Anybody else wondering about the NCAA's decision to keep the NCAA Championships in a nearly unreachable part of America the next decade, for most track and field fans?
Read More:
Do you think the NCAA gets more money from it's Nike contract for hosting Nationals at Oregon for the next Decade than they would from all other revenue combined at another location? Tickets/Refreshments/Clothing/Etc...
They do the same thing in NCAA baseball. Every world series is in Omaha NB.
No matter the for sure reason, Eugene Oregon has many people coming to watch athletics. They do not care the color of the vest. Just looking for competition. I think they like them all. With research I see this is not the case everywhere in the United States. Hayward Field has the history too. No place in the USA is close to everyone. Where would it be better?
This is good for the students at the meet and I think they appreciate it. But they may not like so much chance of rain.
How successful would any professional sports league be if they held every game in a single location for a decade? by bogarting the championships they are stunting the growth of the sport for the grass roots of the country.
i agree with Sean Denard. when i was in college i competed at outdoor ncaa at 4 different locations, vastly different. during the time i competed as a collegian, there where 5 different locations. right now it seems that you can only compete at maybe 2 locations. Im glad to see that USATF is attempting Sacramento again. the Olympic trials went well there i thought.....it has almost been ten years!
i still fell Eugene is hands down the best place to compete. When you hear the students responds to the location, its surely slowly becoming stale for them.
I hope to be returning to Eugene this outdoor season. The facility is appealing and superior to most others, but I'd love the change of scenery AND atmosphere. Oregon offers plenty of love for both track and field athletes, but the experience is shallowed when you're exposed to just one facility.
In my world the health of our sport is the priority. Keeping NCAA track & field in TrackTown USA provides a media-friendly venue with butts in seats. That will always trump half empty stadium everywhere else.
Other than team mates and parents; how many fans are traveling the NCAA champs? We need to have the locals come out en mass if we want big crowds and high energy. I hope it's in Eugene forever. My one concern is weather.
But is there anywhere weather is not an issue?
But is there anywhere weather is not an issue?
Agreed. Weather can be poor for one group of events anywhere.
Too much heat for the distance runners
Too cool for sprinters.
This could be what the US needs to upgrade a stadium suitable for the World Championships. Hayward Field needs more seating to host the big dance.
This could be what the US needs to upgrade a stadium suitable for the World Championships. Hayward Field needs more seating to host the big dance.
Seriously!? That would be so amazing.
From an NCAA person on another discussion board:
QuoteDisplay More1. The University of Oregon is a very successful and well run athletic department with great financial resources. They have a wonderful benefactor in Mr. Knight that every college athletic department would love to have. So overall they have a financial situation that just about no other college in the country has. We certainly would like to see more people love track & field and be willing to step up financially.
2. Anyone who believes that Oregon hosting the NCAA meet for eight straight doesn't translate into a recruiting advantage has little to no knowledge of college sports. But that recruiting advantage is only relative to maybe 10-15 schools, those that are competing for the top NCAA spots. For the other 300+ colleges UO having the meet eight straight years has no impact. In other words, my former conference, the MAC will not be affected by Oregon hosting the meet.
3. Anyone who believes that Oregon hosting the meet doesn't translate into a home field advantage does not follow the analytics of sports. Every sport played there is a home field advantage and I just listened to an NFL announcer talk about that home teams win 75% of the time. Certainly UO hosting the meet for eight straight years provides a home advantage for their athletes, but how much that negatively affects every other athlete would be [is unknown].
As far as your question regarding the bid process. It is quite straight forward. Any institution that desires to host a championship fills out the bid materials, which essentially details discussing the facility, hosting history, administration, etc. and then providing a projected budget. This budget details projected revenue and expenses. Every host institution has different expenses. Typical things that would be in the expense report would be officials, meals, staffing, facility rental, etc. Projected revenue would be tickets sold, advertising, concessions, etc.
This information is sent to the NCAA Track & Field Committee (comprised of coaches and asst/assoc AD's, SWA's). The committee reviews the bids and based on the bid review along with NCAA data (how much to fly to a certain site, how much motel rooms are, etc) makes a recommendation to the NCAA Cabinet (comprised of athletic directors, conference level folks). A site visit may be done to ascertain the bidding sites. Sometimes that is not possible. Texas A&M was given the indoor bid prior to their facility being built. It just depends on what information the committee needs to make an informed decision.
Generally speaking over the last ten years there have been a small group of institutions that have submitted a bid for indoor or outdoor. I can think of Sacramento, Oregon, Boise, Texas, TAM, Arkansas, ABQ, Birmingham, Indiana, Tennessee, Drake as just about the only ones who have bid for indoor or outdoor.
In almost every bid that I ever saw, expenses were higher than expected revenue which means that NCAA subsidizes the meet. I know that one of the aforementioned bidders submitted a bid that dictated $150,000 in expenses, but only $50,000 in possible revenue. The NCAA then subsidizes that meet. I don't believe that the NCAA has believed they will make a profit on the NCAA indoor or outdoor meet. If a profit was a necessity there would be only one, maybe two bidders. I was told (but never saw the actual paperwork) that one host needed $150,000 from the NCAA.
In 2008-09 Indiana, Tennessee, Arkansas, Drake, and Oregon submitted bids for the outdoor championship. UO bid was for seven years, all others were for one. When discussing those bids one thing popped up. Two of the bidders had a negative financial report meaning they didn't think they could break even. One bid thought they could break even. One other bid thought they could turn a small profit. And then there was UO's. I would say their bid was a game-changer. They provided a bid that would allow the NCAA to walk away after all expenses with a sizable positive cash flow, which may have been the first ever in track. I know the NCAA was impressed by their bid. The vote was to not give the meet to them for seven years since there was still a feeling that moving the meet around was valuable for the sport. Having the NCAA meet in places like Indiana, Knoxville, Arkansas, etc does have advantages. There is maybe a "charm" to going to a collegiate setting and having the championship. I believe when the outdoor meet was at BYU years ago they had record attendance. In the end it was decided to give the meet to Drake for a couple of years and UO for a couple of years.
I think one could surmise that this time around UO again provided a "bid they couldn't refuse" (taking a page out of the Godfather movie) and that is what the NCAA saw. I did not see the actual bid was told from several folks about their bid. All I would say is HOLY COW!!! I don't think there is anything sinister about the bid and if we look at it from the NCAA point of view why wouldn't they want to host the meet at a site that does a great job AND can provide a huge profit. But I think there are traditionalists that still believe moving the meet around is important and I do think that sites like Drake and Arkansas do a remarkable job hosting the met with fantastic people. I know working with the Drake staff and Arkansas staff was highly rewarding as they are super professional and just some of the best people around.
I can see a future where, after three or four NCAA meets, the stands become full of 2nd and 3rd time attendees and therefore new fans. They originally came to see junior race and had such a great experience in Eugene they came again (and again... etc) because they knew what was going to happen had found a comfort zone.
One things that has to happen with the NCAA being in Oregon for such a long period is have better coverage of all the events going on. Have a camera per event that is going on. So if there is long jump, shot put, a distance race and say pole vault then online there should be a stream for each event. Not just one main stream where 98% of the time is the running event and then a quick glimpse at the field events and right back to the running event. It's track and field not track and maybe a bit of field if we feel like it.
I'm sure like myself as long as I get to watch the event I'd be quite happy considering the lack of exposure of track and field anywhere. They can go full out covering the races just show the field events, please.
@Matt Marcoccia is there any other place such as #Eugene who would be able to offer such a coverage?
I do understand that the athletes want to see some other places as well, but for the audience it seems to me Eugene is a good choice. Better coverage, great atmosphere ....
@Florian van Dijck I really don't know because I haven't been to many stadiums where they could/would hold the NCAA championships. I'm also a DII thrower so I won't come across many of them anyways. But with being the NCAA championships being in Eugene for so long I think it would be a good idea to do some additions to allow viewers to watch a particular event. So something like the throws all your really need is a fixed camera on the ring which could be mounted next to an actual cameraman who could assist if something goes wrong.
With all of the camera technology out there in other sports and the money that Oregon has a few cameras and equipment isn't going to damage their bottom line.
I like @Matt Marcoccia s thought. The institution should be more willing to invest in infrastructure if they know they will use it repeatedly. The same with Eugene. One can build a more viable business model if one has an idea of the future events.
The odd thing about the NCAA is their location in Div I, II football championship moves different locations.In Div III football it is the same location. In swimming all Divs they move the locations. With basketball in all divs they use the whole country till the final four. in Div II and III of track and field they move all around the country from California and Texas to Ohio and Nebraska. The NCAA track for Div I is an odd choice because you can't tell me that New York or LA could not host the championship. I do think Nike has been the curse and hero of track and unless the NCAA or the USITF start putting Nike in their place, Nike will remain the king of track in the USA
<p>I believe its because of Nike. Eugene was always track town and Nike supports all the meets in there. </p>
<p>I dont really care about seeing other places, but the traveling is really bad it takes more time than travel to Europe from USA. Also, the WJC in Eugene will be some horrible travel experience for some countries (China, Australia, New Zeland, even Europe)</p>
Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!
