Photo of Doug Logan and Gail Devers
Doug Logan & Gail Devers
e-mail to a friend
tell us what you think!

"Shin Splints"
A Blog by Doug Logan

No More Camels

Sunday, March 08, 2009

USA Track & Field CEO Doug Logan on Sunday submitted to the USATF Board of Directors his response to the Project 30 Task Force Report. Issued on February 9, the Task Force Report had made 10 recommendations to improve USATF High Performance Programs and achieve 30 clean medals in London 2012.

Below is the full text of Logan's response.

When I formed the Project 30 Task Force last October, I had no preconceived notion of what their findings should look like, or what recommendations they should make. I did, however, have one overall goal, which informs everything I do as CEO of this organization: to modernize the way USATF does business and the way we conduct our professional athlete programs.

Careful listeners have heard me discuss this imperative many times over the last several months. A more contemporary, streamlined and professional day-to-day operating model will lead to greater success on the track for our athletes. Resources will be more effectively utilized and the oversight of programs will become more structured and accountable. Only when and if we modernize our operations can we hope to achieve the goal of 30 clean medals in London. I did not choose the number 30 arbitrarily; it represents a reasonable result if our athletes live up to their potential, and if we as administrators live up to ours. A spoils system for earmarking athlete funds, haphazard management and a sprawling structure will not do the job. Our athletes are talented enough to be the best Track & Field team in the world without a whole lot of help from USATF. However, for our athletes to get to that benchmark of 30 medals, they need and deserve the direct, muscular and effective support of their federation.

To achieve my goal, four things are required of USA Track & Field:

  • The will to change and improve;
  • The talent to do it;
  • The resources to make the changes; and
  • The plan to implement the changes.

The will to change must start with the Board of Directors. Our new, 15-person board meets for the first time March 8 in Orlando, and I will immediately present my response to the Project 30 Task Force Report, which I will describe below. As the group with oversight of our bylaws and budget, the Board must support those measures requiring bylaw changes or shifts in policy. Specifically, matters involving staff selection, Olympic Trials format, development programs and preparation for London 2012 will not be possible without their support.

There is no argument about the talent of our athletes. This country has the deepest talent, extending through more events in track and field, than any country in the world. We have to do more to support and cultivate our talent, but it is undoubtedly there. Thirty medals may sound like an overly aggressive goal, but it is well within the abilities of our athletes to achieve. Yet we need more than talented athletes. We need and have talented coaches. The best way I can support this endeavor is to ensure that we have a professional staff at the National Office with talent that is commensurate to that of our athletes. We need world-class professional executives to administer programs that will enable our world-class athletes to fulfill their potential.

The resources aren't there yet. It is my job, and the job of USATF's National Office, to go out and find the financial and other resources necessary to bring this organization to the level at which it needs to be. Obviously, in the current financial climate, sponsor money isn't falling from the sky in gift-wrapped packages. We must be creative and aggressive, and most important, we must not undervalue our sport. Track and field offers immense financial value that has not yet been tapped in any way. Russian pole vaulter Yelena Isinbayeva has just signed a five-year deal with a sportswear company that will pay her a reported $7.5 million over five years. Her contract should not be an aberration, it should set a new standard. We as a federation can learn from Ms. Isinbayeva: know what your value is, and go find somebody who will pay it.

The Project 30 Task Force Report has provided a first draft of the plan. Since the Report was released on February 9, I have had the opportunity to read and re-read the report multiple times. I have discussed its findings and recommendations with a wide assortment of people in the sport, as well as with staff and disinterested observers. I have read and heard disparate opinions of the report from all corners. Some loved what it had to say and embraced the changes; others have asked "where is the fire" and "why does anything need to change?"

No honest observer of our practices and procedures would ever conclude that the results of the competition at the 2008 Games were a blip or an aberration in what otherwise was a welldeveloped, long-range plan to excellence. The Report chronicles some disturbing anecdotal patterns. More important, the statistical references validate the unease felt by many. This is an institution afflicted by sclerotic thinking, lethargic planning and archaic practices. We have adopted an argot of nonsensical truisms that do little to develop athletic excellence. We have overlapping, duplicative committees and panels that instead of stimulating creative results, actually stifle progress and promote bastions of false power. If the definition of a camel is that it is a horse designed by a committee, that explains why I sometimes feel like I am working in the middle of the Sahara.

As promised, I am offering below my plan for adopting elements of the Project 30 Task Force Report. Whether or not, and when, to adopt various recommendations takes into account financial implications, logistical issues and philosophical and business concerns. All decisions and actions taken will be based on achieving our organizational goals.

Project 30 Plan

Recommendation 1: Hire a General Manager of High Performance
This recommendation of the Task Force is a natural fit with the restructuring the organization underwent in December, and it will further advance the goals of making USATF a more efficient and accountable national governing body. I agree with the overall job description for this position provided by the Task Force, but I will give it the title of Managing Director of Competition. As such, she or he will oversee all areas designated by the Task Force in their recommendation. Additional support staffing may be necessary and will be determined as the position is filled and the new Managing Director determines the department's needs. I have already begun compiling a list of potential candidates and plan to have this person hired and in place by June 1. 2009 Financial impact $150,000 - $225,000, including salar(ies), benefits, travel and other costs.

Recommendation 2: Create a transparent, criteria-based Team Staff selection system
As part of USATF restructuring, the Team Staff selection system was amended to have the staff ultimately accountable to the CEO. In its recommendations, the Task Force proposes that the selection system itself be significantly changed, and that the Managing Director of Competition have oversight of the staff selection system. As the Task Force indicated, the Managing Director will be responsible for determining the criteria-based system that will ultimately choose the staff. Because that person has yet to be hired, it is too soon for me to speculate as to what the selection system might ultimately look like. Regardless of the form it ultimately takes, the system will indeed reflect the Task Force's philosophy: that staff selection should be a merit-based, relatively impartial, incentivized system that will better connect USATF with coaches. I will look to the Managing Director to have the staff selection system developed and in place by the 2009 USATF Annual Meeting in Indianapolis. Cost/financial implication: Negligible.

Recommendation 3: Restructure the composition of Team USA staffs
There is no debate on this topic: we need more managers and fewer individuals with honorific coaching titles. I will implement immediately the Task Force's suggested new composition for Team Staffs of up to 18 credentialed positions. I reserve the right for the Managing Director to make tweaks to the job duties of each position. As delineated by the panel, a staff of 18 will have nine coaches, six managers and three professional staff. This composition formula will be in place for all future staffs that have not already been selected as of today. Cost/financial implication: Negligible.

Recommendation 4: Shorten the U.S. Olympic Team Trials Track & Field to five days
Having experienced what was a truly amazing Olympic Trials in Eugene last year, I fully appreciate that this meet is the crown jewel of domestic track and field competition. Indeed, it is one of the greatest athletic events in the world. I am inclined to agree with the Task Force, however, that the Olympic Trials program is unduly long from the standpoint of competition schedule. There appears to be little scientific evidence to argue for either a longer or shorter Trials. Ultimately, it comes down to what best serves our athletes and produces a team that will best perform at the Olympic Games. Anecdotally, many athletes feel the 10-day Trials are too draining, and many pointed to the personal financial drain as well. We will shorten the length of the Olympic Trials. What the schedule will ultimately look like will be decided in consultation with the Managing Director. It may be five consecutive days; five days of competition spread over a longer length of time, or a different length entirely. One option we will strongly consider is to host six competition days over two weekends with a youth meet in the intervening down days. But the era of eight days of competition is over. The short-program format of the 2012 U.S. Olympic Team Trials Track & Field will be finalized by July 1, 2010. Cost/financial implication: To be determined.

Recommendation 5: Terminate the National Relay Program
Terminated. We had some of our country's top coaches working on our relay program, and it wasn't for lack of effort or dedication that we did not achieve better results. I can't guarantee that eliminating the National Relay Program as it currently exists will automatically result in nothing but gold medals for all our relays. Relays are by their nature unpredictable, and that is what makes them so exciting. But I can guarantee that each relay medal we win will have cost our organization thousands of dollars less than it did under the Relay Program. USATF will still compete in relay targeted events at different meets throughout the country, but they will be under a different managerial structure and at greatly reduced cost. USATF will follow through in establishing truly national relay standards for hand-offs and other technical aspects of the relays, to be incorporated in our Coaching Educations programs and implemented at the local and grass roots levels. Cost/Financial implication: Savings of $100,000-plus per year.

Recommendation 6: Establish a comprehensive 2012 team preparation program
The most troubling element of the 2008 Olympic Games to me was that more athletes did not perform at seasonal- or personal-best levels. I accept the Task Force's recommendation of providing financial incentives for PBs and SBs, and believe that funds for these incentive bonuses should be earmarked before developing a training-camp plan. The desire to offer these bonuses must be mitigated by the reality of having a 130-person team. I propose a $15,000 bonus for athletes setting a personal best at the Games, and a $5,000 bonus for a seasonal best. Estimated cost for such bonuses would be roughly $200,000-$400,000, depending on the performance of our athletes.

The linchpin of the Task Force's 2012 preparation plan is the establishment of a long-term training base in Europe, for six weeks or more, in 2012. I agree with this recommendation in principle. USATF has had preliminary talks with the USOC concerning a multi-sport base camp in Europe to serve our athletes in preparation for the 2012 Olympic Games. This camp would be open to athletes approximately 1 months prior to the Games, allowing them to have a European base and thus limiting the amount of travel between continents. The USOC will convene a meeting with the interested sports/NGBs in the near future and hopes to have possible sites located by the end of the summer. In addition, USATF also is investigating other possible sites. The obvious challenge is how to fund and staff such a long-term camp. The financial cost of such a camp is greatly variable, depending on the level of involvement and support of the USOC and arrangements we can make with a host city.

I strongly agree with adding some Olympic tune up meets that would be nation-based, team competition. These meets can help our athletes prepare and would be a huge boon to promoting the sport internationally. Televising these meets domestically, as well, will give our athletes an even higher profile. I will negotiate and secure two such events in Europe in 2012, while also providing a tune-up meet for athletes in the United States prior to the London Olympic Games. The financial impact could range from a net cost to a net profit, but it is reasonable to project this as a budget-neutral endeavor.

Finally, the Task Force within this recommendation spoke of the strong need for past Olympic athletes to mentor current athletes, especially those just emerging from the collegiate ranks. Topics for mentors include helping educate young athletes on how to conduct themselves as professionals and make good business decisions, how to choose a coach and a training situation that works for them, and how to prioritize their careers. The recommendation proposed no specific apparatus for establishing such a mentorship program.

USATF currently has an athlete Alumni Association, and we will move to make serving as a mentor a requirement for membership in the Alumni Association. USATF will work directly with alumni to ensure those who ultimately are selected for mentorship roles are individuals of high character, who had the kind of professional success that would provide a solid model for today's athletes. In addition, we will provide a part-time USATF executive to serve as a professional coordinator for the Alumni Association and the mentoring program. 2009 Financial impact $40,000.

Recommendation 7: Target technical events for medal growth and develop those events
The facts seem to bear out that most athletes perform best when they have a training group, and that we have the greatest upside medal potential in technical events (jumps and throws). The Project 30 Task Force recommended a nationwide network of High Performance Training Centers to provide group-based training and career development for athletes. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, USATF will develop two (2) High Performance Training Centers (HPTCs) in the United States each year. The two initial HPTCs will be locales that emphasize the development of jumps and/or throws. USATF will provide financial support for coach salaries (head coach and assistant coach), support staff and insurance and other ancillary costs, and will advise and assist on establishing local sponsorships and community outreach. Cost/Financial implication: Roughly $200,000 per HPTC.

The Task Force also specifically targeted immediate post-collegians, and athletes under 26, as those with the greatest potential for return-on-investment of developmental funds. Taking into consideration all these factors, USATF will invest $450,000-$500,000 to host developmental events at no less than eight domestic track meets in 2009, including funding targeted events at the Mt. Sac Relays, California Relays, and several other meets. All event groups will be covered, with immediate post-collegians who have already achieved the World Championship "A" qualifying standard being the focus of development funds to provide travel for athletes to these meets.

The Task Force quite astutely identified the need for qualified coaches and a more robust and professional USATF Coaching Education system, if all disciplines and events are to improve in the long-term. As part of our continued updating of our web site and new media we will, as recommended, place Coaching Education materials online in easy-to-access formats.

Moving from the top down, we must overhaul the structure and management of our current Coaching Education program. The program has educated nearly 20,000 coaches, but it is time for a renovation in structure, and it is time that we attract more of the country's very best coaches and educators to be part of the curriculum planning and to serve as instructors. The restructuring of Coaching Education will be a high priority.

Most important, USATF's Coaching Education program currently only documents that a coach has taken our classes. We have no true coaching certification program. Coaches may successfully complete Level I and Level II courses, but they are not certified by USATF. This is nonsensical. We have an obligation as a federation to set minimum coaching standards and to have in place an apparatus where we can tell the track and field world who has achieved certain minimum standards. Certification will not merely be certification of coaching technique or ability, however. It must also certify that USATF gives its "stamp of approval" for how the coach conducts him or herself, ethically and professionally. Coaches with past doping violations or shady pasts have been hired by schools, clubs or universities, in most cases because the group doing the hiring simply had no idea that a coach was in any way suspect. Coaches with a USATF certification will have that piece of paper to show the world, their employers and their athletes that they have been rated as fully qualified by USATF. The financial impact of establishing this type of wide-ranging certification program will be dictated largely by the costs to develop the education plan and the certification process, and the cost of administration. Financial stipends and travel costs will be provided to instructors. Additional annual cost is estimated to be $200,000.

Recommendation 8: Create a well-defined Professional Athlete designation
The Task Force hit on a very important issue with this recommendation. Unlike other professional sports, USATF has no contract with its professional athletes. Having a Professional Athlete designation would put such a contract into place and would create responsibilities on both sides. USATF's new Competition Division and General Counsel will work together to develop this designation and investigate its enforceability. The Professional Athlete designation will be two-tiered and will be defined, enforceable and in place by September 1.

The first tier is to develop a "rookie contract" signed by all newly declared professional and/or post-collegiate athletes. It will bestow upon an individual the Professional Athlete designation and will enumerate the duties of a Professional Athlete in the sport of track and field, including but not limited to completing "Rookie training," competing clean, fulfilling contracts, abiding by a code of conduct and supporting the sport through public appearances and media events. Failure to fulfill elements of the Professional Athlete designation contract will result in the loss of certain types of USATF support.

The second tier of the designation will be a more robust, pre-emptive Statement of Conditions for any athlete planning to compete at any meet or race that serves as a selection event for the World Championships or Olympic Games. USATF has the right to select our national team and the right to place obligations on those representing the country. USATF's and the USOC's current Statement of Conditions is signed by athletes after they select themselves through place finishes. This new Statement of Conditions will require an athlete's signature prior to being accepted as an international team member. It will stipulate that the athlete, should he or she make the national team, will agree to conditions such as wearing the Team USA uniform in any public appearances, participating in official team activities, abiding by a code of conduct, consulting with USATF's Managing Director on their competitions prior to the Worlds or Olympics and other matters pertaining to preparing for competition. Refusal to sign the contract will jeopardize the athlete's selection to the international team. Both these documents will be finalized by June 15, 2009. Financial impact: roughly $10,000-$25,000 for legal costs.

Recommendation 9: Establish a more stringent anti-doping reinstatement system
I thank the Task Force for moving beyond their stated charter to take on the most serious issue in track and field. I agree with the spirit of this recommendation and will institute a more stringent reinstatement system immediately. However, I want to take their recommendation a step further and establish a mechanism for certain individuals, if they are open, truthful and dedicated to fighting doping in sport, to come back into our good graces, whether as a coach, volunteer, official or in some other capacity. A truthful statement of contrition is the starting point to that process, as is a minimum level of community service. Financial impact: Negligible.

I applaud the Task Force's intent in calling for a "rehab" program for educating athletes on how to train and compete clean, but the real issue behind cheating through the use of PEDs is greed-based behavior, unchecked ambition and dishonesty. To rehab those impulses would require years of therapy and far more money that we would or could devote to it. From a pragmatic perspective, a true rehab program is not feasible.

Recommendation 10: Promote and foster a self-sustaining professional athletes' union
This is the Task Force recommendation I have a hard time accepting. I don't doubt that a professional union would make for a more professional sport. I do, however, challenge the notion that the sport - or the "employer" - should be paying for the salary of a union leader. I have a hunch that such an arrangement may even violate federal labor laws. American track athletes have talked for decades about forming a union. Just over three years ago, the most concerted attempt to date was launched with the Professional Athletes' Association. The PAA embodies everything that makes me fundamentally reject this recommendation. USATF put hundreds of thousands of dollars into helping athletes get the PAA off the ground, but the athletes did almost nothing to help themselves or professionalize their union. Most athletes don't know who runs the PAA, or if it still exists. The bottom line is a union cannot and should not be born of, nursed and raised by a sports organization. If a potential union can come to me with a sophisticated business plan that clearly lays out how seed money would be spent, I am open to changing course. Until then, I will not adopt this recommendation. The onus is on the athletes. Cost/Financial implication: $0, pending a thorough, valid and sustainable business plan being presented.

If all these projects are successfully implemented, the financial impact on USATF for 2009 would be in the vicinity of $500,000. This figure takes into account savings from the termination of the relay program and includes calculation of half-year costs for the Managing Director and HPTCs.

The Project 30 Task Force report and our response to it are designed to move the sport forward, but this is still just a short-term solution. It is a first step on a journey that can get us to a place where our athletes have the opportunity to redefine what it means to be the World's #1 Track & Field Team. It's a place where USATF fully embraces all of our responsibilities as an NGB and as a professional sports organization. It's a place where each segment of the athlete development pipeline is supported, funded and valued. It is a place, I hope, where camels are an endangered species.

COMMENTS
This is a shortened version of a letter I sent to Doug: I enjoyed reading your latest Shin Splints blog. It has many good points, but is missing a significant reference that is typical of the M.O. of USATF in the years prior to your arrival. There is nothing implied or explicitly stated on how we will change the culture of the sport to develop champions in race walking. The race walk is THE technical distance event within the sport we govern (you only mentioned jumps and throws). It needs to be treated as such and athletes need to be developed in that manner. We need the institutional support and financial support to make the 30 in 2012 something we can contribute to making you a prophet. Simply, what is USATF going to do to finally get behind race walking and help us win those 9 medals?
Posted by: Michael Roth on 3/8/2009 4:19:09 PM PT
Recommendations 6 & 7. Quick question about bonuses for PR's at Olympic Games. As a shot coach, the men's shot has consistently produced medals in th event. It is very hard to PR or have a seasonla best at the Olympics since it is the only event that has prelims and finals on same day. Add this to the fact that US men's shot putters have to peak for the Trials instead of the Olympics first, and it seems to be an unfair bonus for this event, that ironically produces so well for us. Now, abotu the training centers. Most athletes that are developed and successful are proiduced at the universities, which is basically our "develpomental" system, with each one being a "traning center" in and of itself. It appears to me that many technical event people that do well and win medals have consistency in the coach/athlete relationship first and foremost. A training group is secondary. Would the fundiong for these athletes be better suited to be given to the athlete to enhance his already successful coaching/training situation. I guess this debate would be similar to the school voucher debate.
Posted by: Don Babbitt on 3/9/2009 8:05:02 AM PT
The Boartd of Directors needs to ask itself three questions.1.Does the sport have value at the elite level in the United States? 2.If it does, what is the problem? 3.What is it's effect on the other levels of Track and Field in the United States? The United States has become a spectator-oriented sports culture.Expecting to develop a fan and sponsorship base with little television exposure, with its stars perfornming on another continent and with little or no reults printed in American newspapers and no results shown on major sports news programs, is not facing reality. USATF must re-connect with the American school system which provides the facilities, recruitment of athletes, coaches, competitions, media support, fans, scholarships, and Coaching education classes. Where would the sport be with out them?
Posted by: Bob Fraley on 3/9/2009 10:36:17 AM PT
Bob Fraley nailed it.USATF must re-connect with the American High schools & Jr High systems which provides the facilities, recruitment of athletes, coaches, competitions, media support, fans and Coaching education...There is no education for these coachs from USATF. No help on how to recruit, info on how to grain media support or draw in fans.Your 30 project has good points but counts on trickle down instead of growing a larger and better base.
Posted by: John Reardon on 3/9/2009 1:48:21 PM PT
In my experience, USATF Youth want nothing to do with high school athletics. In our Association, we are prevented from posting high school results in the Youth section - they only want to support and post results for Association and USATF events. This myopia does little to promote the sport or connect high school athletes and their coaches with USATF. Also, high school coaches have little need for us, since all high school events are sanctioned and governed by scholastic bodies that know little of what USATF does, nor do they care. I went to a California State Championships a few years ago, and the meet director didn't know who USATF was. USATF may want to consider a partnership with DyeStatCal - they know how to promote youth athletics.
Posted by: Linda Garmisch on 3/9/2009 4:30:32 PM PT
If there is one thing missing from this debate/program it's a certification program for event directors/managers. Currently, anyone can set up a road race and as long as they get a permit from police/transportation authorities they can call it a race. We have a wild, mish-mash of events from well-managed, longstanding road races to decent, competitive local races to 'fun run' type events. The problem is that some of the less well managed races apply for and get USATF sanctions, which attracts attention from good runners who show up to find poorly designed courses, improper timing practices and inadequate awards. These 'races' are an embarrassment to the sport and to the USATF. It's high time that sanctioned races be true races.
Posted by: Robert Lung on 3/10/2009 11:34:25 AM PT
Mr. Logan, first off, congrats on being selected to spearhead the USATF. I believe that the "30 Project" theme is a step in the right direction as far as professionalism is concerned. Professionalsim is indeed, not overrated, and that "something" that is truely needed to challenge the "individual" mindset of our athletes and their coaches.
Posted by: Carlos Jones on 3/11/2009 6:29:47 AM PT
The comments on Coaching Education intrigued me in the fact that the word "science" was not used at all, not once. The United States leads the world in scientific research, including performance based physiology. The current Coaching Education is science based and should continue to be so. We should not move to our coaches secret cookbook, but instead be based on scientific evidence that can be applied in a variety of situations. On one hand we are eliminating honorific coaches from our National Teams, but welcoming them into Coaching Education. Let's continue to have our Coaching Education based on science.
Posted by: Scott Christensen on 3/11/2009 9:46:32 AM PT
In So Cal, the LA84 Foundation http://www.la84foundation.org offers an outstanding cross country and track & field coaches education program aimed at high school coaches but applicable to all levels. (For more information, contact Tim O'Rourke.) Also, these clinics are free and include a comprehensive manual than can be downloaded online. This program far exceeds what the USATF offers both in scope and quality, and you may want to consider partnering with them or using a similar model. Also, the USATF Level II school needs a major overhaul - when I attended a few year ago, it had limited value and was mostly a brain dump to pass a test. It was not the best use of my time or money.
Posted by: Linda Garmisch on 3/11/2009 2:38:56 PM PT
Curiously, the new leadership position emphasized above - Managing Dirctor of Competition, is not posted in the "Employment" section of the site.
Posted by: N. Johnson on 3/12/2009 3:41:15 PM PT
A related topic - the marathon trial standards Recently, the marathon trials standards have been changed to be more stringent. I think this change does a disservice to the sport, has potentail far-reaching negative ramifications, and I see little positive in the change. If cost is the issue, why not simply lower the "A" standards. The negative effects include effects on athletes. particularly for marathons, progress is progressive, and a runner might only start serious training if they feel they have a chance to attain the "B" standard, and through that training advance to a higher and perhaps an elite level. On the local scene, it is certaily a benefit to race directors to be able to say that an athlete in their race is a trials qualifier. These folks are ambasadors for our sport; it is great for local mid-pack runners to be able to interact and compete with these trials qualifiers and I feel, this interaction can only enhance our sport, either through participation by these mid-pack runners or through their encouragement to their children. The "local guy/girl makes good" story is part of the fabric of America, and is, I feel, in large part responsible for the continuing strength of our sports teams. Finally, I attended the 2008 women's trials in Boston. It was a great racing event, with what certainly seemed to us to be the right number of participants. I certainly would have felt less "into" the moment, if approximately half of the runners weren't there. there is a certain critical volume needed in such a race and local participation is enhanced. Again, I appreciate the opportunity to comment, see no advantage in lowering the qualifying standards, and lots of advantages in keeping at least the "B" standard at its current level. I apologize for typos but this comment block does not allow easy changes.
Posted by: Peter LaGoy on 3/12/2009 3:44:35 PM PT
I have labored on rec.5 to cancel the relay program for weeks now and still can not find a good reason to deny so many of our emerging athletes this great oppertunity to get quality competition that would not be avaliable to them. there needs to be input from those of us who have worked in the program and who have labored in the field to cultivate these athletes Ernie Gregoire
Posted by: Ernest Gregoire on 3/12/2009 3:49:26 PM PT
It is good that we striving forward to turn things around, after several devistating negative international as well as national medial exposure about our sport. Let us not forget that the bonous for other sports (1.5 million) oppose to the propose bonouses we earn in our sport still have leaps and bounds before we can ever close the gap on other sports, in reference to compensating our professional athletes.
Posted by: Kerry Sloan on 3/12/2009 4:24:52 PM PT
One of the larges groups in USATF is the Officials and I see nothing about officials in your report Without officials none of the meets would happen. We are well trained and not very well respected. We mostly have to pay our own way to meets and the in National meets we are barely paid enough to make ends meet. If USATF is truly going to be a professional organization the officials should be paid as professionals. I am a master official and mostly have to pay my own way. Selection of officials for National meets is now done in a fair way. We are treated more like volunteers when it comes to pay.
Posted by: Robert Wood on 3/12/2009 5:43:09 PM PT
One of the larges groups in USATF is the Officials and I see nothing about officials in your report Without officials none of the meets would happen. We are well trained and not very well respected. We mostly have to pay our own way to meets and the in National meets we are barely paid enough to make ends meet. If USATF is truly going to be a professional organization the officials should be paid as professionals. I am a master official and mostly have to pay my own way. Selection of officials for National meets is now done in a fair way. We are treated more like volunteers when it comes to pay.
Posted by: Robert Wood on 3/12/2009 5:43:30 PM PT
Without a marketing plan aimed at redeveloping a fan base how can the sport expect to grow?
Posted by: Jan Johnson on 3/12/2009 5:53:06 PM PT
I've been trying to send a comment but this web site rejects them without specifying why. Two comments. Most runners are local. There are few elite runners in these races. The only elites are the Kenyan and Ethiopians who come when there is prize money. Most local runners are not USATF members. They are interested mostly in their local charity. USATF may want to refocus on the local runners. Otherwise it will always be a marginal organization working with elites.
Posted by: Kent Weber on 3/12/2009 6:53:22 PM PT
Maybe it will be time to separate professionals from amateurs in the USATF membership. Club competitors are the amateurs and those with agents and contracts are the professionals. Then we can spell out what USATF is for each.
Posted by: Tom Derderian on 3/12/2009 6:58:52 PM PT
I couldn't agree with Micheal Roth more. USATF is undervaluing Racewalking. The Emnpire State Games eliminated girls and boys events last year and is under way to eliminate all racewalking in this and future years. We are in the sport because we love it, not because we want the endorsements, but that would be nice, too.
Posted by: Bruce Edward Logan on 3/12/2009 7:06:52 PM PT
You have drafted a thoughtful response to the Project 30 Plan. Your leadership is evident and I hope for great things under your guidance. Shortening the Olympic Trials will negatively impact the host city. Less gate revenue, concessions, hotel, dining, etc. My fear is that a city like Eugene (what an awesome meet in 2008)would not be able/willing to bid given the shortened schedule. I hope you comment on this in future blogs. I will be in Eugene for the 2012 trials regardless!
Posted by: Steve Howard on 3/12/2009 7:34:42 PM PT
In order to elevate our sport into the 21 century of technical excellence in science, research, development, educational training centers, professional coaching levels, officials' certification, and foster an elite generation of track& field athletes, The High School Federation Assoc, NCAA, and USATF must undergo changes to establish a networking system of unified cooperation. They need to share information, conduct cooperative clinics, workshops, conferences, training seminars, and promote funding opportunities. With the exception of eligibility criteria, why would USATF youth rules and regulation, to include officials' certification differ from high schoolif track and field in hs started competitively K-5. The NCAA is gradually moving to international standardsso what is preventing the NCAA from incorporate USATF rules, and market/package an international college competition or relay carnival. For the love of the sportwe need to leave our egos at the door, plan, organize, establish, and implement a unified track and field system that puts all of us on the same page. Our fans deserve it, our athletes will dominate with it, and I believe our coaches, and officials, will support it! In conclusion, can these organizations take the first stepand TALK to each other? Sincerely, David F. Mack, LTC Retired Florida Certified Official Throws, National Level
Posted by: David F. Mack on 3/12/2009 8:48:01 PM PT
I think that the tone of the response lessens its effectiveness. It contains a lot of "I", "me",and "my". It seems as though you believe that you have to battle the rest of the organization. I don't believe that is necessary. Also, I agree entirely with the comments made by Linda Garmisch about the LA84 Foundation.
Posted by: Michael Wenslow on 3/13/2009 12:30:18 AM PT
There has been a slow decline of support for emerging elite athletes since 1988. If there isn't support at the root levels: youth, high school and emerging elite, there won't be any elite. A strong foundation is the key.
Posted by: Jane Brooker on 3/13/2009 4:25:19 AM PT
I'd like to second Kent Weber's comment, and perhaps Tom Derderian's as well. As a local runner whose personal best is probably never going to exceed a 2nd place trophy in my age group in a community race, I did join USATF, but I get the clear sense I don't belong here. Yet a creative USATF could probably find a way to connect me more effectively to the sport without compromising its efforts on behalf of the elite athletes. That would be good for everyone.
Posted by: bcamarda on 3/13/2009 6:42:54 AM PT
I applaud the new direction that you have given to the purposes of USATF for the next Olympics. However recommendation #6 seems out of line with the Project 30 objectives. I whole heartedly agree with Don Babbit's position on bonus' for PBs and SBs. First, it is rare that a technical event athlete sets a PB or SB during the Olympics or World Champs. Second, Project 30 emphasizes medal count, not personal best count. Why would USATF stray from this goal by rewarding a PB? I coach collegiate throwers and coach a world class shot putter, and we rarely talk about setting a PB. Our focus is on making the final and then earning a medal. The PB will come as the athlete learns how to compete, not how to chase a mark. Why not provide financial incentive to athletes for steps they take toward earning a medal? Reward a young athlete when he makes his first world or Olympic final. Then reward him when he finishes top 5, then earns a medal, etc. This enforces COMPETITION, which the general public and sponsors understand. Not PBs, which most disinterested people do NOT understand.
Posted by: Carrie Lane on 3/13/2009 11:22:37 AM PT
I would also like to comment on the regional training camp ideas. I feel these camps would be redundant with the current high school and university systems that allow post collegiate athletes access to their facilities. Why not funnel money needed to run the training camps into enhancing the athlete's own "training camp?" Offer money for the athlete to buy proper equipment, join a functional gym, or get regular physio care that they could otherwise not afford?
Posted by: Carrie Lane on 3/13/2009 11:36:40 AM PT
Doug, this is superbly written. I know that many ardent members of the track & field community would like you to tackle various extraneous issues, but it is remarkable that you have been able to focus, laser-like, on the most important issues that impact Olympic success. I encourage you to continue to resist the calls to fix everything that might ail the sport; if you can do this ambitious list of items, you will have performed a remarkable turnaround for the sport.
Posted by: Dale Neuburger on 3/13/2009 3:21:17 PM PT
I too have been struck by the "bonus for SB/PB" idea. While never and elite thrower, I know that wind has a huge effect on the discus and javelin. Throwing those implements in enclosed stadiums (and the Olympics are always in an enclosed stadium) means athletes in those events are automatically out of the running for SB/PB bonuses. The idea needs a rethink. As to the length of the trials, it has always struck me that we choose our team in a competition that does not mirror the Games themselves for which the team is being selected. The rhythm of the trials is different from the rhythm of the Games. I know that would mean a longer meet, but it also might mean athletes prepared for the competition better.
Posted by: Jerry Bookin-Weiner on 3/14/2009 8:17:03 AM PT
While there is a lot to comment on, I will focus on the one issue that isn't debatable: the need for increased exposure for our sport. Let's face it: we are all track geeks who will watch meets regardless of the aesthetics of the presentation. We must engage in an empathetic approach when we try to ascertain the best way to engage the public and the media. Hence, we need to ask the media outlets a fairly straightforward question: What do you need our sport to look like, to be, or to do in order for it to be a source of good business when you cover it? And we should expect some silly sounding responses that challenge the way we conduct the sport, and we must then be open to trying those ideas. For instance, maybe they want to see one-on-one races, hyped up for a couple months while the training process is covered reality TV style. Perhaps they want to see jumping events competed in public squares on constructed, elevated runways with portable pits. Picture your local city square with an elevated runway and pit right in the middle of it. Imagine the exposure. The media and the people control the destiny of our sport's popularity. Let's reach out to them and listen.
Posted by: Adam Carpenter on 3/14/2009 9:28:07 AM PT
Mr. Logan, If I may, I would like to provide you with a brief background of myself. I am a former Olympic 110mm high hurdler during the same time when Stephanie Hightower competed, and when USATF was known as The Athletics Congress (TAC). I am currently the Chief Executive Officer for the North Dallas Minority Chamber of Commerce. The National Track & Field Professional Athletes Union is a sub-division united for the mutual interest of our sport. It is our mission to assist and direct the professional athlete to a higher level of excellence. I have read your response and agree with the business model adjustment to better suite USATF and the overall performance of the professional athletes. However, when I read recommendation 8 and your response it posed a question. For instance, if any form of contract between USATF and the professional athlete might change the overall relationship? How would this affect the athlete? What is the overall control? Currently, it is my assumption that all professional athletes are currently viewed as an independent contractor who performs at track meets governed by USATF up to the Olympic Trial. If a rookie's contract is binding then the professional athlete and the USATF have created an employee - employer relationship? So is this the intent? Conversely the National Track & Field Professional Athletes Union is administrators on behalf of the professional athletes. As a chamber of commerce we have access to other commerce resources, partnerships and corporate collaboration that the professional athletes can benefit from domestically and internationally. I am familiar with the Professional Athletes Association, and I agree with your statement made in recommendation 10 but, from a chamber of commerce viewpoint, the overall executive business projection model changes with cost saving on both ends designed by MBA's with the professional athletes in mind. What if I propose a one year agreement to collaborate between the N
Posted by: RMilteer on 3/14/2009 11:54:06 AM PT
I believe the United State Olympic Committee should slash all funding to USA Track & Field. Place this organization on probation as previsously discussed in past years. It's disappointing on the amount of salaries this organization throws out. USA Hockey, Figure Skating, Swimming and Diving are young NGB's and they are more well off than USATF. Sincerely, Sad To Hear About The Waste Of Monies!
Posted by: Jay Hockey on 3/18/2009 5:06:06 PM PT
Doug, Project 30 and the work of the task force is terrific and I believe long overdue to the sport I have enjoyed pfor more than 25 years. I look forward to implementation of these areas and for the transformation of USATF.
Posted by: Sean Robison on 3/19/2009 10:01:48 AM PT
Race Walking supporters - you can help your cause by assuring that major event results are posted in a timely manner. For example, the USA Masters 20K Race Walk Championships on March 15th are still not posted - unfortunately, this is all too common for race walking events, even at the world level: http://www.usatf.org/events/2009/USAMasters20kmRWChampionships/
Posted by: Jane Walker on 3/19/2009 11:39:01 AM PT
Pursuant to Article 3: Purposes and Duties of the USATF Bylaws, it states, that it is a non-profit corporation 501(c) (3) and shall act as the national governing body (as defined by the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act of 1998). Has anyone read the above Sports Act? This act only speaks to amateur athletes and has no jurisdiction over professional athletes, which mean that all professional athletes need to provide notice to USATF. Consequently, professional athletes have neither remaining high school nor collegian eligibility. In order to be recognized as a Professional Athlete written notice of the athletes status. The National Track & Field Professional Athletes Union is the governing body for all professional athletes in the sport of Track & Field and presently is looking into questionable labor law and interstate commerce issues. We welcome any question, comments and or concerns and we can be reached at info@ndmcc.org
Posted by: R Milteer on 3/26/2009 7:45:46 PM PT
And why is the NTFPAU website shared with the North Dallas Minority Chamber of Chamber? If you want the NTFPAU to be recognized as a professional organization on its own standing, they need their own website that reflects a unique image and branding. If this current NTFPAU site is any reflection of that status of professional athletes in track & field, we have a long way to go.
Posted by: Ann Marks on 3/27/2009 10:48:21 AM PT
Ann, All professional track and field athletes are considered by the National Labor Relations Board as independent contractors. Secondly, the North Dallas Minority Chamber of Commerce is 501 (c) (6) business trade organizations pursuant to the IRS code: therefore, it is apparent that the NTFPAU is a body of independent contractors also known as professional athletes and fit within the aforementioned business model. I reiterate, The North Dallas Minority Chamber of Commerce incorporated is nothing more than a business trade organization that provides services to all SMEs, independent contractors, small home based business, small business owners and corporations. Thirdly, it is our business model to include the NTFPAU on our website. It has been reviewed and approved by the IRS: thus, as you can imagine this is our right to do what we see beneficial for the organization and its members. Lastly, in reference to your idea about image and branding it is our position that your statement has neither supporting foundation nor merit. It is clear that you do not have an interest in our mission or goals to serve the individual professional track and field athletes. Therefore, your statement is mute.
Posted by: R Milteer on 3/29/2009 10:48:52 AM PT
Ann What is your opinion regarding the USATF business model? The USA Track & Field is a Non-Profit Foreign Corporation (2002031200098). Its the USATF mission to promote and/or sanction track and field meets in the USA and solicit member for the USA Olympic track and field team through the Olympic trial meet. Is it acceptable for USATF to create an employee-employer relationship? Is the USAFT an amateur or professional governing body? What is the intent of the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act of 1998, as it relates to the USATF professional track and field athletes? Can the USATF hold the professional athletes prize money since they are independent contractors? Can the USATF subject the professional athletes to a performance contract without changing its legal position? Can the PAA and the USATF share money or is that a conflict of interest? Can the USATF export professional athletes across the United States boarders without violation of United States Commerce or any other labor law? Is the USATF general counsel allowed to practice law within the State of Indiana? According to the Indiana Supreme Court section for Licensed Attorneys they were unable to validate. Would you be able to validate? if so please provide the state bar number on this blog, since it is public record. We have prima facie evidence that USATF is now acting as an employer through their contracts. This is deemed questionable when viewed by the National Labor Relations Board. I would appreciate your opinion.
Posted by: R Milteer on 3/29/2009 11:42:56 AM PT
It's all jibber-jabber to me - I am only suggesting that if you are forming a union for any professional athletes, they need their own website and branding. Of course, like so much else in this sport, you can ignore good advice and do whatever you want. In my opinion, your efforts would be better spent working on behalf of athletes who share your views and interests than trying to change how USATF conducts business - it's futile.
Posted by: Ann Marks on 3/29/2009 1:47:44 PM PT
ANN I am a former Texas aggie and olympic runner. My board members all have master degrees, MBA, JD etc. What level of education do you have? This will allow for me to remove my marketing director and contract with you. please provided me a copy of your resume.
Posted by: RMilteer on 3/29/2009 3:57:27 PM PT
Forming a union would make sense in other sports like Football, Baseball, Basketball, and Hockey in which the athletes in these sports do not have little or no say in running their sports. But in USA Track and Field every member has a say on how this sport is run, from the grassroot level to the elite. From the club level coaches to the elite professional level coaches. From the Association level official to the National Technical Official. Forming a union will not only will be a waste of money, but I feared would undermind the reason USA Track and Field stand for. I look through the USATF Governance Manual, it has a provision that will allow active athletes in committees. One is the Athletes Advisory Committee that is a some source of union that will advise officers, National Office, Board, and all national and association committees with the regard of all matters relating to athletes and athlete's rights. In a nutshell, we as members run this organization.
Posted by: John Carter Jr. on 4/14/2009 5:21:43 PM PT
hey wat up peoples
Posted by: ryan on 4/20/2009 5:56:14 AM PT
POST A COMMENT

Share your comments about "Shin Splints" by completing the form below. USATF reserves the right to edit or delete submissions for profanity, inappropriate content or any other reason. The content of the submissions does not necessarily reflect the opinions of USA Track & Field, its athletes, employees, officers, sponsors or volunteers. USATF does not intend for the content of the submissions to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual. Neither USATF nor any of its athletes, employees, officers, sponsors or volunteers is responsible for, and neither will be liable for, either the submissions’ content, implication or intent, or any loss, damage or injury resulting therefrom.

Your name:
E-mail address:
Comments:
By clicking the Post Comments button, I certify that I have read and understand the USATF privacy statement and terms of use and agree to their terms.

 

>> Blog archives

Photo of Doug Logan Doug Logan is the CEO of USA Track & Field (USATF), the national governing body for track and field, long distance running, and race walking. Headquartered in Indianapolis, the organization has more than 90,000 members throughout the country.