New Media and Old School Track and Field?

Just finished hosting the conference track meet. Talk about a marathon...

There's something about track and field that does not lend itself to new media...or marketing for that matter. Indoor track has to be the worst spectator sport on the indoor sports docket. Is there anyone besides parents that will sit through eight hours of events for two days?

So, we tried a new strategy--something others have probably used as well, but new to us. We promoted events instead of promoting the meet. And, it seemed to work.

Going into the meet, we picked a half dozen events in the two-day period that were going to feature what we thought were pretty spectacular battles. Then, we adjusted our print media and online media to promote those specific battles. I alerted local media for story lines on each of those battles. We used our Twitter feeds and Facebook page to promote the events. We also dropped a line to the fan message board.

What happened was interesting. Taking an informal visual survey, I noticed that during those event times, the attendance was the highest. And for our biggest event, a battle in the men's mile on Saturday, the arena was actually rocking like a rival basketball game. Now that is what track and field can bring to the table!

The only problem with this approach is that it doesn't sit well with most coaches. They are fiercely protective of the idea that track and field events should be covered equitably, virtually ignoring the drawing power that some events create. They know people want to see only certain events, but they don't want us to promote it that way. Maybe it's time to get track and field into the 21st century?

To Ad or not to Ad--is that the question?

Recently, the NCAA asked CBS (who manages their website) to yank an ad for Focus on the Family that was part of the Super Bowl campaign featuring the slogan, "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." The ad was pretty innocuous featuring a father holding a young son with the text, "All I want for my son is for him to grow up knowing how to do the right thing." The NCAA asked CBS to remove the offensive ad on the grounds that the group's stance against gay/lesbian marriage conflicts with the NCAA's mission of inclusion regardless of sexual orientation.

Now, I totally would agree with this if the ad depicted gay or lesbian marriage in a negative way. But to disallow the ad on the basis of the philosophical mission of the organization was a mistake. Focus on the Family has reason to be angry, but I'm sure they are not. There are probably plenty other CBS-managed websites where the ad can be planted. But now, however, I am slightly confused about the NCAA's decision.

Frankly, for many years, I've been totally uncomfortable with the fact that, in our arena, there is a huge ad placard for Budweiser on our scoreboard and three very large posters over the doors into the arena that feature student-athletes encouraging people not to drink. Beer companies are huge sponsors of college athletics, mostly because they profit heavily from the college crowd and those that follow them.

I may be totally nuts, but the message of the Focus on the Family ad is not covert. How do you make a distinction like this in sponsorships? It's okay if you advertise beer as long as you spend as much time and effort telling people not to drink too much? It's okay to advertise Cialis and other ED drugs as long as you don't advocate people abuse them for personal pleasure--like that doesn't happen. What are we afraid of? Do we think Focus on the Family will take over college athletics?

It's the squeaky wheel that gets heard and it only takes a few like Pat Griffin, a retired University of Massachusetts Amherst professor who is a consultant to the NCAA on gay and lesbian issues, who blogged about the "terrible ad", to get the ball rolling and hysteria breaks out. Too bad we leave our common sense at the door sometimes.