2016 Olympic Trials location yet?

[BeerFart]

Has USATF selected a site yet for the 2016 trials?

[CookyMonzta]

Has USATF selected a site yet for the 2016 trials?

Bring it to Icahn Stadium, NYC! We've been ready!

[gh]

No, no selection yet. Formal bidding process hasn't even be opened as far as I know.

As for USATF "bringing" it to Icahn (or anywhere), I repeat once again that the impetus for the meet's going anywhere doesn't lie with Indy. It lies completely with people in host cities. Before it'll end up in Icahn, somebody on the ground at that end needs to come up with a financial package that will work, a large volunteer operation to staff the whole thing and some energetic person to honcho the whole affair for not a lot of money.

There's a reason there are rarely bidders for big meets.

[gh]

why a lot of athletes would vote for Eugene, courtesy of Georgetown's Maggie Infeld:

<<On being in "TrackTown" ... When I was driving in, there were billboards with runners and all sorts of advertisements for running apparel and shoe companies - runners' faces are even featured on the sides of buses here! It's like an alternate reality.

Track & field is somewhat of a niche sport and in America it's certainly not at the status of football or basketball. So, it is really cool to have people be so enthusiastic and excited about track & field here. My family flew in from Ohio and my boyfriend is flying in from DC and they get to experience all of this too.

We went to the track yesterday and it was like Disneyland for track fans. Outside they have a festival and in the stadium they had to build additional stands to fit all of the people who wanted to come.

The crowds are roaring even in the prelims and semifinals. I just try to feed off that energy and use it because it's a once-in-a-lifetime experience and I'm trying to soak it all in and enjoy it. I try to remind myself of that when I get nervous - I need to just enjoy it and have fun because that's what sports are really for anyway. >>

boldfacing mine

[j-a-m]

Are Eugene and Des Moines the only two places expected to bid?

[gh]

from a new story on the front page:

<<Lananna and Eugene have yet to submit an official bid to USA Track & Field to host the 2016 Trials, though they have submitted a “request for proposal,” which is the first step.>>

And when we were in Des Moines for the NCAA, there was story in the paper about an impending 2016 bid (although there are apparently some concerns about how NCAA attendance has fallen off markedly in last 4 years).

I have heard no other rumblings.

And off the top of my head can't think of any other sites with the requisite infrastructure and ability to put together a financial package.

[Marlow]

It isn't 'fair' that Eugene, not very convenient for the rest of the country, should keep getting it, but really, is there a better place for it?

No - no place else is even close.

Eugene ain't Tracktown USA for nuttin!

[Conor Dary]

If it was in Des Moines I don't see how it could possibly stay at 10 days. The middle of Iowa is not Eugene.

As for 10 days in Eugene, I have to admit from a TV perspective this time around is much better than in 2008 and actually has been fun to watch. Last time there were too many rounds, with races involving only eliminating a few people, and generally being a waste of time and a bore to watch. And getting rid of the extra round in the 100 and 200 should help prevent injuries to our stars.

So keep in Eugene, keep the present schedule, and sell lots of daily tickets.

[kuha]

Put it in Eugene permanently. I'm still for chopping some days off the overall schedule, but that just isn't that big a deal...

[donley2]

The crowds are roaring even in the prelims and semifinals. I just try to feed off that energy and use it because it's a once-in-a-lifetime experience and I'm trying to soak it all in and enjoy it. I try to remind myself of that when I get nervous - I need to just enjoy it and have fun because that's what sports are really for anyway. >>

boldfacing mine

Are all the days of the meet sold out? From the several TV shots I have seen it does appear quite a few people are scared off by the rain. It does not look like the packed stands circa 2008.

[j-a-m]

It isn't 'fair' that Eugene, not very convenient for the rest of the country, should keep getting it, but really, is there a better place for it?

Two different questions here (with different answers):

- Should Eugene become some sort of permanent host? No.

- Should Eugene host Trials repeatedly IF their bid is the best one every time? Yes.

[gh]

can't speak to the nature of being sold out (a week or so before the meet I had heard no), but there are more sections of seats available this time, so that while you may be seeing what appear to be more empties, the number of actual butts in the seats (or at least tickets sold) is higher than last time round.

[Marlow]

Put it in Eugene permanently. I'm still for chopping some days off the overall schedule, but that just isn't that big a deal...

I liked the 2-weekend (Fri-Sat-Sun) idea. Yeah, it kills the out-of-towners (like me!), but we have bigger fish to fry here.

[j-a-m]

I liked the 2-weekend (Fri-Sat-Sun) idea. Yeah, it kills the out-of-towners (like me!), but we have bigger fish to fry here.

Swimming trials take place during the week, and NBC shows them in primetime; in case TV coverage is the fish you're referring to. If the 2-weekend schedule benefits athletes, then I'm all for it; but not if it's just supposed to benefit perceived TV needs.

[Conor Dary]

Put it in Eugene permanently. I'm still for chopping some days off the overall schedule, but that just isn't that big a deal...

I liked the 2-weekend (Fri-Sat-Sun) idea. Yeah, it kills the out-of-towners (like me!), but we have bigger fish to fry here.

As kuha noted, it could be shorter. But the 2 weekend thing is good. But the big change is every day it has been on tv it has been well worth watching. Not true in 2008.

[j-a-m]

Put it in Eugene permanently.

No. If you give the Trials to Eugene permanently, then you take any incentive away from other locations to build or improve a stadium. Why would anyone invest in a track facility if they have no chance of ever hosting the USOT.

[donley2]

can't speak to the nature of being sold out (a week or so before the meet I had heard no), but there are more sections of seats available this time, so that while you may be seeing what appear to be more empties, the number of actual butts in the seats (or at least tickets sold) is higher than last time round.

OK. Track superfan has posted some attendance data that makes some since of what I have been seeing. The wiki pages lists the highest attendance day for 2008 at 21,176.
The first three days of 2012 are listed as 20,936, 21,795 and 27,013. So yes several thousand open seats for the first couple days, but still in line with the best days of 2008.

[bruce3404]

Are all the days of the meet sold out? From the several TV shots I have seen it does appear quite a few people are scared off by the rain. It does not look like the packed stands circa 2008.

In a word, no. There are at least 1000 more seats available than last time. Weather has surely been a factor for the casual, walk up fan. The only section that's been relatively empty is right by the start of the 200, lane 4; in 2008, there were just a few rows of the permanent concrete bleachers, but this time they built a rather large section over the existing seats. The fan festival hasn't been as well-attended either, due to weather issues. We're having some very strange, wet weather for June. According to the NWS, the average rainfall for June 22-25 is .0325"/day. We've been averaging .21"/day during the Trials or about 6.5X normal.

[lonewolf]

Now, if they had just had the trials in Oklahoma we would have had ten consecutive 100 F, rain free days. No slippery poles or takeoff boards. Run the 10 K in the evening when the temp drops into the 90s.

[Grasshopper]

What aren't Stanford or Berkely options? Didn't Stanford host the WC trials a few years back? Both have dedicated T&F-facilties and a lot of seating capacity (with room for more), right? I think the Bay area has a great running culture that could drum up a lot of interest, support, and attendance for such an event. GH, being local can you speak to why neither of these schools ever bid for such events?

[kuha]

Put it in Eugene permanently.

No. If you give the Trials to Eugene permanently, then you take any incentive away from other locations to build or improve a stadium. Why would anyone invest in a track facility if they have no chance of ever hosting the USOT.

What sort of argument is that? How many places are actually competing for the OT these days?

[Grasshopper]

What aren't Stanford or Berkely options? Didn't Stanford host the WC trials a few years back? Both have dedicated T&F-facilties and a lot of seating capacity (with room for more), right? I think the Bay area has a great running culture that could drum up a lot of interest, support, and attendance for such an event. GH, being local can you speak to why neither of these schools ever bid for such events?

...and speaking of Northern California, why isn't Hughes Stadium in Sacramento (http://goo.gl/maps/iVWT) an option? It's been mentioned how ideal the Sacramento weather is for the athletes (and I would imagine it might be similar to Rio weather). The Sac State site of the '00 and '04 Trials now has turf infield, but Hughes still has grass and I think has more seating capacity. Didn't it host the '93 US Nationals, as well?

[j-a-m]

Put it in Eugene permanently.

No. If you give the Trials to Eugene permanently, then you take any incentive away from other locations to build or improve a stadium. Why would anyone invest in a track facility if they have no chance of ever hosting the USOT.

What sort of argument is that? How many places are actually competing for the OT these days?

As long as Eugene has the only or best bid, sure, let them host the Trials. But make that decision every four years, and don't give it to them permanently. Just because not many places compete now, doesn't mean they wouldn't do so some time between now and the end of "permanently".

[kuha]

Just because not many places compete now, doesn't mean they wouldn't do so some time between now and the end of "permanently".

And pigs may fly, too. Just make it simple: give it to Eugene for one-half of "permanently"--by American standards, that would be 20 years.

[Conor Dary]

As long as Eugene has the only or best bid, sure, let them host the Trials. But make that decision every four years, and don't give it to them permanently. Just because not many places compete now, doesn't mean they wouldn't do so some time between now and the end of "permanently".

Well, obviously, they aren't going to say, Hey Eugene has it for the next 40 years. But it shouldn't go anywhere else just to move it. And the number of places is pretty small. Chicago is out. It might have been possible here during the Ted Haydon days, but not now. And where else do you have the volunteers? And I just don't see Des Moines for 10 days.

Eugene it is.

[gm]

And I just don't see Des Moines for 10 days.

What's any worse about Des Moines for 10 days than Eugene? It's a nice place.

[Conor Dary]

And I just don't see Des Moines for 10 days.

What's any worse about Des Moines for 10 days than Eugene? It's a nice place.

It's a nice place for a weekend.

[gh]

What aren't Stanford or Berkely options? Didn't Stanford host the WC trials a few years back? Both have dedicated T&F-facilties and a lot of seating capacity (with room for more), right? I think the Bay area has a great running culture that could drum up a lot of interest, support, and attendance for such an event. GH, being local can you speak to why neither of these schools ever bid for such events?

Stanford doesn't remotely have the seating and it would be tough to boost it to the 20,000 level (which is certainly required to help crack your nut). Stanford also no longer has Vin Lananna; you may have noticed that as he moved from Stanford to Oregon, so did a lot of hosting. As I said, it's crucial to have a driving individual in place.

Cal does have the seating, but also an administration that has shown no interest in being in the big-meet hosting business.

[gh]

....
...and speaking of Northern California, why isn't Hughes Stadium in Sacramento (http://goo.gl/maps/iVWT) an option? It's been mentioned how ideal the Sacramento weather is for the athletes (and I would imagine it might be similar to Rio weather). The Sac State site of the '00 and '04 Trials now has turf infield, but Hughes still has grass and I think has more seating capacity. Didn't it host the '93 US Nationals, as well?

I don't think that Hughes as the multi-runway/ring setup that's required of an OT these days, although that could "easily" be fixed with a little cash. Yes, I noted earlier that Sacto may be best weather in country for an OT, but the big problem there now is "who's going to take it on?"

After losing a million bucks or so the first time, and feeling used and abused by USATF in the no-bid situation that gave '08 to Eugene, I'm pretty sure the Sacramento Sports Commission is somewhat soured on the whole concept at this point.

So the bottom line remains this: even if you have an awesome stadium, unless you have a person/group in place at the site willing to do a ton of work (and have the ability to drum up adequate sponsorship), it's pie in the sky to suggest any site.

Exactly the same problem as the annual query as to "why can't the U.S. host the World Championships?" Because there's nobody on the ground in this country equipped to do so.

That's the ongoing many-kilos gorilla in the room.

[Grasshopper]

....
...and speaking of Northern California, why isn't Hughes Stadium in Sacramento (http://goo.gl/maps/iVWT) an option? It's been mentioned how ideal the Sacramento weather is for the athletes (and I would imagine it might be similar to Rio weather). The Sac State site of the '00 and '04 Trials now has turf infield, but Hughes still has grass and I think has more seating capacity. Didn't it host the '93 US Nationals, as well?

I don't think that Hughes as the multi-runway/ring setup that's required of an OT these days, although that could "easily" be fixed with a little cash. Yes, I noted earlier that Sacto may be best weather in country for an OT, but the big problem there now is "who's going to take it on?"

After losing a million bucks or so the first time, and feeling used and abused by USATF in the no-bid situation that gave '08 to Eugene, I'm pretty sure the Sacramento Sports Commission is somewhat soured on the whole concept at this point.

So the bottom line remains this: even if you have an awesome stadium, unless you have a person/group in place at the site willing to do a ton of work (and have the ability to drum up adequate sponsorship), it's pie in the sky to suggest any site.

Exactly the same problem as the annual query as to "why can't the U.S. host the World Championships?" Because there's nobody on the ground in this country equipped to do so.

That's the ongoing many-kilos gorilla in the room.

Thanks for the insights, GH. That's very interesting and helpful to hear.

[gm]

And I just don't see Des Moines for 10 days.

What's any worse about Des Moines for 10 days than Eugene? It's a nice place.

It's a nice place for a weekend.

Which is two days longer than Eugene

[kuha]

And I just don't see Des Moines for 10 days.

What's any worse about Des Moines for 10 days than Eugene? It's a nice place.

Yes, it's perfectly "nice" but so what? I've been in both places and in this context would rank them on scale of 1 to 10: Eugene 10; Des Moines 2.1416 (the pie there is good).

[bruce3404]

Yes, it's perfectly "nice" but so what? I've been in both places and in this context would rank them on scale of 1 to 10: Eugene 10; Des Moines 2.1416 (the pie there is good).

Being from Eugene and having spent a week in Des Moines the past few years for the NCAAs, I like Des Moines and its people. The stadium.....meh!

[Conor Dary]

And I just don't see Des Moines for 10 days.

What's any worse about Des Moines for 10 days than Eugene? It's a nice place.

Yes, it's perfectly "nice" but so what? I've been in both places and in this context would rank them on scale of 1 to 10: Eugene 10; Des Moines 2.1416 (the pie there is good).

If you mean π, then it is 3.1415926....which is where I would put Des Moines, Eugene a 9.5.

[TN1965]

Stanford doesn't remotely have the seating and it would be tough to boost it to the 20,000 level (which is certainly required to help crack your nut). Stanford also no longer has Vin Lananna; you may have noticed that as he moved from Stanford to Oregon, so did a lot of hosting. As I said, it's crucial to have a driving individual in place.

Here is one reason that Eugene should not become a "permanent" site.
Lananna will not be around for the next 40 years, right?