Interestingly cycling is all about the rider's contracts, transfer rumours, etc. It adds depth but also is what fills the off-season news.
Perhaps the issue in trail running is still there there are not many team structures other Salomon, Terrex , North Face, and the reason for changing sponsors is still very much based on who will offer a better contract. In cycling, the reasons for changing are much more dramatic such as a rider going to another team to have a shot as a leader, or a team offering a better support team, better coaches etc.
As the sport of trail running continues to grow and structured teams become more prevalent I think it will be a natural evolution that we will talk of runners going to rival "teams" vs another "brand". Also, the day that the teams begin to become sponsored by non-running brands will be a big step in the growth of the sport on a global scale but that is a whole other story on how you will build a cohesive storyline of a season of running that a causal fan can follow and understand more easily, Sky Running, Mountain Running, GTS, UTMB Series, where do you even begin..
Another thought provoking post, Matt. My take on all this is that brands and organisations have an opportunity - through storytelling - to turn casual viewers into fans. I’d argue that you and your friends, who you say are “ just nomads who are happy to watch something entertaining on a Saturday night” could become fans of the stories around ice hockey were told better. If you were more invested in what was happening on the ice, in the league and in the teams, then you’d be more likely to buy a season ticket, some merch and pay attention to the brands involved in the sport. So I’d argue that you are the perfect target for whomever is marketing the sport. Running has the chance to do the same thing - turn casual observers into fans. But the answer has to be stories.
An additional perspective is that while newer participants like you and Finn appreciate what goes on 'behind the curtain', the old guard did not want to know. "Business" was sort of frowned upon; ultrarunners did it for the love of the sport. This is a classic storyline, well told by "Chariots of Fire". Note that it wasn't until 1986 that the Olympics allowed an athlete who had ever been paid anything! The best runners in the world had to be paid under the table; a great example is Frank Shorter - Yale B.A., Florida J.D. Law - and 2 Olympic medals - who fought hard to allow economic sustainability in this sport. The story goes on, as this speaks to the privileged class, etc.
Christians comparison with road cycling opens another storyline - cycling is indeed the opposite of running - but it's business model is a wreck, with too much power held by the big races - which speaks to our current questions re UTMB.
Interestingly cycling is all about the rider's contracts, transfer rumours, etc. It adds depth but also is what fills the off-season news.
Perhaps the issue in trail running is still there there are not many team structures other Salomon, Terrex , North Face, and the reason for changing sponsors is still very much based on who will offer a better contract. In cycling, the reasons for changing are much more dramatic such as a rider going to another team to have a shot as a leader, or a team offering a better support team, better coaches etc.
As the sport of trail running continues to grow and structured teams become more prevalent I think it will be a natural evolution that we will talk of runners going to rival "teams" vs another "brand". Also, the day that the teams begin to become sponsored by non-running brands will be a big step in the growth of the sport on a global scale but that is a whole other story on how you will build a cohesive storyline of a season of running that a causal fan can follow and understand more easily, Sky Running, Mountain Running, GTS, UTMB Series, where do you even begin..
Another thought provoking post, Matt. My take on all this is that brands and organisations have an opportunity - through storytelling - to turn casual viewers into fans. I’d argue that you and your friends, who you say are “ just nomads who are happy to watch something entertaining on a Saturday night” could become fans of the stories around ice hockey were told better. If you were more invested in what was happening on the ice, in the league and in the teams, then you’d be more likely to buy a season ticket, some merch and pay attention to the brands involved in the sport. So I’d argue that you are the perfect target for whomever is marketing the sport. Running has the chance to do the same thing - turn casual observers into fans. But the answer has to be stories.
Good perspective, and agreed.
An additional perspective is that while newer participants like you and Finn appreciate what goes on 'behind the curtain', the old guard did not want to know. "Business" was sort of frowned upon; ultrarunners did it for the love of the sport. This is a classic storyline, well told by "Chariots of Fire". Note that it wasn't until 1986 that the Olympics allowed an athlete who had ever been paid anything! The best runners in the world had to be paid under the table; a great example is Frank Shorter - Yale B.A., Florida J.D. Law - and 2 Olympic medals - who fought hard to allow economic sustainability in this sport. The story goes on, as this speaks to the privileged class, etc.
Christians comparison with road cycling opens another storyline - cycling is indeed the opposite of running - but it's business model is a wreck, with too much power held by the big races - which speaks to our current questions re UTMB.