Track and Field’s Popularity Problem, And How to Fix It
Why engagement matters more than ever, and the role of storytelling and coverage.
This week, I’m tackling a topic central to how I view track and field. Track and field is my favorite sport, and for many others, too. It has a popularity problem and is struggling to stay relevant. This problem has real solutions, and today I will share a few, giving my take on how to help track improve.
Historically, track and field, often referred to as athletics, has been one of the most popular sports to participate in. One reason is accessibility: It requires little to no equipment, and you don’t even need a track to get started. Other popular sports like basketball or football need equipment and teams to be played competitively. But the real issue isn’t participation, it’s engagement. Track and field struggles to keep athletes engaged past their competitive careers and struggles to attract new fans. This includes watching the sport, talking about it, and supporting it financially. This lack of engagement is the problem worth exploring.
The first solution is making track and field easier to watch, just as it's easy to participate in. I believe that if it is easier to watch track and field, more and more people will continue to watch it. For example, large sports media outlets like ESPN and others could do a better job with their coverage. Track and field is covered only occasionally, usually when the big stories come around, but it should be regularly covered. Track shouldn’t change the sport itself just to gain viewers. By changing and enhancing the coverage, it can simply show people what they are missing out on.
Besides just more coverage, track can improve how it’s covered. About two months ago, I talked about how Grand Slam Track is changing the game. Olympic-level broadcasts, dynamic graphics, in-depth analysis, and strong fan engagement. GST is setting a new standard for how track and field can be covered and consumed. I would suggest reading that article for more details about how the broadcasts can improve, but for now, GST is becoming the blueprint for track and field coverage success.
Another way for improvement is promoting more storylines and narratives. This may sound a bit cliche, but it is true; it is central to track’s growth. Last week, I discussed rivalries and track’s need for more of them, and that falls into this category. To explain this, I would like to take you back to last year in the Olympics. Noah Lyles, Olympic champion in the 100m, received a lot of backlash along with coverage during the games, not only for his sprinting talents but for his “antics” as well. Lyles, unlike most other track and field professionals, has a very loud personality, and did not shy away from using his talents on the track to become an icon, or a character off of it. Because of this and his behavior, more and more people watched, and this was made possible because additional attention and coverage were given to Lyles. While not everyone is a fan of Lyles, I feel that he and other athletes like him can help to grow the sport.
Track and field isn’t alone. Take the NBA, for example. What is the main storyline of the Finals? It wasn’t just two teams meeting that had had great seasons, but two teams that had vastly different journeys to that Finals stage. The coverage of the Finals didn’t focus on just the two teams' records, but the story behind them. Track and field could follow this blueprint, because it truly could help a lot when bringing old and new people to the sport.
Ultimately, the problem and the solution both come down to coverage. The future of track and field relies on not only more frequent, higher-quality, and more storyline-driven coverage.