Development programs are a legitimate activity of an association, but hardly
essential. Many athletes find their way to success without the benefit of an
association. Individuals, acting in their own best interest (for love of
the sport, for money, for whatever turns them on) are self-motivated to
coach, create meets, practice medicine, perform research, and compete. Since
when was the presence of a world or national bureaucracy necessary to
motivate individuals - coaches, athletes - to be their best? It is a
fallacy to assume that if not for the IAAF we would not have a sport. Do
you not love this sport? Are you not self-motivated to participate in it?
Wouldn't an organization that runs a professional track and field league
have a vested interest in promoting the sport at all levels, much like the
PGA, etc.? Of course. But their promotion and development efforts would
not be necessary to insure new athletes. Motivated people will show up on
their doorstep.
What is the driver of a sport, or anything? Individuals, always.
Individuals will always find a way to do something regardless of the
presence of an institution.
>
> > Who needs who?
> If the athletes who earn money and competed in a new competition that paid
> more than the Olympics or worlds arrived fully fledged as stars you would
> have a point.
> But who is going to nuture the athlete when he or she starts out? I'm
> talking pre-college age for those of you who live in the world's greatest
> polluter! Who runs the little leagues, the kids' competitions?
> The IAAF and Federations do many things other than run the top
competitions
> for the top athletes. And if they don't make money from those top
> competitions they can't pay to develop the sport, so the whole thing would
> collapse and a
> >successful professional
> >track and field league that pays better than they can make now
> would rapidly go out of business once the present stars had retired.
> Randall Northam
>
