Will Chairman George lead a masters exodus from USATF?
It’s possible. George Mathews, USATF Masters T&F chairman, has seen efforts to grow masters (and the movement’s income) go for naught. Now he says he giving serious thought to a radical solution — playing Moses and leading masters out of the Egypt known as USA Track & Field. Even though untold hours and thousands of dollars have gone into a USATF Masters Strategic Plan, George told GeezerJock magazine that he is considering leading an exodus from USATF and establishing masters track as an independent masters-only organization similar to U.S. Masters Swimming. GeezerJock quoted George as saying: “We are just a distraction (to USATF) to be honest with you.”
A week ago, I wrote George for further comment on this exodus idea, and he replied (in part):
“I have had a confidential discussion with a natural alliance and am working on a position paper, with the input of others, including you, on where we our future lies. The Masters Committee will make any decision that relates to change. Regards, George”
The idea of cutting the financial apronstrings isn’t new, of course. George has floated this idea before. Pulling the whole organizational plug isn’t new, either. (I’ve been fantasizing about this for nearly a decade.) But when it comes from George Mathews, it’s not a Ken Stone rant anymore.
The “natural alliance” George speaks of is probably USATF Masters Long Distance Running. Of course, if T&F and LDR hold hands and jump at the same time, the overall USATF revenue picture takes a hit — since tens of thousands of roadies are masters. And if their membership dues go, USATF will have to scramble.
So maybe this position paper is more of a gambit to get the attention of the Mother Ship in Indy. The paper also may play a part in averting USATF efforts to kick masters off the Board of Directors in a downsizing plan.
Lots of wrinkles to this issue.
Can’t wait to see the position paper.
8 Responses
Funny wording in your story. Your headline might have read “Geezer’s Plan Comes with Lots of Wrinkles”.
I support Chairman Matthews 100% and give him plenty of credit for being honest about the present “relationship” we masters have with USATF…Perhaps thousands of dollars were spent on the “strategic plan” and the result was exactly what Mr Matthews came up with…we Masters need to make a break from USATF. Not only do i support his idea i would be willing to put my money where my mouth is…i would gladly pay more NOT to be affiliated with USATF. I would also be willing to volunteer some time to help this historic change happen. Chairman Matthews in MY openion has PROVEN himself a leader with the courage to address this incredibly important issue that most just choose to ignore. Thank you George!!
It is time to jump from mothership. If it were not for the loss of funds, USATF leadership would not notice. Masters are just a source of $$$, otherwise they care not at all. For them the future is the youth and elite, the rest of us are just chopped liver. I am fed up with the castoffs from Indianapolis, the lack of support, the patronizing attitude, etc. I agree with Francis Schiro, I am willing to put my money where my mouth is, masters track and field needs to take control of its destiny. If left up to Indianapolis, we are good only for the money they collect from us each year.
My comments apply to the national organization, not to USATF-NE which is very supportive of masters athletes, track and field, road running, cross-country etc. On the national level, masters need to take control of their own destiny and stop writing strategic plans that are filed in the circular files in Indianapolis.
As a new and future Master’s runner, it seems pretty obvious that we are a distraction to USATF. Why not ceceed, so to speak, and use our resources on Master’s track instead of sending our fees to USATF to spend on whatever. BTW what exactly does USATF do for us?
George Matthews has my attention. Now I’d appreciate if he’d ask for my – and all other masters athletes’ – input … In other words, let the masters community as a whole read and respond to his position paper long before we’re asked to choose allegiance. That way we could work out any kinks in advance.
For the record, one of my main concerns with breaking away from USATF lies with the implications for cross-country. Masters cross-country participation at both Club and USA Nationals is growing every year. For many of us, it is the competitive highlight of the year! And a big part of its attraction is the opportunity it affords us to race on the same day with the open runners. How do we break away in track and road racing, yet maintain our x-country relationship?
I’d also like to know how this would affect our relationship with WMA – though personally I’d hope a self-contained masters association might be willing (and able) to flex its muscle more with our international overseers … records in some not-to-be-named-on-this-post events come to mind. Also, the lack of world meets on American soil – even as U.S. athletes consistently post many of the world’s top times/marks at all age levels.
So bring it on, George. We’re listening. We’re eager. We’re just can’t be sure this is the right time or that you’re the right guy to lead us … at least, not until you give us a little more to go on.
I agree with Rod Jett. I dont see much concern from the national governing body on how Masters is handled. I too feel we are more of a bother to them than a legitimate component of the track and field world. Its seems like we alyways have our hands out waiting for them to grace us with a nod. I think our demographic definitley has the expertise,resources and desire (why else would we still be competing) to break away.
Im willing to pay a higher fee to get my moneys worth and to structure a higher caliber, more comprehensive (international)competition outlet. The baby boomers demographic holds most of this countries wealth so why shouldnt we flex that muscle. There sure are a lot of products marketed towards (look at the drug companies commercials)us why not leverage that into sponsorships.A recent article in Geezerjock listed masters athletes as comprising somewhere around 17-18% of total USATF participants.
I dont want to be too simplistic about the process but these are things that have been on my mind since entering masters track. I tell you this, I love competing in masters track!!
Interesting idea . .but certainly merits much more discussion with the athletes . . pros and cons, etc. George Mathews, many other USATF officials and Master’s T& F News folks have worked hard to make a visible and positive spot for masters running in the USA . . . yet much more needs to be done.
Peter Magill raises serious questions about the issues concerning Cross Country. Having a “Club Nationals” with Open and Masters events all in one spot has been the highlight of many of our efforts . . . I for one would not want to see us loose that. Also, what happens to those of us with aspirations to develop Elite Development Programs in conjunction with our Master’s Club program .. Here in Rochester NY we have Open and Masters athletes, men and women, working hard together, inspiring one another for a true “Club System”. It would be a great loss for our future to loose or divide the “Local Club” system. The young folks need our financial support and guidance to continue after HS or College . . we need their inspiration to continue running fast and continue feeling young.
Let’s be careful in what we ask for . . cause we might get it. Will it be better?
Mike Reif, Coach, Genesee Valley Harriers
In Hong Kong, our veterans program has always operated independant of the local IAAF governing body. We’re on speaking terms, and I’m pretty sure they’re just as happy not to have to worry about information and queries from the WMA.
We can work this way ONLY because we had separate status before the WMA merged with the IAAF about 15 years ago. The WMA constitution is set up to give the IAAF national governing body (USATF, for example) first refusal on the WMA affiliation. If US vets tried to set up a separate organization, I expect the IAAF would pressure USATF (if pressure was necessary) to exercise that first refusal.
You need to hear from Bob Fine on this.
Quick Silver
Hong Kong
Leave a Reply