Saving College Track and Field: How to make the Sport TV Ready for a Revenue Sharing NCAA

Saving College Track and Field: Why the Time to Act Is Now

The college track and field season is heating up, and it’s already been a remarkable start. Records have tumbled, with the indoor 5k record broken early on—just one season after Parker Valby set it—and four men smashing the 3k record in the same race. On top of that, three athletes logged top-10 all-time performances in the 300m indoors during a single weekend.

However, amid these thrilling feats, there’s a looming crisis threatening the very existence of college track and field as we know it. According to Sam Seemes, CEO of the USTFCCCA (United States Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association), “The sport is under siege.” His stark warning highlights imminent threats, including shrinking program budgets, reduced scholarships, fewer coaching positions, and even the shutdown of entire programs.

This isn’t just an internal alarm—it’s a call to action for everyone in the track and field community. Here’s a closer look at what’s at stake and how we can work to save the sport.

The Crisis in College Track and Field

The underlying issue is college sports spending. While many sports programs have found ways to generate revenue and justify their growing budgets, track and field has struggled to do the same. This financial disparity puts programs at risk, especially at a time when athletic departments are cutting costs to support revenue-generating sports like football and basketball.

This problem stings even more following an Olympic year where college athletes earned medals and showcased their world-class talent. Despite these achievements, the sport remains undervalued and misunderstood at the collegiate level.

A Broken System: Why the Current Model Fails

Lack of Narrative and Stakes

College track and field struggles to tell compelling stories or create meaningful stakes for fans. While traditional team sports revolve around wins, losses, and championships, track and field competitions often feel like a collection of individual performances with little consequence.

Ineffective Team Structure

Unlike other NCAA sports, track and field lacks a clear system for evaluating team success. Sports like tennis and wrestling have win-loss records, conference standings, and national rankings that provide structure and visibility. Track and field, however, relies on a confusing qualification system that prioritizes individual achievements over team performance.

For example, in many conferences, winning a conference championship doesn’t carry weight in the national qualification system. Teams like the Florida Gators have even won national championships without ever securing a conference title in the same season—a situation unheard of in other NCAA sports.

Limited Fan Engagement

Track and field’s lack of a cohesive narrative and meaningful competitions makes it challenging to attract fans, sponsors, or media attention. According to Sports Media Watch, Division I track and field national championships rank below women’s lacrosse, beach volleyball, and wrestling in TV ratings.

The Path to Redemption: What Needs to Change

Seemes made it clear: “Nobody’s coming to save us.” It’s up to the college track and field community to revitalize the sport. The key lies in creating value through:

1. Compelling Narratives: Highlighting rivalries, team dynamics, and athlete stories to engage fans.

2. Dynamic Performances: Ensuring every competition carries stakes that matter, from conference meets to nationals.

3. Structural Overhaul: Shifting from the current model to one that mirrors other successful NCAA sports, where teams compete head-to-head with clear outcomes and rankings.

A Bold Proposal: Starting Fresh

The current system isn’t working, and tweaking it won’t suffice. A complete overhaul is necessary to align with successful collegiate sports models. This includes establishing regular-season competitions with direct team matchups, developing win-loss records, and creating a pathway for all conferences to compete for national titles.

Revamping Collegiate Track and Field: A Vision for the Future

As collegiate athletics face budget constraints and shifting priorities, track and field must adapt to remain viable. The NCAA is making changes, with smaller rosters and new challenges ahead. Here’s a bold, comprehensive proposal to transform track and field into a shorter, competitive, and more TV-friendly sport.

The Problem: A Need for Change

Today, college track and field meets often resemble marathon events, lasting an entire day with limited audience appeal. Teams participate in multiple meets, many of which are unscored and fail to generate fan engagement. The current system doesn’t lend itself to television or create meaningful competition structures that fans can easily follow.

Key issues include:

• Overly long meets.

• Lack of clear winners and losers.

• Minimal team-focused competition.

• No cohesive structure for crowning a national champion.

With roster sizes shrinking, it’s time to overhaul the system and design a model that’s competitive, entertaining, and sustainable.

The Vision: A Competitive and TV-Friendly Model

The proposed model emphasizes concise, engaging meets that showcase team and individual performances. Here’s how it works:

1. A Shortened Meet Format

Standard track and field meets will now be limited to about three hours. This timeframe aligns with typical sports broadcasts, making it suitable for television.

• Event Splits: Meets will alternate between an “A schedule” and a “B schedule,” each featuring half the traditional events.

• Team Cap: Each meet will include no more than 12 teams to keep the schedule manageable.

• Field Event Integration: Field events will run concurrently with track events, maintaining continuous action.

2. Scoring for Every Meet

Gone are the days of unscored “scrimmages.” Every meet matters, and every performance contributes to the scoreboard.

• Cross-Country Style Scoring: The low-point scoring system ensures clarity. Teams will compete to minimize their points, with the lowest total winning.

• Athlete Limitations: Teams can enter only two to three athletes per event to keep the meet efficient. If a meet has 9 or more teams, only 2 athletes should be entered per individual event. If the meet is 8 or fewer, the 3rd athlete entered could be scratched from the scores.

For television purposes the team scores can now go on a ticker that is on the screen for the duration of the meet. And individual athletes can now go on a leaderboard for their scoring within the conference and the nation. A top athlete might have an average score of 2, a best score of 1, 18 total events scored, and do it across 8 meets during the regular season. With some basic math that could be used to create an “Athlete Score Rating” or (ASR). It would give athletes in every conference around the nation something to accomplish to prove they are the best regardless of their events at putting point on the board. And some end of season awards, could be tied to it, including who gets “All Conference honors” beyond just conference championship meet performances.

3. Revamped Meet Types

A 10-meet regular season introduces a blend of competition levels:

• Non-Conference/Open Challenge Meets: Scored events with up to 12 teams.

• Conference Challenge Meets: Mid-season competitions for conference standings.

• Dual Meets: Two-team head-to-head matchups.

• Regional Challenge Meets: Using USTFCCCA regions to determine team dominance.

4. Eliminating the Indoor Championship

The indoor NCAA Championship will be replaced with a more integrated system. Indoor events become part of a larger, cohesive season, culminating in outdoor championships and an “All-American Meet” for individual accolades.

Below is a copy of what a Sample A schedule and B Schedule might look like both indoors and outdoors:

Indoor Track A Schedule

Track Events

1. 60 Meters

2. Mile

3. 400 Meters

4. 4x800

5. 600 Meters

6. 4x200 Relay

Field Events

1. Pole Vault

2. Triple Jump

3. Shot Put

(Field events run concurrently)

Indoor Track B Schedule

Track Events

1. 200 Meters

2. DMR

3. 800 Meters

4. 60 Hurdles

5. 3000 Meters

6. 4 x 400 Relay

Field Events

1. High Jump

2. Long Jump

3. Weight Throw

(Field events run concurrently)

Outdoor Track A Schedule 

Track Events

1. 100 Meters

2. 4x800M

3. 400 Hurdles

4. 5000 Meters

5. 4x400M

6. 1500 Meters

7. 4x200M 

Field Events

1. High Jump

2. Long Jump

3. Shot Put

4. Hammer

(Field events run concurrently)

Outdoor Track B Schedule

Track Events

1. 4 x 100 Relay

2. 400 Meters

3. 3K Steeplechase

4. 110 Hurdles

5. 800 Meters

6. 200 Meters

7. Distance Medley Relay

Field Events

1. Pole Vault

2. Triple Jump

3. Discus

4. Javelin

(Field events run concurrently)

The Path to the National Championship

A two-round system ensures a clear and competitive journey to the title.

1. Conference Championships

• A two-day event using the A and B schedules.

• Winners receive automatic bids to the NCAA First Round.

2. NCAA First Round

• Features 52 teams, with 48 competing in the first round for eight slots in the final.

• Top four teams in the nation receive byes to the final round.

3. NCAA Team Championship

• A 12-team showdown determines the national champion.

Sample Men’s NCAA Championship Field (based on 2024 Outdoor Track and Field team data)

Men’s Automatic Bids to NCAA Final Round

1. Texas Tech (Big 12)

2. Arkansas (SEC)

3. Texas A&M (SEC)

4. Florida (SEC)

Men’s East Region

1. LSU (SEC) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

2. Virginia Tech (ACC) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

3. UNC (ACC)

4. Georgia (SEC)

5. Navy (Patriot)

6. UConn (Big East)

7. Princeton (Ivy)

8. High Point (Big South)

9. Rider (MAAC)

10. Kent State (MAC)

11. Rhode Island (A10)

12. Kennesaw State (ASUN)

Men’s West Region

1. Washington (Pac-12) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

2. USC (Pac-12) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

3. Auburn (SEC)

4. Montana State (Big Sky)

5. Cal Poly (Big West)

6. Colorado State (Mountain West)

7. Grand Canyon (WAC)

8. North Dakota State (Summit)

9. Texas Southern (SWAC)

10. South Alabama (Sun Belt)

11. Samford (Southern)

12. Norfolk State (MEAC)

Men’s Mideast Region

1. Nebraska (Big Ten) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

2. Virginia (ACC) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

3. BYU (Big 12)

4. Oklahoma State (Big 12)

5. South Florida (American)

6. Iowa State (Big 12)

7. Liberty (Conference USA)

8. Harvard (Ivy)

9. South Carolina (SEC)

10. UMass Lowell (America East)

11. Little Rock (Ohio Valley)

12. Central Connecticut (NEC)

Men’s Midwest Region

1. Texas (Big 12) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

2. Alabama (SEC) *PROJECTED QUALIFIER*

3. Houston (Big 12)

4. Kansas (Big 12)

5. Northern Arizona (Big Sky)

6. Northeastern (CAA)

7. Akron (MAC)

8. Army (Patriot)

9. Air Force (Mountain West)

10. Youngstown State (Horizon)

11. Incarnate Word (Southland)

12. Indiana State (Missouri Valley)

The All-American Meet

For individual recognition, the All-American meet highlights the best athletes in each event. Using existing qualification criteria for 16 to 24 athletes per event, this meet provides a platform for top talent without team constraints. However, there would be no need for the old NCAA East and West Regional First Round structure to select those athletes outdoors.

Why This Model Works

This model mirrors successful frameworks in most other NCAA sports, while addressing track and field’s unique challenges.

• Fan Engagement: Shorter meets with clear team scores create a compelling spectator experience.

• TV Readiness: A three-hour meet fits seamlessly into broadcast schedules.

• Increased Competitiveness: A focus on team and individual performance keeps athletes motivated.

The Benefits of Change

This bold proposal creates a sustainable and engaging future for collegiate track and field. By emphasizing competition, structure, and entertainment, this model positions the sport to thrive in a challenging landscape.

Track and field has proven its ability to captivate audiences during the Olympics. There’s no reason it can’t thrive in the collegiate realm as well. But change won’t happen without a concerted effort from the community.

The clock is ticking. Athletic directors are already making tough decisions about which programs to cut. If college track and field can’t demonstrate its value—through fan engagement, sponsorship opportunities, and competitive relevance—more programs will disappear.