Brooks Beefs

by Jarrett Felix

We are just a few short weeks from the IAAF World Track and Field Championships in Beijing. The USA has had it’s National Championships and the window athletes had for chasing “A” standards is essentially closed, meaning we should finally be able to start writing down Team USA in pen. However, the USATF is threatening to take white out to one of the sport’s most recognizable and accomplished names: Six-Time US 800m Champion Nick Symmonds.

Symmonds won the US Championships this year in Eugene after a slow start to the 2015 season, running season bests in each of the two qualifying rounds before running one more in the finals to secure the gold. Since he had the “A” standard, Symmonds had locked up yet another USA Outdoor team (he’s made every team since 2007) but this was his first team under new sponsor, Brooks, as opposed to his previous sponsor, Nike.

The USATF and Nike have a deal in place through 2040 that makes Nike an official sponsor of team USA in global championships[1]. Their signature “swoosh” will be prominently featured on team jerseys and clothing, and the USATF has told athletes they will have to wear Nike branded material at all competitions, practices and other “team functions”. Symmonds, is fine with sporting his Nike racing kit in competition, but he’s concerned about the far-reaching nature of the language surrounding “team functions” and what this means for marketing opportunities on the sport’s biggest stages.

Here’s the basic media snippet from Symmonds you will come across in basically any article you read: “My concern is that … how far back can they go? If they wanted to, they could say I have to wear Nike from the moment that I make the team at USAs, and then all of a sudden they’re buying up the entire season. USATF and Nike are just taking way too much of the pie, so far as to violate my rights as an athlete.”

If Symmonds doesn’t agree to sign a contract on these rules before Sunday, he will be removed from the team in Beijing. Nick has threatened to pursue legal recourse if this occurs.

A strong write up on the story thus far can also be found here.

Another nice article, including some tweets from Symmonds, can be found here. Pay particular attention to the tweet at the bottom of the article. It’s a picture of a note from the USATF and it paints an interesting picture. A direct quote from the letter reads:

 

“You are required to wear the Nike Team USA apparel (includes under layer apparel, bandanas, headbands, hats, sweatbands, wristbands, socks, sports bras, travel bags, etc.; but shall exclude sunglasses watches and shoes) at all team functions throughout the trip, including at the athlete hotel, during training, press conferences, competition, and award ceremonies. Accordingly, please pack ONLY Team USA, Nike or non-branded apparel and be sure to bring your Team USA gear.”

I believe that the USATF is paying for the expenses of the trip and setting up practices in Japan to prepare for the event. Nike paid a good sum of a money (I believe $20 million a year)[2] for precisely this advertising opportunity and this language has been in place for years[3]. It’s my understanding that no other athlete has refused to sign the contract, even those who are sponsored by shoe companies other than the swoosh. This includes 800m qualifier and fellow Brooks sponsor Casimir Loxsom.

However, it seems like the USATF and Nike are really overstepping their bounds in the statement above. The fact that they explicitly tell the athletes to not even pack anything with a competitor’s logo seems absurd and feels like a violation of privacy and basic athlete’s rights. The World Championships (and especially the Olympic Games) are one of the very few times Track and Field Athletes are ever in the national spotlight, so how are they expected to convince sponsors outside of Nike to sign them if they will be completely missing out on the best opportunity for a return on investment?

No athletes are breaking the bank as professional runners. The sport is not really popular outside of select circles (ask ten random people on the street who Nick Symmonds is and compare your response when you talk to ten high school cross country runners), but really the earning opportunities are greatly limited by the organizational structure of track and field. Unlike sports like Major League Baseball or the National Basketball Association, there is no “league” structure to track and field; therefore, there are no salaries from teams. The only money these athletes get is from the sponsorship deals (mainly shoe companies) they can negotiate[4].

Symmonds understands this part of the game very well. When he was a Nike athlete, he was constantly repping the Nike brand, wearing Nike gear and doing everything to keep his brand in the spotlight in a positive way. Now that he is sponsored by Brooks, his allegiances have naturally changed and he will be doing his best to keep Brooks in the spotlight.

Here’s the thing about Nick, he knows how to get headlines. Over the years, he’s tried to be The Bachelor, he’s gone on dates with Paris Hilton, and he’s tried out for NBC’s American Ninja Warrior[5]. As pointed out on the LetsRun forums, he’s already received more publicity for Brooks during this controversy than he ever would have grabbing a medal in Beijing. Nike looks like a big, bad dictatorship and Brooks looks like the hero.

But there are natural questions as well. Some in the running community review this with skepticism. Here are some key criticisms I’ve read from various sources:

1. “This is not Nick’s first team; clearly he knew this language was in the contract, why did he not say anything before?”

2. “If this is such a big problem, why are no other athletes stepping forward in support?”

3. “This sort of language is in other contracts for other sports teams as well. We want to have our team look like a cohesive unit representing the country. Nick should follow others lead, keep his mouth shut and represent the country.”

I believe all of these are flawed arguments. It is worth noting that I personally am a fan of Symmonds as both a competitor and an ambassador for the sport. While some view Symmonds as narcissistic and loud mouthed, I view him as an intelligent businessman who keeps the sport fun. So that difference of opinion may influence my beliefs with regards to my arguments below.

1. Symmonds did not say anything in his previous championship runs, because he was sponsored by Nike. As I’ve said, he has always been a devoted representative of his sponsors and that’s a basic part of being a good employee. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you.

2. Admittedly, I do find it strange that no one has come forward to stand up to these rules besides Nick, particularly some of the high profile women within the New Balance camp. However, you have to keep in mind that Nick is the perfect candidate for something like this. For starters, as he continues to age it seems very likely that Symmonds’s medal winning days are behind him. If he is forced to miss the team while taking his stand, he’s not throwing away strong medal odds like Jenny Simpson or Emma Coburn.

And Nick has been there before. He has made a name for himself, he has enjoyed the world championship experience and his brand is well established. If this ends poorly, he has little to lose, but guys like Cas Loxsom or Robby Andrews would be risking their first world championship team and their best chance at bettering their brand. In the end, this all comes back to your ability to market yourself and get sponsors.  

3. Again, sponsorship is the only source of income for these athletes. And they make a lot less money. So every decision, every little bit extra they can do, makes a big difference. Lebron James doesn’t need to be in the Olympics for everyone to know who he is. I’m sure that he would still get paid millions of dollars in sponsorships if he never steps foot in Rio.

Also, it’s not like Nick is looking to get out of wearing the USA singlet or uniform. I don’t think Symmonds seriously expects to wear full brooks get up on the starting line at worlds and I’d imagine he would be fine wearing full Nike-USA gear at practices. But if he can’t sit in the stands and watch a race with a Brooks headband or sit in the hotel lobby with a Brooks t-shirt, he thinks that’s not reasonable. And honestly, I would agree.

It will be interesting to see just how far this escalates and if Symmonds will be allowed to represent the USA in Beijing (and what this ruling may mean for the Olympics in 2016). I respect that Nick is willing to go to great lengths to support athlete rights and to support his sponsors. It’s hard not to think of Steve Prefontaine’s example, fighting the AAU dictatorship. Hopefully, like Pre, the running community will get behind Nick and help make a change for the better in Track and Field.

EDIT: Another great link to an article here

 

It’s worth noting that if Symmonds is disqualified from competition, it appears that Akron’s Clayton Murphy is next in line for the Worlds Team. He was fourth at USAs and has the A Standard.

---

[1] Apparently there were no other bidders accepted for this deal and they locked up the sport for a long time, causing many to be skeptical about possible corrupt behavior from USATF

[2] I believe this money is not shared on any percentage with the athletes, it goes entirely to the USATF

[3] In fact, USATF claims Symmonds has already signed this agreement before as a Brooks athlete during the 2014 Indoor World Championships. Symmonds has denied this is the case.

[4] And there are limits on what you can and can’t do: Nick knows this well as he has a Hanson Dodge tattoo on his shoulder that he has to cover at the world championships. Meanwhile Nick has posted articles about darts athletes making piles of money by covering themselves in advertising. Yes, dart athletes.

[5] My girlfriend and I are a big fan of the show and were sad that Nick barely got any mention in the episode, considering they did a pretty big segment on a football player (I think a punter) right after him. Such is track.