Track Champion Latest to Put Sponsorship Debate Before Public

Last week, American middle distance runner Nick Symmonds, the current 800–meter U.S. champion, was left off the USA Track & Field team that will represent the United States at the International Association of Athletics Federations World Championships in Beijing starting Saturday.

The exclusion of Symmonds comes after he refused to sign the statement of conditions required by the track and field group in order to compete.

Symmonds is taking a stand for fellow athletes and has been a vocal opponent of the condition that national track and field association athletes wear only Nike–branded apparel at official events during the competition.

As of Sunday, the two cannot agree on an appropriate truce. The track and field association says the requirement has never been strictly enforced and Symmonds says he wants the association to put in writing what has unofficially been the practice.

Perhaps gleaning inspiration from the plight of collegiate athletes, Symmond's stand indicates that the fight might just be beginning for Olympic athletes, and more specifically, those that complete in track and field.

In recent years, the plight of current and former collegiate athletes has garnered much attention, and track and field could be next. Great strides have been made for the collegiate athlete, and the battle wages on.

A decision could come any day from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in O'Bannon v. NCAA and what the repercussions from the National Labor Relations Board rejection Monday of a regional director's ruling that Northwestern Universitys' college athletes are not employees, and thus, capable of unionizing, is still to be felt.

The high–profile lawsuit against the NCAA and its major conferences spearheaded by labor attorney Jeffrey Kessler, Jenkins v. NCAA, also remains pending.

Mirroring these high–profile collegiate cases, similar legal disputes in the realm of track and field could be on the horizon.

Symmonds, who is sponsored by Brooks Running, has taken particular issue with the vagueness and overreach of the track association contract regarding apparel at official events.

He claims that the governing body sent a letter asking athletes to only pack Nike apparel for the trip to Beijing, such that the entire trip would be deemed an "official" event, not just the competition itself. Symmonds also points out that the association has not defined what is considered an "official" event, putting him at risk of violating his own contract with Brooks as a result of this ambiguity.

The root of the dispute, however, is money. Nike recently renewed an exclusive apparel contract with the track organization that will pay the organization approximately $20 million per year through 2040. According to sports business authority and Smith College economist Andrew Zimbalist, elite track and field athletes will only receive 8 percent of that revenue. That figure is far less than other North American team sports, where athletes typically receive approximately 50 percent of derived revenue.

Olympic athletes typically earn a large percentage of their income from non–competition revenue sources (endorsements). In essence, Symmonds' position is that the USATF has cut off his primary source of income and retained that revenue for itself through its own agreement with Nike. This scenario is not unique to Symmonds or track and field athletes in general.

Interestingly, Symmonds took a similar stand against the International Olympic Committee in 2012, challenging an IOC rule that prohibited an athlete from being used in an advertisement during the games and during a blackout period for one month before and after the games.

There are, of course, counterarguments to Symmonds' position. The track bodies' agreement with Nike is more valuable because of its restrictions on apparel worn at official events since Nike gets more exposure. This money does get distributed to athletes, despite the revenue–sharing discrepancy. USATF also does not restrict apparel worn at non–international events, which provides free exposure to athletes and their sponsors.

However, Symmonds has the support of at least some fellow competitors, many of whom don't have a problem wearing Nike–sponsored apparel during competition, but take issue with the breadth of control imposed by USATF and Nike. In speaking with ESPN, U.S. hurdler Lolo Jones also took issue with the fact that Nike–sponsored athletes are given a far greater clothing stipend during international events than non–Nike athletes.

Symmonds has vowed to pursue litigation, though he has not done so to date. One potential avenue could be an antitrust lawsuit, possibly filed by Symmonds and by Brooks, against Nike and USATF based upon Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1, for concerted action restraining trade. Symmonds could also pursue damages for USATF's interference with his contract with Brooks.

What this matter really demonstrates is the need for a strong union of track–and–field athletes. There have been attempts to organize before, most recently with the formation of the Track and Field Athletes Association. However, the TFAA has flaws that have rendered it virtually powerless with no bargaining power, especially juxtaposed to the strong unions found in major professional sports leagues.

As it stands, most track–and–field athletes lack Symmonds' financial stability and visibility to take a stand the way he has. With a strong, centralized union, perhaps the 8 percent revenue figure would increase to a more reasonable level, and the "official" event designation would be more narrowly defined.

The USATF had no qualms leaving one athlete off the team, but if a majority of competitors declined to sign according to USATFs' terms, real change could be effectuated.

Symmonds' one–man activism may make track and field the next legal battleground in the fight for athletes' rights, but his advocacy is also reminiscent of another former track and field athlete, Steve Prefontaine.

In the 1970s, Prefontaine fought the Amateur Athletic Union, the entity that at the time governed track and field in the United States. Prefontaine threatened not to compete because the AAU only paid its athletes $3 per day, far less than their international counterparts.

Before his death at an early age in 1975, Prefontaine played a large role in reforming the sport. Congress enacted the Amateur Sports Act in 1978 which led to greater oversight of Olympic sports and more equitable treatment of athletes.

Whether it be through litigation, renewed pressure to unionize or though continued vocal activism, expect Nick Symmonds to continue to fight for athletes' rights in track and field in a manner similar to those that came before him. 

Team Members: