Is it just me, or are there others out there who see a need for a vision in bowling and not just business as usual? I am referring to some recent writings by people who are supposed to be bowling experts.
Above, John Jowdy has written a lengthy editorial on why bowling should forget about the Olympics. It made about as much sense as Mort Luby's article in Bowlers Journal International a while back that the Internet is a primary reason for the demise of bowling membership.
Jowdy begins by saying that bowling should take the same approach that golf has taken and simply say, "We do not need the Olympics."
The Olympics is used to showcase athletes from around the world and provide exposure that they would not receive otherwise. Golf doesn't have to worry about that. Name a Saturday or Sunday or a network that doesn't give you golf ad nauseam. Bowling, on the other hand, comes to us weeks later in a wonderful format called tape delay.
Bowling experts should never compare bowling and golf. Bowling will never be able to compete with beautiful outdoor courses, the county club attitude, and, of course, the prize money.
Let's look at the prize money itself. As of Oct. 29, Walter Ray Williams Jr. was bowling's leading money winner with $290,630. If you compare that total to golf, Williams would be 75th on the PGA money list.
Golfer Tiger Woods, however, in less than 90 days as a professional, has earned $790,594. In fact, his first winner's check ($297,000) exceeded Williams' total (which includes equipment incentives.)
One way to bring bowling to the attention of the world
would be through the coverage the Olympics receive.
Jowdy's next issue was the cost of staging the Atlanta Olympics, down to and including the salary of the CEO of the Olympic Games. Here are a few figures that Jowdy inadvertently omitted.
According to Dr. Jeffrey M. Humphreys, Director of Economic Forecasting, Selig Center for Economic Growth, Terry College of Business, at the University of Georgia, Atlanta's winning bid had a tremendous economic benefit to the state. "In the simplest and broadest terms, the economic impact of hosting the Olympic Games on Georgia's economy is projected at $5.1 billion."
Jowdy writes about Coca-Cola and Nike as if they are bad companies because they spend a lot of money on the Olympic Games. "Does this sound a bit commercial?" he asks.
Let's look at the history of the Olympics. The earliest reliable date that recorded history gives for the first Olympics is 776 BC. It began as a festival, but when the warlike Spartans began to compete, they influenced the agenda. The 37th Olympiad (632 BC) expanded the competition to five days. The growth of the games fostered "professionalism" among the competitors, and Olympic ideals waned as royalty began to compete for personal gain. The truth of the matter is the games were the preserve of the wealthy few.
Today, hundreds of millions will witness the games and feel part of it if only through a pin, hat, T-shirt, or other item of commercialism.
Despite Shaquille O'Neal's contract, most of the Olympic athletes, nearly 11,000 returned to life as plebeian as the rest of us.
The 100th anniversary of the modern Olympics had an estimated 10,500 athletes from 197 nations. It was the largest peacetime event in history; only world wars have been larger. The Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games predicted a $200 million tax windfall for Georgia and $5.1 billion for the economy.
Let's be honest: Money makes money. Vendors have existed since the first Olympiad. Vase painters, sculptors, nationalism, and greed are not 20th century inventions, nor are vendors unique to the Olympics. Been to a baseball or football game lately? How about a professional bowling tournament? Why are those people charging entrance fees? Why are we charged for programs, photographs, jackets, T-shirts?
Could it be commercialism?
Jowdy goes on to talk about the Olympic spirit and one athlete's comment about letting his country down. "This is the way it was originally designed," he writes.
No, it wasn't. We want to believe that because it makes us feel good. No one works their entire life for one chance with only God and country as the motivation. Everyone expects something better will happen to them, whether that be monetarily or otherwise.
Comparing the Olympics with the Federation Internationale des Quilleurs (FIQ) is like comparing high school football to the Super Bowl. In 1991, 48 nations competed in the FIQ, and although it is wonderful competition, it isn't the Olympics. It doesn't get the exposure, the prestige, or the triumphs or failings of this enormous event.
Finally, Jowdy talks about all of bowling's wonderful leaders being treated poorly by the International Olympic Committee. Well, I am sure they are wonderful people, but I question their ability to negotiate with the IOC after seeing their track record with television coverage and marketing the PBA and LPBT.
Until the bowling integers wake up and realize that what they have not done really well is selling their product, bowling will continue to decline. One way to bring bowling to the attention of the world would be through the coverage the Olympics receive.
It is blatantly obvious that business as usual isn't working, and bowling should get all the coverage it can. It needs modern thinkers capable of moving forward because bowling cannot evolve without modern thinking.