Track and field's viewership problem in non-Olympic years requires revamped marketing strategy

It's not clear whether the journalist solicited Marie Josée Ta Lou's opinion on the track-centric Netflix series "Sprint" or if the veteran standout from the Ivory Coast volunteered it, but she made plain that the show underwhelmed her.

Her main problem: It focused on gold-medal winners at the expense of other elites who also offer compelling plotlines to a season-long narrative.

"You don't show only people who win, because track and field is not about only winning," she said. "It's about people who overcome different situations, good or bad."

If you think of "Sprint" as a pure documentary, aimed at telling the best story possible about a season in the life of the Diamond League, Ta Lou has a point. But if she prefers no-nonsense docs that dive deep, and elevate compelling characters regardless of their fame, she should try QB1, the football series that introduced us to a young Justin Fields.

"Sprint" is an infomercial dressed up as a documentary. It doesn't want to tell a story. It wants to sell the sport. Big distinction. That Netflix greenlit two seasons marks another breakthrough in the Drive 2 Survive era of sports marketing.

I'm old enough to remember when advertisers bought airtime during broadcasts, and the only thing the audience paid was attention. Now it costs $22.99 a month to watch long-form ads from Formula 1, the NBA, NFL, PFA and ATP, and now World Athletics, the governing body behind "Sprint."

The move makes sense for World Athletics. They're looking to expand their U.S. audience, and a series focusing on English-speaking athletes in high-profile events is the most direct path to a North American sports fan's consciousness.

Season 2 drops November 13. It'll chronicle the run-up to the Paris games, and