I’d like Affiliates to come under definition #4. I like the minimalist approach from HQ in the affairs of Affiliates.

This was NOT a coaching or programming issue per se; the guy never took a class or did an intro. The gym was the wrong “bias” for him, and he felt kinda ignored because of that. He (and they) were probably right on the fit, btw. I think he should have been greeted, welcomed, and chatted up to confirm the first impression, had his questions answered, and then directed to one of the several places that would have been a great fit. This particular gym is noted for great coaching, great (if aggressive) programming, and producing really good CrossFit athletes more than it is known for its work with less healthy, older, less well conditioned folks. And that’s OK.

I just wish they’d done a little more “goodwill” stuff, ya know?

bingo

am·bas·sa·dor (m-bs-dr, -dôr)
n.
1. A diplomatic official of the highest rank appointed and accredited as representative in residence by one government or sovereign to another, usually for a specific length of time.
2. A diplomatic official heading his or her country’s permanent mission to certain international organizations, such as the United Nations.
3. An authorized messenger or representative.
4. An unofficial representative: ambassadors of goodwill.

Official, authorized ambassadorship would be a great start in mentoring new Level 1 trainers. (this goes for any public-related company) If we can agree that there are poor ambassadors of this fitness movement at all levels of org, then there is certainly room for improvement.

Your experience above is not so rare as many think. I hear from folks often who have bad experience after bad experience in affiliates. I still send folks to CF Gyms, however, and gladly check out the coaches and programming for them. It doesn’t take long to weed out potential “bad” gyms. The process should (could) be going in the other direction…

My .02

Your knowledge base on the extent of sports influence from the non-football schools is incomplete. UConn was a non-factor in pretty much everything prior to the Big East, including basketball. More than any other school in the conference, UConn is what it is today because Dave Gavitt invited them to join in 1979. Providence had a perennial candidate for the College baseball World Series. They were a top 10 hockey team through the 70′s and 80′s and into the 90′s. Providence had 3 final four teams if memory serves. In the original Big East group Boston College was a mediocre program in all but hockey. Kinda like today. They had two mini-runs as a football team with Flutie and “Mattie Ice”. Now? Pretty much a mediocre sports program in all but hockey.

UConn is tiny for a state school. “Serves 10′s of thousands” only if you consider a bit less than 20,000 “10′s”! At that, UConn is measurably larger now that it was in 1979 because of its involvement in the original Big East. Indeed, in the original Big East the only true big time athletic program with influence in multiple sports was Syracuse with a decades long history in football (dating back to Jim Brown) and lacrosse (ditto) in addition to basketball.

The death certificate for the Big East was indeed signed when Penn State was denied entry into the conference by the “hoops” schools as noted by Mike Tranghese at the time. The football schools were not “forced to leave” but rather opted to put the emphasis of their athletic programs on football, exploring options to maximize football revenue. UConn did not cause the demise of the Big East, nor do I make that point in my essay. UConn is kind of just along for the ride as a quasi-football school, a status it enjoys 100% because of the success of its basketball program. Nor did the Catholic 7 sign a TV deal prior to the football schools defection, rather inking the contract after the league fell apart.

My point was that UConn is chasing money it has an option to chase only because it was given a chance to grow as a basketball school in 1979, only because it was invited to join the Big East. It (and to some degree BC) show a lack of gratitude in their departure that is of a wholly different character than Miami, VT, and Syracuse. While UConn is not responsible for the demise of the conference, a contention I do not make, they nonetheless are guilty of an unseemly money grab with no sense of their history, no sense of where they’ve come from.

Thanks for weighing in!

You forgot to mention some points in your blog. First, seems to me that the Catholic 7 were chasing money when they went out on their own and signed their own television deal. You forgot to also mention that, BC, Syracuse, Pittsburg, Virginia Tech, Miami, Notre Dame all decided to leave the conference, not UConn. So UConn should stick around and prop up a bunch of aging programs that quite frankly haven’t done a thing since the 80′s? Besides Georgetown and Marquette, no other school has been relevant in any sport, including basketball. St. John’s?, Providence?, Seton Hall?, Nova?, DePaul? NO! UConn is a state university, it services tens of thousands of students. It does not compare to the small liberal arts colleges that make up the catholic seven. You can’t blame UConn for thee demise of the Big East, this happened many years ago when the original 3 defectors left. You may also want to point out that these basketball schools were short sighted when they refused Penn State’s application to the Big East because, they were not good enough in basketball! The basketball schools essentially ruled the Big East with an iron fist and essentially caused all other schools that valued football to leave. Could you imagine what would have happened if Penn State would have stayed. BC, Miami, and VT would not have left and the original BE would still remain in tact.