USA Cycling's response to ACA Relationship



 

From Steve Johnson
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 22, 2011

 
To my fellow cyclists in the great state of Colorado! 

As many of you know, I have been actively involved in competitive cycling for more than 30 years.  During this time, I 
have met many wonderful people, made many friends and accumulated countless memories that will endure for the
remainder of my life.  Like most of you, I spent much of this time in the sport just worrying about my own racing 
experiences, never giving the process of managing the sport a second thought.  My how times have changed!  

Today we find ourselves embroiled in a discussion of the relative merits of USA Cycling versusthe ACA as 
a preamble to some sort of “vote” by the clubs to determine whether or not Colorado racing should join USA
 Cycling and the national family of 33 other local bike racing associations, or remain an autonomous organization 
without any affiliation to the national or international sport structure.  Based on discussions I have had with
 many of you, I suspect a large number of Colorado racers really don’t care much one way or the other, while
 an even larger number can’t figure out what all the brouhaha is about.  However, for those of you who find 
yourselves wondering how we got to this point and are actually concerned about the future of Colorado bike 
racing, I would like to take a few minutes of your time to discuss this important and timely issue. 

Read the full statement from USA Cycling

This is in response to the ACA Position Statement on USA Cycling Relationship

 
 

 

News Item: 

40 Comments

Sorry

Sorry for all those who may be offended, but... having read all that ACA has had to say, and now having read what USAC has to say, and having lived through the USCF/BRAC --> USAC/ACA brouhaha, I'm convinced more than ever that with the exception of very bruised egos on the part of the ACA powerbrokers, there is absolutely no good reason ACA shouldn't become the Colorado local association w/ USAC. Beth has moved on, ACA should move on, too.

Corporate Bingo

Never addresses who or how we would run things in Colorado next year if we went from ACA to USAC.

Does mention the "National" Rankings. I'll be courious to see how they rank a 50 person (for the full day) cross race in Texas to a 600+ person cross race in Colorado to a 2000 per cross race in Oregon. Again that ranking is for the few people doing Nationals.

I don't mind going back to USAC if there is a good plan in place, if we get a saying in the rules, etc. What is to stop USAC from saying that all USAC members can't race at any non-USAC sanctioned race? What if the National Ranking system stinks? Can we as members have a say in it? Who is going to run the LA? Who is going to be our State Rep? Who will run the website? Who will run the race kit? Junior Camps? etc......

Still lots of questions to be answered before we give up what we currently have.

I think the two reasons ACA

I think the two reasons ACA should re join USAC are clear;
1. USAC pros could race ACA events without any problems
2. Masters cross racers could get the points needed for national callups.

With the new USAC rules these types of conflicts will continue. Time to end this division.

How would we do things?

How would we do things? Very simple, buy your license from USAC, and the ACA structure would do almost all that it does now (except for the nagging little administrative bits that no one really wants to do) and from the rider's perspective on a day to day basis, life would go on. We'd still have BAR/BAT, KHCCTT, etc...

Well Thought Out

It was nice to see a well thought out response to the questions many riders here in Colorado have about USA Cycling versus ACA. The ACA has done a great job with racing in Colorado, but the reason they put forth for not becoming a local association, the money that will be lost, is silly. In the days of BRAC we all paid for a USCF license and a BRAC membership to further help the local racing. I feel most in Colorado can see the benefit of providing for additional local benefits. Let's move forward Colorado and put concerns from 15 years ago away.

reason to do a sport

Two huge glaring reasons missing from the USA Cycling response as to why do a sport - 1. Do I like doing the sport, 2. Is it fun. Without those two, the rest are meaningless. The "can I make a living doing it", is for the maybe 5% of the crowd and frankly shouldn't even enter the equation, IMO. This is a sport and recreation; if it was purely for status and acceptance, it would never flourish in our car centric, football/baseball/baseball centric society.
I honestly don't think USA Cycling gets it.

Pages