Q&A With USOC CEO Scott Blackmun

(ATR) Less than a month after being hired, U.S. Olympic Committee chief executive Scott Blackmun is enjoying the runaway success of the U.S. team for the Vancouver Olympics and forging new relationships that should lead to future U.S. bids for international events.

In a Q&A with Around the Rings in his office at USA House in Vancouver this week, Blackmun shied away from predicting when a new Olympic bid from the U.S. might emerge. Instead, Blackmun says the U.S. is looking at smaller events first before launching another campaign for the Games.

Around the Rings: What is your assessment now that you are into the second week of the Games?

Scott Blackmun: I guess the huge thing is just the way our athletes are performing. It's fantastic. I do not want to say it is unexpected but they are just doing a great job on and off the field. It is making a huge difference for the whole delegation in terms of everybody feeling good about the direction we are heading. There are a lot of administrative things going on but all that kind of takes a back seat to what happening on the podium for us right now.

Around the Rings: On the international front, are you making progress with the IOC and international sporting federation?

SB: I think we are making a ton of progress in that we are spending time with them and in most cases it is the first time we are spending time with them. It is a relationship business. And until they get to know us and trust us we are not really going to make any progress. The first order of business is just to spend time with them so that they can get to know us and form their own judgments about us.

Hopefully, those judgments over time will be positive and we will be in a position to make some progress. There is nothing tangible that I can report in the way of progress other than that we have been spending quite a bit of time doing informal breakfasts, meetings with various NOCs, the reception that we had with 41 IOC members. I think we are investing a lot of time of getting to know them.

ATR: Is there one thing that is coming up that you hear over and over again? For example, “I wish the United States would…”

SB: (USOC chairman) Larry (Probst) is very good at asking that question 'what can we be doing differently or better?'. You get different answers from different people . One of the consistent themes is that we need just to be present more often —come to our meetings and event, be seen, participate — it is really just blocking and tackling.

ATR: One area where the U.S. seems to be not at the table for relationship building is leadership of international sporting federations. There is just a handful of people from the United States that have a leadership role. How do you feel about that? Is that something that you recognize as something that has to be taken care of?

SB: I think it is the same issue. It is all us spending more time with them at their events. I think we have some pretty good people involved in sport in this country and for whatever reason becoming a part of the worldwide sport movement has not really been a priority for us. I think we as the USOC needs to make it a much more priority for us and encourage all the other federations to do the same kind of thing.

ATR: What about encouraging the NGBs to bid for world championships and World Cups?

SB: Clearly that needs to be part of the strategy but a lot of people think we need to spend money in order to curry favor in the worldwide movement. I don't view it that way at all. We need to participate and carry our full share of the load. We need to try to host events where it makes financial sense for us to do that but the issue is not that we haven't hosted enough events. We just haven't spent time with the people that we need to spend time with.

ATR: If you were to host events would you be designating a city that you are grooming for a bid down the line?

SB: Not necessarily. It would help because presumably if we had one city that has been hosting events over the next years then there would be relationships between that city and various people, but no. We are not even thinking about the bid right now.

ATR: What about other events, such as hosting a Pan American Sports Organization Assembly or an IOC Session?

SB: I have asked for budget information on hosting the events you have mentioned. I think it would be great, especially if we could host an IOC Session. We are looking at all opportunities for hosting more events like that.

ATR: There has been a lack of involvement by the U.S. in the Pan American Sports Organization and that is the backyard of the United States. It is the place where the United States needs to have support before it can talk about getting support from Europe or other parts of the world.

If the USOC can't walk the walk in the Americas then why bother with the rest of the world? What are you going to do about that PASO relationship?

SB: You describe the reality. We need to be more involved in PASO. Larry has taken a step in that direction. He has taken a new post and Larry is committed to being at those meetings. That is a step in the right direction. We are not all the way there yet. Being more involved in PASO and the Pan American Games is clearly the right thing for us to do.

ATR: What abouthosting another Pan American Games?

SB: There are a number of cities. You remember how supportive San Antonio was. Houston has a very strong sports community and Charlotte. There are a lot of cities who would love to bring events like that to their town. We would definitely look at that.

ATR: Is the USOC in Colorado Springs to stay?

SB: The U.S. Olympic Committee is there to stay. It is a phenomenal community. It is a much larger community than people understand it. It has over 500,000 people in the metro area. It is just a great place to live and it is just a great place for families.

ATR: What about other parts of USOC operations? You have the marketing office in New York, the international relations in Orange County California. Are there any consolidations that could take place?

SB: The New York City office makes a lot of sense. I don't have any intention of making any changes there. Everything other than New York City, you have to kind of balance the regions where those offices existed initially verses building a team.

My priority is to make sure that the team is going to be able to see each other and interact with each other. So one of the things that I am going to talk to [international relations director Robert Fasulo] is how important is it for that office to be in California. My predisposition is to have the senior executive team all in one place.

ATR: How quickly could you merge the offices?

SB: The lease is up at the end of June for that office so if we are going to stay there then we need to renew the lease now. We are going to be engaging in thosediscussions on a March/ April timeframe.

ATR: Anyneed to have a presence outside the United States for the USOC?

SB: I haven't given it much thought. If the worldwide Olympic Movement was all gathered in one place all the time then clearly it would make sense but IOC members are spread throughout the globe.

ATR: Looking at the USOC as an organization, it has encountered some criticism because there is a perception that it is a guys club. The leadership is all male— chairman and CEO.

SB: The chief marketing officer and chief development officer—our two major revenue sources are led by women. Our general council position is held by a woman, our auditor is a woman, head of HR is a woman, our board has three women on it. Look, I think we are justly criticized for a lot of things but lack of diversity is not one of them. We are a diverse organization.

ATR: On the subject ambush marketing, how is your beef with Subway?

SB: I hate to give it more press than it has already gotten. The whole thing frankly disgusts me. It is a necessary evil in our world. I am disappointed it happens. It is a little bit outside our control. Sponsors have been great with working with us. The more press we give it, the happier the ambushers are. I would rather not say much more than that.

ATR: The issues that you had before you got here with the IOC are still in play. Where do you think you are on the revenue sharing issue with the IOC?

SB: The revenue issue was deferred until 2013, that is what Larry and [IOC President Jacques Rogge] announced in March of 2009. I think our discussions with the IOC have been extremely positive and extremely productive. We have had a number of meetings with them and I feel that there is a level of communication that bodes well.

ATR: It is due to be renewed in 2013 so do you have to work on it between now and then?

SB: What we said we would talk about Games' cost. The IOC has requested that we make a contribution towards their costs of putting on the Games and we agreed to talk about that in the short-term and that we wouldn't even talk about the revenue-sharing until 2013. So it is not that we must have a new deal in 2013, we start talking about it in 2013 with a view of making a change after 2020.

ATR: What about the US Olympic TV network? Is that still a backburner item?

SB: Those discussions are on hold until the IOC tells us that they are interested in having us pursue it.

ATR: As you look towards London 2012 what does the USOC need to do to prepare for the next Olympics?

SB: We are very fortunate because all of our revenue for this quadrennial is for the most part contractually obligated. What we really need to focus on is the long-term health of the USOC, so we are looking at 2013 and beyond in terms of the revenue model for us.

ATR: Any further discussion on the possibility of government funding?

SB: We have not discussed that. As you know, there are people on both sides of that issue and I have asked for our folks to do is to describe what the strings are. Everybody says the problem with government funding is that it comes with strings attached. Well, I do not really know or understand what those strings are.

To subscribe to Around the Rings Click Here

Conducted by Around the Rings Editor Ed Hula with Karen Rosen.