If you watch the video above, it's clear why members of the world croquet nation have been grinding their teeth over the past week or so. How did curling get so lucky? Why does croquet get relegated to that little dark corner as the quirky, quaint throwback to another time? The injustice of it all.

I've watched a few different email conversations sprout up around the topic and at least one has angled into a "we need to" or "we should" thread that may be accurate but likely will have little impact. I don't know that I can truly assess the issues that affect the progress of the WCF and the associations of Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand, but I believe that I can speak to the challenge that the USCA faces.

In what can both be considered a short period and also a long period, the USCA has achieved a relative miracle. The sport is established in the United States with more than 3,000 members in the USCA and possibly just as many outside of the association. With the real effort starting in 1977, the US quickly made it's way into the top tier of international team play and we even saw an American make a run at the world title in 2009. And the crown jewel of US achievement is the National Croquet Center in West Palm Beach, FL which we should remember is relatively new. All together, the effort to make all of this happen and the overall accomplishment is quite remarkable.

After four years on the USCA's Communication's Committee, I am pretty sure every member has their own idea on how to grow the sport in America. I am sure because I feel like I've heard every single idea. Many of the ideas I've heard are right on target and would accomplish the objective. So why don't we move forward?

I would suggest that somewhere in the past 10 years the USCA made it about as far as it can go as a volunteer-based operation. The goals, the marketing, the programs needed require work. There's become a mis-perception that the internet revolution made everything easier. It couldn't be further from reality. When I was a sports reporter for the Hiawatha Daily World back in 1994, I didn't run the presses. I typed my story up on a desktop, then handed over a disk with the story. The work was all up front and it's not much different today. It'll will take me an hour to write this piece. In the end, I will press a publish button instead of sending it to press. The writing is still the same.

The internet and software didn't solve writing, it didn't solve graphic design, it didn't solve video editing. It makes it a bit more efficient, but the work is still there. The change is in the delivery and the demand for more content. Multi-platform delivery and the unlimited demand for content really creates a greater need for content producers and marketers. That has been missed though as traditional companies are convinced that technology solved content.

The USCA is in an awkward place. It's been successful as a grassroots volunteer-driven organization. To truly chase growth, it would have to make major structural shifts. That creates risk. And because the USCA operates on budget every year and maintains the same revenue streams, there's no real pressure for the USCA to change. So the organization sits on the edge. It is a functional, stable association that has established the sport in America. But it cannot make the awkward leap to the next level, without risking what it has gained.

So, returning to the original question -- why is curling so fortunate? Behold, the power of television. All it takes for curling is two weeks of limited exposure every four years.