This is the same issue pro cycling has struggled with for decades. Zero ticket sales. Extremely limited TV audience -- we're not competing for the next TV contract with any stick and ball sports. We get laughed out of the room.

And the athlete sponsor has to be able to justify the investment by tying the investment to the additional sales it generates.

Just as with basketball, football, tennis, etc. . . . the athlete's value is tied directly to their attractiveness. (There, I said it.) Most athletes that pull down the big endorsements are little more than models and/or spokesmodels. A championship title of some sort CAN help, but isn't really necessary. If they look GREAT in a swimsuit, their sponsorship value as an "athlete" is multiplied. If they are physically attractive and articulate and the sponsor wants TV commercials, the value as an "athlete" is multiplied.

I guess what I'm saying is, an athlete's endorsement value has a lot less to do with their athletic achievements than it does with their physical attractiveness -- both male and female. Less than 1/100th of 1% of the target audience knows or cares who won Kona this year. (Heck, most of the target audience doesn't know what a Kona is!) Find a stunning male/female model, enter them in a triathlon if you must, and pose them with a bike or a set of goggles in a tiny swimsuit. There's your value proposition. Eyeballs always win.