http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/olympics/19234466

An interesting debate is now going on. Many will feel that GB did great and so did the athletes. However, 6 medals was below the target set by UKA Head Coach Van Commenee.
Despite all the funding, the overall performance isn't as good as some other years dependent how you look at it rather than just the medal count.
When you further consider that Ennis and Farah are largely outside of the UKA "system" then it really does beg the question why athletics has disappointed overall whilst other sports seem to have upped their game.

I do think athletics is difficult to manage. It isn't like other sports. Cycling is very straightforward as is rowing. The Olympic athletics events are a diverse range of from 100m, to Marathon, Pole Vault to Shot, so with all these individual events linked under the umbrella of athletics, the formula of funding used for more specific events like cycling / rowing cannot be replicated with athletics.

The set up at Manchester for the cycling would be akin to having a High Jump centre, hurdles centre, sprinting centre etc...

But how could the sport be structured better help ensure that our undoubted talent gets to the next Olympics better prepared to PB.