I agree. When I called the program all smoke and no thrust, I was not suggesting that it should be abandoned. You have to give the program time, and then survey the participants to see if actually enhanced their sport rocket activity, and if they felt that it improved their impression of the NAR serving their needs. Some people really do like smoke.
I would expect to see usage "spikes" at certain choke points, such as motors available to minors (F), motors available at many retail stores (G), and motors available without LEUP ("easy access").
I think looking at aggregate motor usage data can be misleading. Unless you are a motor manufacturer, the most important statistic is the number of rocketeers flying a given motor type or class, not the numbers of motors actually consumed. It would also be instructive to know the number of people flying clusters of F and G motors, since they are the people who would probably be flying larger motors if they could.
I have also suggested that the NAR should spend creative energy and resources on shoring up some MR issues. The Jr. cert. program shows that they are at least blowing smoke in the right direction. I have also suggested an HPR L0 certification, only half jokingly. True, the expansion to LMR was nice, but what has the NAR done for MR lately? They need to do some serious work with the DOT, CPSC, NFPA, and perhaps the FAA to keep model rocketry as a safe alternative to the much more hazardous amateur rocketry.
Alan