There are several reasons for this.John Foley wrote:What I find most extraordinary about the name list from the 1970s is that the same names continue to appear today both playing and organising. Once this particular generation of chess players turn over their king for the last time, chess will face an unprecedented crisis.
The 1970s was a time of boom, so not only did the game become flooded with new players, it became flooded with new administrators. These were naturally the keenest of the 1970s bunch, and so they're still around today.
I think there's hardly any emphasis on finding volunteers for these things who are relatively young. However, take the 4NCL game-inputting team. Two of the regular inputters are under 20, and I'm only 21. This doesn't include Jack Rudd and Matthew Carr either, who aren't exactly going to be drawing their pensions any time soon. I'm not going to be at the 4NCL for most of the Saturday at the upcoming 4NCL weekend, and I'm confident if I left one of the under 20s to co-ordinate the effort, the job would still get done.
I think the 1970s generation of organisers haven't been universally great. Indeed, they've caused enough crises in their time (see GM v Lancs, Yorkshire, Surrey v CCF etc.). So if by "unprecedented crisis", you mean "Can last 5 years without threatening disaffiliation, legal action, and rows that last a lifetime", then I for one will look forward to it!