In Deep Water: The recent struggles of collegiate swimming programs

  47 SwimSwam | February 05th, 2013 | AAC, ACC, Big 12, Big Ten, College, Featured, Ivy League, NAIA, NCAA Division I Mid-Major, NCAA Division II, NCAA Division III, News, Pac-12, SEC

Natalie Schumann is a former high school swimmer and State Championship qualifier from Pennsylvania, and is now a sophomore journalism major at Indiana. 

These are not fruitless swim teams unable to recruit or unable to win in competition. This is not about lackluster school pride or failing team spirit. These are historically successful swimming and diving programs that have produced NCAA champions, All-American athletes, Olympic Trials qualifiers and Olympians.

These are teams that, in some cases, have flourished for almost 100 years. These are teams that have achieved winning records during regular season competition. And these are teams that have been cut.

Since 1993, over 35 college swimming programs, including those at the University of Maryland and the University of Washington, have found themselves on the chopping block, according to International Swimming Hall of Fame member Phil Whitten. Perhaps one of these programs would have one day produced the Michael Phelps or Ryan Lochte of the future.

Universities nationwide have been eliminating swimming and diving programs in the last two decades, causing hundreds of student athletes’ careers to come to a screeching halt. Colleges large and small, from NCAA Division I schools to Division III schools, have been affected by this growing trend.

No collegiate athlete commits to a program expecting to be told in the middle of their career that their sport will no longer exist at their school. Likewise, no athletic department expects to be forced to cut programs with rich histories and numerous success stories.

Clemson University, the University of Washington, Rutgers University, and the University of Maryland are among the most notable programs that have received the axe from their respective athletic departments in the past decade. Out of these programs, the freshly eliminated University of Maryland program alone sent six swimmers to the 2012 Olympic Trials.

Programs that once fostered a spirit of commitment, dedication, and passion for the sport are no longer in existence. “You just can’t take the fact that you have a swim team at your school for granted,” said Bob Groseth, former Northwestern University head coach and former director of the College Swim Coaches Association of America (CSCAA).

Breaking the news

During the 2011-2012 athletic season at the University of Maryland, athletic director Kevin Anderson announced that the men’s and women’s swimming programs would be dropped immediately after the conclusion of the season.

For swimmer Kelly Carroll, a freshman at the time, November 8, 2011 began as a completely normal day, her schedule filled with the usual alternation of time in the classroom and time in the pool. When her coaches called an impromptu meeting before afternoon practice, the team members began to whisper speculations of a men’s team cut due to lack of success and high costs, recalled Carroll. “But never in any of our minds did we think the women’s team would be cut—we were ranked 19th in the country at the time,” said Carroll.

Team members, gathered in a classroom overlooking the pool, reacted immediately to Anderson’s news of the proposed program cut. The room was silent and tearful, swirling with feelings of shock, confusion, and denial. “Even my coaches were crying,” said Carroll. “My head coach looked like he was going to pass out or punch a wall. I was just in such denial and shock that I couldn’t show emotion.”

As the unthinkable became reality, the swimmers met with their team captains to process the news. Gathered on benches in the women’s locker room, Carroll and her teammates discussed their fate. “Everyone was bawling, and I was too. But we decided we wanted to fight for our program,” she said.

The team called a meeting with University of Maryland president Wallace Loh and spent a week preparing for battle. They discussed possible budget reductions, weighed all options, and practiced speeches about the importance of the program to present at the meeting. Two days after the meeting, Carroll and her teammates received an email stating the final decision: the University of Maryland’s men’s and women’s swimming teams would be cut due to financial issues.

Some team members chose to stay; others began talking to other schools and considering transfer options. Carroll chose to transfer to Fordham University, where she is continuing her collegiate swimming career. Carroll’s experience at Maryland is similar to that of many other swimmers across the country.

Just a year and a half before, Clemson University announced two and a half years ago that men’s and women’s swimming as well as men’s diving were going to be phased out over a two year span. Clemson Director of Swimming Phil Grayson recounted the day the Clemson teams were told the news.

The athletic department informed the team at the end of the spring semester of 2010, and the reaction was less than positive. “They were stunned more than anything,” said Grayson of the Clemson team’s initial reaction to the news. “They were pretty subdued, and you could see that they were shocked at hearing that. When you have that, it’s not the time to process the details. They just knew that the program would be cut and that it would be a very traumatic experience for them,” Grayson said.

At Rutgers University in New Jersey, the men’s swimming program received the same fate after the 2006-2007 season. Chuck Warner, the coach at the time, did not take the news well.

“I felt like a parent walking their child across the street, and a car hit them because I wasn’t holding their hand the right way,” he recalled. “I felt like I let down not just the team but the legacy of the sport of swimming in New Jersey. I felt like I let everybody down,” he said.

Warner recounted the story of one of his male swimmers who chose to transfer to the University of Maryland when the Rutgers’ men’s team was eliminated. During his collegiate experience, Warner’s former swimmer had three coaches in three years at two different programs. Today neither of those programs exists.

The program at the University of Washington met a similar demise, even after solid attempts by student government, faculty, coaches and swimmers to protest the decision to cut the teams. Syracuse University, the University of Illinois, and many others also no longer have teams of one gender or the other.

Why?

Reasons for program cuts vary, but one reoccurring theme involves budget limitations. From a business perspective, it all comes down to money, said Kirk Sanocki, President of the College Swim Coaches of America Association (CSCAA) and head coach at Wingate University. Regardless of the high grade point averages reported by teams and the countless feel-good success stories of swimmers achieving their goals, swimming typically resides at the bottom of the totem pole that is collegiate athletics.

At Maryland, the story revolved around inadequate funding. Prepared to lose nearly $4.7 million in budget cuts, the athletic department made the decision to eliminate the swimming program as well as five other sports teams.

Clemson University found themselves in a very different position. For Grayson and the rest of the athletic department administration, the problem was not funding but lack of facilities. As one of few ACC conference schools without a 50-meter pool, Clemson felt that their aquatic center was simply not conducive to successful training and competition.

“It wasn’t an issue of not having money to fund the program. We felt that we couldn’t compete at such a high level without a 50-meter pool. We didn’t have the money, we didn’t have the facility,” Grayson said.

Another alarming issue involves Title IX. Enacted in 1972, Title IX’s goal was to prevent discrimination against women in sports at all levels, including collegiate. Today, some argue that strict Title IX requirements are putting men’s programs in jeopardy and leading to a type of reverse discrimination. Groseth, who has seen this firsthand, recalled a story from an end-of-season banquet he attended at Northwestern University many years ago.

“This guy got up and he said, ‘I came to Northwestern as a walk on baseball player and I made the team and got to play. After my sophomore year, I decided to go out for football and made the team, eventually started on the team and played in the Rose Bowl. When you cut sports or put caps on men’s teams, just remember I’m the guy you’re cutting. I’m the one you’re taking the opportunity away from,’” said Groseth.

The same issue afflicts men’s swimming programs and eventually affects the women’s as well. Often, when a men’s program is eliminated the women’s team is weakened because of close relationships formed between the teams and the lack of unity exhibited.

What is at stake?

The effects of the eradication of collegiate swimming programs could potentially reach a national and international level. Currently, the United States dominates in the pool at international competitions such as the Olympic Games and the FINA World Championships. However, many successful members of the national team got their starts in college programs.

Cullen Jones is a two-time Olympian and a member of the world-record-setting, gold-medal-winning 4×100 freestyle relay team that upset France at the 2008 Beijing Games. Jones attended North Carolina State University and did not appear on the international scene until the end of his college career.

Scott Weltz, a graduate of University of California, Davis, made his Olympic debut at the 2012 London Games, and placed fifth in the 200-meter breaststroke. Weltz did not even make the UC Davis team his freshman year, and was not a contributing member until his junior and senior seasons. The swimming program at UC Davis no longer exists.

“Here’s a kid who wouldn’t be on the Olympic team if he hadn’t gotten the opportunity to develop his full potential,” said Mickey Wender, head coach at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. Wender swam for the University of Vermont and coached at California State University, Northridge, both of whose programs have since been dropped.

Wender added that swimmers develop at an incredibly fast rate during their college years. “The college swimming environment is so unique and special, such a fun way to train, and people typically improve by leaps and bounds,” he said.

In other words, the late bloomers and hidden stars are the ones who will be affected by program cuts, even at small schools. “You’re going to miss the Cullen Jones’s and the Scott Weltz’s, the diamond-in-the-rough type of kids. Those are the guys at the upper level that we’re going to lose,” said Groseth.

Even Olympic gold medalist Tyler Clary got his start in a collegiate program. Before he achieved success at international competitions and struck gold at the 2012 London Games, he swam for three years at the University of Michigan. Clary still trains there today.

“I left after 3 years to focus mainly on making the Olympics, and missed the college team quite a bit while I was gone. It’s great being back with the guys,” said Clary. He added that swimming in college helped him get to where he is now in his swimming career.

“It put me in one of the most competitive swimming leagues in the world and opened my eyes to my ability as well,” said Clary.  He also believes that college swimming programs are crucial to making the step from high school to international competition.

Limitations placed on collegiate swimming opportunities could certainly cause the United States’ pool of future Olympic athletes to dwindle, but the international success of United States swimming is not the only valuable thing at stake. Events occurring now will inevitably affect future generations of swimmers.

“If you have a son someday, the chances of him having a program is slim to nothing,” said Warner. “The kids today will be okay and survive and move on, but what doesn’t survive is the chance for the next 14-year-old boy to think about going to college to swim.”

What can be done?

College swimming may be slowly sinking, but it has not drowned yet. Swimming organizations such as the CSCAA are becoming increasingly focused on proactive planning to save collegiate swimming. Sanocki said that the CSCAA is committed to remaining aware of new potential cuts and trying to rally the swimming community in order to save the programs.

The main focus is on education. By ensuring that coaches are educated about how to be better business managers of their programs, the CSCAA hopes to decrease the amount of programs lost.

Whitten, a former CSCAA director, emphasized the responsibility of the coaching staff. “When someone becomes a swim coach, he or she is no longer just a coach,” he said. “They are the CEO of the team—past, present, and future.”

As far as finances go, many schools could be on the wrong track. Athletic departments confuse two very separate things: revenue producing programs and profitable programs. “Anyone can be revenue producing. The trick is to be profitable,” said Whitten.

According to Groseth, publicity is crucial to saving these programs. By ensuring that the public knows when their athletes are being good citizens, contributing to the university community, and getting good grades, coaches can ultimately decrease the chances of his program being endangered.

An additional resource lies in a strong alumni base. Swimming produces numerous influential people who are able to contribute to universities’ fundraising efforts, said Whitten. Alumni can make up a large portion of the funding necessary to keep a swimming program running.

Programs like those at the University of Virginia and the University of North Carolina, both very successful, have fully endowed scholarships and funding, making it nearly impossible for the administrative department to propose a cut. According to Sanocki, a coach’s first task should be to rally all alumni and create a backup source of funding to be used if the program should ever encounter problems.

Organizations and alumni can seamlessly work together to protect the sport of swimming at the collegiate level and to give future students the chance to reap the benefits of being involved in a sport. “I think if people believe that sports develop character and the process of being involved makes you a better person, then those sports have value,” said Groseth, “and when they are taken out of the system, no one can benefit from that.”

While the frequency of college swimming program cuts has begun to slow down since a decade ago, the severity of these program cuts and the level of athletics they affect remains the same. According to Wender, “We’ve got to fight for it, we’ve got to stick together. We have to find ways to ensure that my children and my children’s children have an opportunity to get into this sport and compete.”

Comments

  1. swmr1 says:
    0
    0

    Interesting article that totally ignores the elephant in the room – football. It drives me crazy when Title IX is blamed for ruining men’s sports. Football eats up an enormous share of men’s collegiate sporting opportunities (whether the specific team is actually profitable or not). Blaming a law that actually gave women a chance to participate in sports is ignorant. Blame the universities that decide to allocate all their resources to one or two sporting programs. If it weren’t for Title IX, I’m sure the women’s programs would have been gone long before any of the men’s. I’m for divorcing the big business of football from the University entirely…

    • WHOKNOWS says:
      0
      0

      NCAA football, basketball, and baseball programs are a joke…. their athletes play two or three years and then go pro… nice return for their investment! NCAA is nothing but pawns of professional sports!

      • Brian says:
        0
        0

        Don’t forget that Football/Basketball are also great sources of revenue for the rest of college sports. The University of Michigan is one of the most profitable football teams in NCAAs, and the money largely goes to fund other smaller athletic programs.

        Source:
        http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50135410n

        • Opinionated says:
          0
          0

          Those figures, as many that claim that major football programs are profitable, never include costs like stadium construction, additional football-only training buildings, salaries of support staff who only work for the football team, etc. There was an article that was written a few years ago that showed that if you only include construction costs of facilities whose sole use is by the football team (not even including personnel salaries) ther are only 7-9 football teams each year over the past 20 years that turn a profit. Some programs (Michigan included, which I noticed since my dad is a dedicated fan of 70+ years) lose more money in a year than all of the other men’s athletic programs at the college cost. If you ignore major capital expenses they are profitable, but in reality most of them are money pits.

      • jman says:
        0
        0

        I don’t plan Title IX. But i do blame those who are completely unwilling to compromise on football. It should be either partially or fully out of the equation since it is the only sport in the world that has no female equivalent. Completely unfair to any male not playing football. Personally i wish someone would bring a lawsuit vs. the NCAA on this. And also on the fact that at D1 men can only have 9.9 scholarships and women 14. That is discrimination and unfair.

        • coacherik says:
          0
          0

          The numbers are also higher per women’s team to help balance out the number of scholarship dollars when you take into account a football team. Though it is unfair in the vacuum of swimming and diving, overall that is what is needed to help approach the 85 scholarships football has.

    • NCAA swimmer says:
      1
      0

      You’re kidding yourself if you think that you can eliminate football and/or basketball from the NCAA system and have it continue to run. They are the only two sports that make any money. If your football team gets more money/attention, it makes it more appealing to better recruits. Better recruits = better team. Better team = more money for the entire athletic program. I don’t think the local club team renting lanes is going to pay for the upkeep of a pool (or one worth swimming in), let alone pay the other fees such as coaches salaries, uniforming, and travel. That being said, a swim team needs football because athletic departments need football.

      What would be a good solution to this problem is eliminate football and another girls-only sport like field hockey from the balancing equation. That way we don’t see swim teams getting cut because a women’s golf team could balance out the math.

  2. jeantuehl says:
    1
    0

    No mention of the greatest men’s collegiate swimming program ever to be dropped: UCLA. One NCAA title and several top 5 finishes. UCLA is the original poster child for Title IX dropped sports.

  3. swmr1 says:
    0
    0

    Read “The Economics of College Sports” by John Fizel and “Getting In the Game” by Deborah Brake before you go off on Title IX. At least be educated about the law and its effects and about how college football, in fact, does not often subsidize women’s sports.

  4. Joel Lin says:
    0
    0

    When Maryland announced going to the Big 10 to restore financial stability, the very first thing the AD and President promised was to restore the seven programs that were cut including both swim teams.

    Nothing since. Sad truth is athletic directors these days a are pressured to focus on delivering big time football at the expense of all else. They’re not love you in the morning guys.

  5. JG says:
    0
    0

    3 states have Governors who wish to rationalise the College system in their states. Wisconsin Texas & North Carolina. 3 different philosophies – which you can find out because I get accused of bringing in politics.

    California raised general taxes to specifically fund colleges. California dreaming thinking hey will pry that money outta Jerry’s cold dead hands.

    It is all part of the new economics .

    But something is different – Title Beyonce grabbed all the wattage & oxygen available & left
    Football in the dark in its greatest show.

  6. Swimmer says:
    0
    0

    The part about Scott Weltz not making the team at UC Davis is not accurate. He definitely was on the team as a freshman and was a solid contributor for them. If I remember correctly, he had an Olympic trials cut in high school.

    • Anonymous says:
      0
      0

      He scored 48points for them at conferences his freshman year, most on the team, so even more than a “solid contributor” strange that the author just made that up haha

  7. Mavnation says:
    0
    0

    I have found myself wondering if I do think Title IX is causing a reverse sexism– “Today, some argue that strict Title IX requirements are putting men’s programs in jeopardy and leading to a type of reverse discrimination.”

    Here’s a question I don’t know the answer to… does that money made off of popular fan sports like Football and Baseball provide the financial budgeting for these lesser financially profitable sports like Swimming?

    • Mswimfan says:
      1
      0

      There’s no such thing as “reverse sexism”… Sexism is sexism whether it be discrimination towards women or men.

    • coacherik - RIP Nebraska S&D says:
      0
      0

      Very rarely does a baseball team make money, let alone break even. You will probably find more NCAA hockey teams making money relative to baseball.

  8. Charlie Johnson says:
    0
    0

    Has anyone ever done an honest calculation of the incremental cost of having a men’s team with one or two scholarship equivalents at a public university where there is a women’s team, coaching staff, and pool in place?

    It’s hard to believe the claims of multi-million dollar savings you hear administrators talk about when they cut a men’s team, but continue to fund a women’s team.

    • CoachAsher says:
      0
      0

      Great point. With a little creative accounting, a men’s program may cost (let’s say) $1M/year, taking into account a share of the pool’s operating cost and a share of the services available to all athletes. When the men’s team is eliminated, the facilities and services often continue operation, so with the same accounting, the women’s team has just gotten significantly more expensive. In such a circumstance, it becomes justifiable to cut the women’s team due to expense, but then the facilities and services continue operation and the cost is passed on to another department.

      • coacherik - RIP Nebraska S&D says:
        0
        0

        You can pare down your swim team budget numbers to under 500,000 for a men’s team if you are smart and they staffs are combined. Scholarship takes into account for a lot of that. A men’s program over 500,000 is either wasting a ton of money or renting/includes facility charges..

      • Charlie Johnson says:
        0
        0

        So as if often true in government and big business, it is more about whose budget is getting charged than the actual amount of money being spent.

  9. 0
    0

    The problem is that sports which are marketable bring in the money.

    But what is the use of over 100 football players? The team needs mostly 22 players, so why you would need 3! backups per player is beyond me!
    I’d say cut every football team by 1/4th and you can afford to keep the swimteam…

  10. CUalum says:
    0
    0

    There is more to the Clemson situation that is being told here. There was actually a push by the staff and even alum to get a fifty meter pool built BEFORE the program was cut, but the Athletic Department would have NOTHING to do with it. Interesting how Grayson reports that the swimming program could NOT be successful without the new pool, but the diving program CAN without towers. Sadly, Clemson just wanted more money for football, plain and simple!

    • Eddie Rowe says:
      0
      0

      I even heard that the Clemson swimming alumni went so far as to have the money to build the proposed facility and the AD still said no.

    • anon says:
      0
      0

      clemson cutting swimming was purely economics. clemson did have the $$$ to build 50m but chose not to build 50m. instead, the $$$ was used to put a new roof on the basketball arena, which had caught fire… twice!

      50m water it is no guarantee of success; good coaching + results can counter the “50m” argument. collegiate swimming is not swum in 50m, so the claim that 50m is required to be successful is moot, really.

      clemson could have gone another route and built a 25m x 25yd tank adjacent to their current tank. that would not only have given the program added space, but also become more proactive in the community.

      but, in the end, it was easier to cut the program.

  11. Doug McConnell says:
    0
    0

    I was a walk-on swimming at the University of Illinois in the late 1970s, after many years at a YMCA program. I was not an All American – I barely made NCAA cuts – but college swimming was one of the most formative experiences of my life. I shared the outrage and disbelief when Illinois was one of the first D-I schools to cut its men’s program in 1993. At this point, inertia has put us in the place where funding and facilities have further suffered.

    Swimming is forever. After almost 40 years, I am still close with many of my teammates (including doctors, lawyers, entrepreneurs, educators, coaches and astronauts) and many of us still swim in Masters, Channel and open water challenges. Title IX is not the culprit; it has given opportunities to our daughters that our sisters didn’t have, but it needs to be enforced evenly. Irrespective of whether the beneficiaries of swimming are women or men, we have to get to the point where everyone agrees that, as part of the University education process, there is a place for the lessons of lifelong fitness, goal setting and achievement that are unique to our sport.

    Assuming we can all agree that this is, in part, a financial challenge, could we look to some corporate leadership from the companies that have profited from our sport, but will also profit if it is viable long term? It is clearly in the best interests of the companies that make swimsuits and gear, even chemicals and pools themselves to support college swimming. As this article points out, the opportunities to swim at a high level not only attracts quality people to the sport as college athletes, but they also attract age-groupers who hope to have the chance to swim at that level someday.

    I don’t know who is in the best position to take the laboring oar on this challenge; maybe the CSCAA, maybe the USOC, but we have learned that in most cases having a band of dedicated athletes have no suasion over a University Athletic Department. Bob Groseth has always been a rational and articulate voice in this battle, but my feeling is that we need to attack it from a different angle.

    When the battle plan is organized, I will be the first foot soldier.

    • jeantuehl says:
      0
      1

      Don Sammons was your coach at U of I right?

    • newswim says:
      0
      0

      The battle is already underway…as pointed out by Phil Whitten quite a few years once a program cut is announced it is very late in the game. The key is to fight local battles at each college/university led by swimming alumni committed to the program and school. A galvanized alumni community is a powerful impediment to program slashing. As noted above a bunch of the ‘fully loaded’ cost to swim program includes fixed costs that are not going away. When you get alumni who will contribute to variable costs (endowed chairs for coaches, training trip expenses) those contributions are very highly valued by ADs……also engaged sports alumni tend to contribute to the overall school……(many already do but need to be recognized as attached to the swim program). The good news is that this approach works….the bad news is that its a “local” solution; no “silver bullet” and requires a tremendous grassroots effort.
      Yes it would be ideal if corporate sponsorship could be silver bullet….current swim economics is not working in our favor.

      • Braden Keith Braden Keith says:
        0
        0

        newswim I think you hit on something. Part of the problem for rallying support for programs that are in danger is that by the time anything is made public, it’s too late. Whereas there might be public support, financial and otherwise, nobody knows what’s happening.

        If you try and report it, on a messageboard, in a more formal article, etc. you get attacked for trying to hurt that program’s recruiting, or for violating some handshake agreement with the administration that “if you make us look bad, you’ll get cut that much sooner.”

        Putting it out there for anyone who wants to know – if your program is in danger, and you want to rally support, please let us know. We’re happy to help spread the word.

  12. coacherik - RIP Nebraska S&D says:
    0
    0

    Most, if not all of the problems come from the arms race within in every sport combined with a lack of understanding about our sport of swimming. No one needs a natatorium to be a competitive team or even in the top 25. Case in point, SMU’s indoor facility. Yet we continue to ask for bigger better facilities to compete against each other for the best recruits.

    By arms race I mean football/basketball practice facilities, locker rooms, classrooms, weight rooms, the amenities that go into each and a good and extremely well paid football coach. Its fair to say that this race has been driven by the need to have a successful football program, one that brings in a lot of money for the athletic department and all of the unnecessary costs it may have. ADs are there now for one reason, to make the athletic department money. Its about the bottom line, plain and simple. It’s easier to cut a men’s swim program we know little about then it is to find creative ways to shift money. As soon as you talk about shifting money, you potentially make a program less competitive.

    TItle IX saved our women’s team in 2001. Many left as a result, but as our AD at the time stated in our meeting about being dropped, Title IX did not allow him to drop their team. Our program was around for 80+ years, the year before we had a national champion in the 100fly. As we were explained to, the athletic department’s budget was over by 500K. Oddly enough, that was the same amount as our budget.. Granted we found out some of our coaching staff were not dealing on the up and up, so we would have been restricted in competition and probably had reduced scholarships as a result. We will never know because we were cut before the NCAA ax came down on our necks.

    A side story, the AD that dropped Washington, dropped us and tried dropping A&Ms men’s program after he left Nebraska. He was unsuccessful at A&M, however he did remove the head coach and make the assistant coach the head coach without a pay raise… The ADs name is Bill Byrne (pronounced burn) and I hope he does so on his day of judgement.

    • Peeterdeeter says:
      0
      0

      What is especially nuts is that, from all accounts(especially in College Station), Bill Byrne is considered one of the best ADs in the country – unless you are that sculptor who had it out with him about 20 years ago in Eugene. Ya, the worst sculptor in history, Greenmeir or something like that. Anyway, Byrne’s son is the director of athletics at that little experiment of an independent department in tuscon at U of A. Hope he never asks for old Bill’s advice on which sport is easiest to cut. Bill is a scumbag!..not for making tough decisions, but for his tactics. Major douche

      • Braden Keith Braden Keith says:
        0
        0

        As a former Aggie, I’ve got some history with a Byrne regime. At A&M, people were often polarized on many of his decisions and the way he treated some people, but at the end of the day, the athletics program from football on down the line is light years ahead of where it was when he took over. I’d argue it was underachieving before his tenure and is now right where it ought be given geography, size and resources, but the results were astonishing. 8 NCAA Team Championships, and 37 Big 12 Team Championships from fall 2006-spring 2012, more than any other team in the conference.

        • coacherik says:
          0
          0

          That’s all well and good Braden, but this is an article about swimming teams in jeopardy and a comment about men’s teams being cut. Bottom line: three schools, three attempts to cut a men’s program and successful twice.

          As I spoke to earlier, its about the bottom line and as it seems from him, by any means necessary. The difference in your opinion, quite possibly, is helped by the fact that he failed at cutting the team at A&M. There is nothing you can say that is going to change anyone’s mind, including this one.

          • Dan says:
            0
            0

            Do you have any evidence that Byrne tried to cut mens swimming at A&M? Many have assumed he would do so – after Nebraska. But I also understand the Nebraska program was riddled with recruiting violations. Byrne fired Mel Nash because Nash was going nowhere with the program. Byrne didn’t do Jay Holmes any favors by giving him a one year contract (which scared recruits away), but eventually he put Jay in a solid situation.

    • Swim3057 says:
      0
      0

      Bill Byrne was not the AD who dropped swimming at Washington.

  13. cynthiacurran says:
    0
    0

    Well, it might be that title IX might be reviewed, since we have alot of women programs in sports like swimming. As for Football a look of college systems that are more communter college dropped football and also siwmming like some of the Cal-State schools like Fullerton. Good in baseball but Fullerton dropped lots of programs including Golf, swimming and water polo years ago and so forth.

    • JG says:
      0
      0

      Not to mention their assistant woman’s basketball coach just go shot dead.

      I guess they don’t have to pay her health care anymore , nor pension.

  14. Grant Bevill says:
    0
    0

    Great discussion and if we assume that dollars will ultimately rule the day then I like the idea that Doug suggests. Get those with the most to lose to pony up some profits to continue the sport that supports their bottom line.Maybe alumni need to earmark donations to support the program that they support. $500,000 is a drop in the bucket for these huge schools. Not to pick on football but it probably costs that much for uniforms and equipment for the team every year. I can’t believe its that hard to raise these funds. Not sure about US Olympic funds but they seem to benefit a bunch in ratings.
    Besides the interest every 4 years in the olympics the general public has no idea about the benefits that swimming brings to young men and women. After years away from swimming and a few knee surgeries later I am back in the pool and grateful for the sport that gave me a sense of determination and accomplishment. I live in a community with 4 high schools and zero HS pools. It kind of starts there. It’s a sad state of affairs for swimming all around.

  15. cynthiacurran says:
    0
    0

    3 states have Governors who wish to rationalise the College system in their states. Wisconsin Texas & North Carolina. 3 different philosophies – which you can find out because I get accused of bringing in politics.

    California raised general taxes to specifically fund colleges. California dreaming thinking hey will pry that money outta Jerry’s cold dead hands.

    It is all part of the new economics .

    But something is different – Title Beyonce grabbed all the wattage & oxygen available & left
    Football in the dark in its greatest show.

    Well, the states you mention grow fast since they are cheaper to live in, not that Texas and Florida don’t have problems. Both Texas and Florida have interesting similar problems like California and New Jeresey related to their immirgation. Children of native born declining and children of immirgants not always among the higher income are increasing. Colleges have mention that the more educated population in the workforce will be replaced in the 2020′s by a less educated workforce in those states according to a study by San Jose around 2005.

    • JG says:
      0
      0

      Not too many swimmers in the ethnic groups coming up either. Not that they could not be good swimmers but a kid has to have parents who are prepared to do all that plus value college.

      Might be quite a lot of spots available on sport teams & in dorms. Those in the north will always wan to come south for the sun & cheaper rents.

      Thank you for your response . I shall include your points in my thinking .

  16. WHOKNOWS says:
    0
    0

    I may be wrong, but the number of athletes (men and women) must be the same in the NCAA. Drop men’s swimming and keep women’s swimming. This bring the parity the number of athletes closer together

  17. Dan says:
    0
    0

    Men’s swimming, like wrestling, is vulnerable when an athletic department needs to cut costs. Most athletic departments reimburse the school for the value of the scholarships they award. So a mens team with 9.9 scholarships pays for lets say $400,000 of scholarship costs. Two coaches = $200,000. At least one trainer, and perhaps a few graduate assistants. Pay for the use of a pool, and travel and equipment.

    Everything I have read about Maryland says it was a terribly run athletic department. Massive over spending and too much debt.

  18. BlackRock says:
    0
    0

    This is from an article written by Bill Powell in 2002 for Swimming world. A lot has changed in regards to the cost of running a program and tuition since 2002 but I still find this a very interesting way to look at the numbers.

    Swimming is often referred to as a “non-revenue sport.” Is this statement really true?
    The following facts about the men’s swimming program at Western Kentucky University would seem to dispute the term, “non-revenue.” Indeed, after checking out the numbers, you’ll see that WKU’s men’s swimming program is a revenue-producing sport—an encouraging fact for coaches across the country who may fear that their schools are considering cutting men’s swimming.
    It’s likely that WKU is typical in this regard, and that most—if not all—collegiate swimming programs actually produce revenue for their institutions.
    In the current school year, there are 51 students on Western’s campus who are here solely because of the men’s swimming program. If it had not been for this program, they would be attending other schools with men’s swimming programs.
    Of these 51 students, 34 are from out-of-state; 17 are from in-state.
    Out-of-state tuition at Western Kentucky costs $7,424. This figure multiplied by 34 students equals $252,416.
    In-state tuition is $2,844, which computes to $48,348 for the 17 in-state students.
    The total tuition revenue to the school for these 51 students is $300,764.
    Western Kentucky’s swim team budget for tuition scholarships is $37,120 (five scholarships).
    This figure subtracted from the total tuition revenue still leaves an income of $263,644.
    The overwhelming amount of money spent for meals by these swimmers is at university cafeterias and snack bars. The meal plan at Western costs $1,740 per year. Therefore, 51 students spending $1,740 per year equals $88,740 spent on food at the university.
    WKU’s swim team has just one swimmer on a meal scholarship. That means the net revenue to the university for meals is $87,000.
    Residence halls at Western charge $1,840 per year to live on campus. Of the 51 students, 21 live in the dorms: let’s see, that’s $1,840 times 21, which comes to $38,640. Subtract the amount of money provided for the six men who are on housing scholarships, and WKU has an additional source of revenue of $27,600.
    Now, let’s add in the cost of books. According to Western’s student catalog, the average cost of books is $400 per year. Again, you can do the math: $400 × 51 students = $20,400. Subtract $400 × 7 students on book scholarships = $2,800. Net revenue = $17,600.
    Time to add up the numbers:
    Tuition $263,644

    Meals 87,000

    Housing 27,600

    Books 17,600

    TOTAL $395,844
    • There’s still one more subtraction to the preceding figure. That is the remaining WKU men’s swimming budget, which includes coaches’ salaries, travel expenses, fringe benefits, etc. That total is $93,460, bringing us to a total net revenue of $302,284—not too shabby for a “non-revenue sport.”
    Of course, these figures may not be totally accurate. “Revenue” does not equal “profit.” On the other hand, it does not include the money spent by the swimmers’ brothers, sisters, girlfriends, buddies, etc., who also came to Western Kentucky University because their friend or relative—the swimmer—is part of the men’s swimming program!
    ~~~~~~~~
    By Bill Powell
    Bill Powell is head coach at Western Kentucky University.

    • Dan says:
      0
      0

      I think that is fuzzy “revenue” at best. I appreciate the spirit of it. That revenue didn’t flow to the athletic department. In some universities – if those swimmers weren’t on campus other students, non-athletes, would take their place. At Texas, where each freshman class is full the 75 or so male and female swimmers and divers are just noise to the enrollment of the school.

  19. Spot says:
    0
    0

    On a side note, why is Tyler Clary allowed to swim with his former college team? I know he is not the only one in the country who trains with his college team or even with a different collegiate program but I did think there were rules against this. Has the NCAA changed its rules on professionals training with collegiate athletes?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

About SwimSwam