The American Swimming Coaches Association (ASCA) has issued a letter to USA Swimming calling on the national governing body to have transparency and a defined selection procedure when appointing Team USA staff members for international events.
The ASCA said it believes “the criteria should be communicated openly and made available to all coaches to ensure awareness, understanding and confidence in the process,” wanting to “underscore the importance of clearly communicating publicly accessible criteria that are grounded in merit, experience, and the demonstrated ability to drive success at the highest levels of international competition.”
The ASCA pointed to recent cases where certain coaches were surprisingly not named to international staffs despite having the resume to do so.
“A coach selection process that lacks clear, established guidelines erodes trust and fairness within the swimming community. This has been evident in past cases where successful coaches were not selected, and their exclusion went unexplained.”
While no instance or coach is specifically named, there were a lot of raised eyebrows over the summer when Indiana head coach Ray Looze was not chosen for the U.S. Olympic team staff in spite of qualifying four swimmers for the Paris Games.
The ASCA added that beyond performance metrics, there is room for a subjective coaching selection in specific instances.
“This may include the subjective appointment of a qualified coach who brings specialized skills, fresh perspectives, and the ability to round out the needs of the team as a whole,” the ASCA wrote. “Balance ensures a cohesive, dynamic staff that maximizes the potential of all athletes and fosters a collaborative environment for success.”
USA Swimming released its selection criteria for assistant coaches at the 2024 Olympic Games in September 2023, which included specifically having three male and three female assistants for the Games, though the requirements to be named were relatively loose and cast a wide net. Coaches had to have served on a previous major international team staff, or served as a primary coach for an athlete on an international team, or qualified a swimmer on the 2024 Olympic team, in order to be named.
They also had to be at least 25 years old, but there was nothing specifically outlining how one coach who qualified swimmer(s) on the team is prioritized over another, for example.
USA Swimming’s National Team Director is responsible for selecting the coaching staff for major international events. The organization parted ways with former National Team Director Lindsay Mintenko in September and assembled a task force to search for her replacement in October.
FULL ASCA LETTER TO USA SWIMMING
ASCA advocates for a transparent and clearly defined selection process for Team USA staff appointments.
ASCA supports bringing a cohesive, diverse, and experienced staff to all international level competitions. We believe the criteria for selection should be communicated openly and made available to all coaches to ensure awareness, understanding and confidence in the process. We recognize the National Team Director holds the responsibility for assembling the coaching staff. We want to underscore the importance of clearly communicating publicly accessible criteria that are grounded in merit, experience, and the demonstrated ability to drive success at the highest levels of international competition. Transparency will not only enhance the integrity of the selection process but will also inspire confidence among athletes, coaches, and all who are stakeholders in the long-term success of USA Swimming on the global stage.
A coach selection process that lacks clear, established guidelines erodes trust and fairness within the swimming community. This has been evident in past cases where successful coaches were not selected, and their exclusion went unexplained.
ASCA also recognizes that while performance metrics are important, the National Team Director must also consider the diverse expertise and experience that each coach brings to the team. This may include the subjective appointment of a qualified coach who brings specialized skills, fresh perspectives, and the ability to round out the needs of the team as a whole. Balance ensures a cohesive, dynamic staff that maximizes the potential of all athletes and fosters a collaborative environment for success.
By establishing transparent criteria, USA Swimming will ensure that coaches know exactly what they are working toward, and that our National Governing Body promotes fairness, accountability, and confidence in the process. A clear selection process will ultimately strengthen Team USA’s performance on the global stage and maintain the integrity and high standards of USA Swimming.
USA Swimming interim CEO Shana Ferguson responded with a statement to SwimSwam regarding the letter:
“USA Swimming staff, in conjunction with many key volunteer-led committees, particularly our Athletes’ Advisory Council and National Team Steering Committee, have been discussing coach selection procedure improvements for quite some time, with changes scheduled for the 2025 international meets. Our plan is to continue to collaborate with these key USA Swimming stakeholders to build selection procedures for 2025 and beyond that are comprehensive and fair, and that set us up for success in international competition. After discussing this plan with ASCA and reviewing this response letter, we are happy to see that we are aligned on goals and objectives.”
The letter was sent by the ASCA after USA Swimming said it would be releasing coaching staff selection criteria for the 2025 World Championships in mid-January.
The assistant staff selection was “three years in the making”
https://swimswam.com/desorbo-breaks-down-u-s-olympic-staff-selection-three-years-in-the-making/
The process will never please anyone. I’m not sure we need to lose too much sleep trying to do that. Someone is always going to feel burned. I do think there is something to the idea of having a cohesive staff. I reject the notion that a coach not making the staff means they won’t be there. An assistant once remarked how strange it was to go to the Olympics and see American coaches everywhere. A lot of the coaches for other countries are coaches from the US. Also, with today’s technology, the national team members are in constant contact with their coaches. And national team members who make the Olympic team have almost assuredly traveled to an international meet… Read more »
I get that head coaches are announced ahead of time, but until the full team is named, they shouldn’t be planning their assistant coaching staff in the lead up to the games. They should be planning how to to work with the best assistant coaches available, based on Trials performances.
After each intl meet, the athletes also critique the entire staff and support team! Should this be transparent too….I don’t think so.
Should a female coach be assigned and they say a token female coach? I don’t think so!
Realistically seems like the criteria will have to remain subjective if not vague. If a head coach believes that he or she will be unable to work with a particular assistant, they need the discretion to veto the candidate who, based on the numbers, would otherwise be entitled to a spot on the staff.
It the head coach cannot work with another coach, then maybe he or she should not be the head coach. If a coach has 5 athletes on a team but the head coach doesn’t like that home coach, why should 5 athletes be punished by not having their home coach on staff? This shouldn’t be about coaches’ egos. It should be about providing the best resources for the athletes and putting Team USA in the best position to win gold medals.
Peter Andrew over Ron Aitken in 2021 will be remembered as an all time embarrassing blunder by USAS (even though it was half-corrected after Trials)
Popcorn in the Microwave
This comment section is going to be fantastic.