One of the recurring questions each Olympic swim meet brings up is that of athletes who train at American NCAA institutions but represent foreign nations in international competition.
While the discussion often lingers on fairness and ethics, the true center of the argument is money – particularly at public universities, where some argue that American tax dollars are being used to fund athletic departments that train foreign athletes who then turn around and beat American athletes for Olympic medals.
That, of course, ignores the non-money aspects of the issue. Most schools promote a diverse population, and administration (and many swimmers) find it a positive experience to have classmates and teammates from different nationalities and backgrounds. There are plenty of less-money-related arguments on both sides, but without hard-and-fast figures to analyze, they turn more into an exercise in editorializing than in reporting facts.
While those arguments have their place (and that place, at least earlier this month, was often in the comments section of our Olympic recaps), there’s one more nuance that’s worth a look – athletic departments that actually make money for a school, thereby reversing the cashflow and funding academics.
That’s not the case very often. In fact, as of 2014, just 24 schools in the NCAA’s Football Bowl Subdivision (which comprises mostly the biggest and best-known schools and conferences in the nation) brought in more revenue than they spent, according to the NCAA.
A few years earlier, ACTA (the American Council of Trustees and Alumni) broke down the numbers further. In 2012, 23 of 228 NCAA Division I athletics departments created more revenue than they spent. And of those 23, 16 received subsidies of some sort.
That left 7 programs that didn’t receive subsidies and still broke even. That list is below:
- LSU
- Nebraska
- Ohio State
- Oklahoma
- Penn State
- Purdue
- Texas
Of the schools on that list one stands out: Texas’s Joseph Schooling was at the center of many of these comment section discussions when he won Singapore’s first Olympic swimming gold after two seasons competing and training with the Longhorns collegiate program.
But fans can rest assured that Schooling, at least, wasn’t technically turning American tax dollars into nabbing an Olympic gold medal over American Michael Phelps, because Texas’s athletic department is one of the few self-sufficient departments nationwide. (If anything, any funding Schooling gets from Texas is more likely income from the school’s football and basketball teams in ticket or apparel sales. Of all NCAA sports, only FBS football and basketball turned a profit in 2014. Men’s swimming programs ran a median deficit of almost $600,000 nationwide and women’s swimming about $630,000).
If nothing else, this very niche discussion serves as a handy list of schools where complaints about foreign athletes taking U.S. tax dollars don’t logically hold up.
Sad that 2 of the 7 programs that don’t need subsidies also don’t have men’s teams (Nebraska and Oklahoma). Interesting that of the 5 that do have men’s swimming.. 3 are from the Big 10.
I can see both sides to this argument. I’ve had many foreign swimmers compete on my team in college and I value those relationships as many described above.
The only question is.. how much is too much? For example say your team has 25 swimmers, but only 5 full ride scholarships (less funding than most big D1 schools) and your 5 best swimmers are ALL foreign then chances are they’re going to use up about 80% of what your team has to offer. You could make the case then why not increase it to the max which is I believe 9 full rides? But then the coach can just recruit more foreign swimmers! The coach gets his bang for his… Read more »
Eeeeeeeh, some shady accounting generally keeps a lot of schools working at a loss. (Along with some pretty exorbitant salaries (Link!).
If it was even more obvious everyone was making money, it’d be even harder to justify not paying the revenue-generating athletes.
Besides the money thing for me it’s about a person being respectful to someone or something. We are taught as young kids( most of us are) that when someone or something helps us we gives thanks and honor those people or situations. Its the right thing to do.
In this case if someone lives in a country (especially if they live here for many years) and they train in a country and they do everything in a country then they should become citizens of that country and represent them in competitions. If a athlete becomes super good BECAUSE of Country A schools and Country A trainers Country A facilities then it’s being respectful and showing honor to Country A… Read more »
Obtaining US citizenship is not so simple as that. Being a terrific swimmer is not at all likely to be enough to get citizenship
Not only is Catherine right about obtaining citizenship there is the FINA process for switching sporting nationality. So to fulfill your ideal we should potentially water down the field at the Olympics or World Championships? Deny deserving athletes of their shot at an Olympic medal?
I don’t have a problem with a U.S. kid competing for a scholarship opportunity with a foreigner, because if that swimmer wants the spot he’s gonna work harder and get faster. If he can’t do it, he should walk-on and try to snag a spot if some money opens up, and there is nothing wrong with that. Foreigners raise the level of competition, and for a capitalist nation that believes that competition sharpens the mind and body, it is surprising to hear that this is an issue. The 100 free would not have been nearly as fun to watch at NCAA’s without Simonas Bilis, nor the 500 free without Quintero. Would Dressel have gone so fast without foreign competition?
The… Read more »
Doesn’t really matter if a few athletic departments that actually make money for a school, and reverse the cashflow by funding for academics….. as you are always limited by the 9.9 scholarships available in the pool. It’s extremely competitive since only a few of those scholarships are released each year by graduating seniors.
Just seems like basic math. Every scholarship dollar given to a foreign athlete does not go to US home grown talent.
Perhaps the question should be reversed or changed. If a college team gave a majority or even all of its swimming scholarships to foreign athletes would it matter? Where is the break point? Does it eventually become an ethical question?
This makes as much sense as a Brazilian article decrying “foreigners” winning medals at their Olympics on their dime.
Wow, so many myopic and xenophobic people here! Foreign athletes give somethings back to the program too. It’s not like they’re leeches who do not give somethings back to the program they trained and competed in. It not only enriches the college experience but the ties that are built last a lifetime. It is also a marketing and branding value when US schools give out athletic scholarships to deserving foreign athletes. The US has soft power because it has the ability to influence beyond its shores. One aspect of soft power is the US’s university system and its ability to attract foreign athletes and scholars to its shores. These foreign alumni when they complete their education at US universities will… Read more »