The USA-Swimming Model: Does it Work?

It is not uncommon for institutions in the United States to hold dual mandates. The president, for example, serves as both the figurehead of the state and the chief executive of our government (versus somewhere like the UK, where the Queen and Prime Minister split those duties). The US Federal Reserve is tasked with maintaining stable prices and limiting unemployment (two oppositional concepts), while other major banking systems, such as the Bank of England and the European Central Bank, can solely set their sites on inflation.

In fact the United States seems to be dead-set on its major institutions holding two wildly different, yet wildly important, roles within its system. Depending on who you ask, this methodology has lead to varying levels of success in different areas, but that is mostly a discussion for other sites covering other topic matters.

I’d like to focus on the dual mandate of USA-Swimming, and whether or not that effectively improves the sport as a whole.

USA-Swimming is charged with leading two vastly different groups within the swimming community.

On the one side are the elite professionals. These are swimmers who dedicate their whole lives to swimming, with 4 hours a day in the pool, another couple  on drylands, have strict diets and sleep regiments, and fly all around the world for big international competitions. This group could theoretically be segmented even further to separate out the megastars, like Phelps and Lochte, who have big endorsement deals, but this group is very small and doesn’t need much support from USA-Swimming one way or the other. These swimmers pour their hearts and souls into the sport, and they are the face of the organization. They put off their “real-world” careers to chase international glory and prize money that barely covers the bills.

On the other end of the spectrum are the age-groupers. These swimmers are the grassroots of the sport. For every Michael Phelps, there are hundreds of Timmy Smiths and Sarah Jacksons who swim in relative anonymity. These swimmers may not be talked about on the swim blogs, but they are the future of the National Team system.

More importantly, they are the financial foundation of the sport. Economically, pool time is the most valuable resource in our sport. Six 10-year olds can comfortably share a lane, and will swim whenever they can find pool time. Elite swimmers often command their own lanes, and strongly prefer the most popular practice times. Financially, age-groupers are way more profitable than international swimmers to a club, and therefore to the organization. Beyond that, Michael Phelps may bring fame to the Speedo brand, but he doesn’t pay for his suits. USA-Swimming corporate sponsorships come with hopes of selling suits, fins, kickboards, and everything else to the hoards of 7-14 year olds that fill up USA-Swimming club teams.

It’s undeniable that these two groups are both very important to the sport of swimming. It’s also undeniable that they have vastly different needs. Interestingly enough, this dichotomy in needs has played a major role in many of the biggest controversies in our sport over the last year or so. USA-Swimming has been tasked with a very difficult task of balancing these needs, and I’m not sure that the system works any longer.

Exhibit 1: The polyurethane suits – These suits brought swimming a massive main street audience and generated more interest in the elite level of the sport than ever before. At any given meet, it was possible that swimmers might break National or World records. All of a sudden, meets like the World Cup, which formerly were pitstops on the way to National Championships and Olympiads, had become headline meets where fans could see some of the fastest times ever. But how can that be balanced with the right of a parent to not have to buy an $800 swimsuit for their child, or else risk that child missing out on the opportunity to be successful in their sport? Children should not be subjected to the will of their parents’ bank accounts when it comes to being able to compete with their peers. Obviously, at some level this is unavoidable. More money pays for better coaching, equipment and facilities. But 99% of the time, these gaps are nowhere near as extreme as those created by the rubber suits.

Obviously, other issues existed with the suits over their fairness to the history of the sport and the suits acting as shortcuts to success, but none of these seemed to be as contentious as the cost issue and what it would do to the non-elite levels of swimming.

Exhibit 2: The expanded Athletes Partnership Plan – While swimmers like Michael Phelps, Ryan Lochte, and Natalie Coughlin don’t need the extra $21,000 a year, serious sponsorship dollars for professional swimmers are few and far between. The amount of time that the modern swimmer dedicates to training makes it nearly impossible for post-collegiate graduates to train for Olympic glory and earn a living wage outside of the pool. If swimmers like Michael Klueh and Kara Lynn Joyce are expected to continue training at an elite level, they need additional opportunities to make paychecks from swimming. But where does this money come from? Without additional marketing and participation contracts, it comes from the age group swimmers.

Although USA-Swimming does not provide any easily accessible breakdown of the annual fees that each swimmer pays to the national organization, it is likely that at least a good portion of the money goes to cover the costs of supporting National Team members and their training. Increased salaries, and expanded eligibility, means fewer resources available to support the grassroots system.

Without expanded commitments by elite swimmers, these fees go to support a program that most of the age group swimmers will never get to see the results of or be a part of. But these National Team members must dedicate their lives to training, and additional requirements that interfere with their training schedules could interrupt their quests for championships. Hence arises a conflict of interest, as either decision is more fair to one group than it is to the other.

So how does USA-Swimming balance it’s duties to both the elite and to the amateur? How can they effectively meet the needs of athletes are paid to compete and athletes who pay to compete? Athletes who are randomly drug-tested and those who don’t have a clue what a steroid is? Swimmers who chase world records, and those who can’t do a flipturn?

I don’t think they can. Not without running into some serious conflicts of interest. I think that the two groups of USA-Swimming need to be separated. FIBA doesn’t run the NBA doesn’t run the NCAA doesn’t run the AAU doesn’t run the Houston Youth Basketball League.

All of those organizations work very closely hand-in-hand, and create some awesomely successful cinergies. But, conspiracy theories aside, they each have their own leadership that acts in the best interests of its membership. Through this cooperation and separation, sports like basketball have improved their sport’s popularity and success at every level.

How to separate these groups is a matter of opinion and debate. Often times, age groupers (Missy Franklin, for example) are amongst the best swimmers in the Nation. This is perhaps the biggest reason why it’s so hard to separate the two groups. And at the same time, the subsidization by the huge number of Age Group swimmers is what, in my opinion, keeping USA-Swimming from finding and supporting more creative ways to grow and fund the sport, such as a professional swim league.

The current model worked once upon a time. Most swimmers retired in their early 20’s and ventured out into the standard workforce. There was little need to support swimmers for decades beyond college. The problem threatens to become even bigger, with more and more swimmers opting to forego all or part of their college eligibility. Those who did were typically true amateurs, and the training methods of the past did not require a 100% time commitment to training. But this  has outlived its usefulness.

The problem isn’t that USA-Swimming is incapable of making decisions that are in the best interest of both groups. The problem is that it’s an impossible task! No one organization can reasonably be expected to balance the needs of a massive membership base with those of a very small elite group.

USA-Swimming has done a fantastic job of providing opportunities for and continuing to develop the best National swim team in the world. But there is a lot of unrest within the rest of the membership, and the alleged failings of the organization involve sensitive enough topics, like the coaching molestation cases, that parents might be moved to separate.

Obviously, a split like this is no easy task. But I think that’s where our sport is headed, and rightfully so. It’s a big change, and it’s a scary change, but with all of the contreversy and animosity surrounding USA-Swimming and it’s leadership, the climate might be right for a monumental change to happen.