And the ESPY goes to....

Ion: I hesitate to do this (re-enter this discussion), but... how can you suggest that there should be prize money at a USMS competition???? Are you serious? I highly doubt one other person involved in this discussion would see that as a positive thing. Like the one response said, who wants to pay to watch middle-age men and women swim semi-fast when they can watch the best in the world in the other sports that ARE televised? And I take issue with your comment about not reading your posts and to stop rolling around kicking and whining, or whatever it was, something to that effect. I did read your posts thoroughly just to be sure I was reading what I thought I read... and I daresay you may be somewhat out of your mind on this issue. No one wants to watch swimming except for every four years in this little competition they have called the Olympics. Why watch then? Because those are the best swimmers at the time swimming for the grandest prize in the sport. Outside two weeks in August or September of every 4th year, face it, no one really cares. It won't be on TV because the guys behind the scene paying to produce the coverage know that no one is going to watch, therefore they would be purely philanthropical broadcasters of a relatively uninteresting sport. There aren't many people in the TV industry looking to lose money. I'm almost shocked NBC has already committed to airing the Duel in the Pool. I figured we'd see taped highlights 3 weeks later on ESPN2. They are probably prepared to take a bath on that event, given the amount of money they are going to have to spend to promote and promote and promote and find out that more people tuned into the 3rd round of the WhoCares.com Celebrity Golf Classic instead. Swimming = boring. Outside the 3 minutes before and after a race that you have a truly vested interest in, most swimmers themselves are bored out of their mind at a meet. How exciting is watching 6 heats of prelims 400m freestlye? I'm prepared for any response. -RM

Emmett said: By comparison, swimmers are notoriously stingy with the money they spend on their sport. Face it - as long as a couple Speedos and a pair of goggles are the only required equipment for swimming, there never will be much $$ in the swimming equipment market. I just spent $$$$ for an orange and black thigh-to-neck racing suit! Good thing my wife doesn't know!

As a thought for arguements sake (these are arbitrary numbers, and my figures are more than likely off - but if someone would like to recalculate feel free). USMS advertises we are over 42,000 members, USA swimming advertises over 2,300 swim clubs - lets say 150 swimmers for each club - we are looking at roughly 400,000 swimmers - the US population is guesstamated roughly of 287,540,000 so roughly swimmers make up about .15% of the population in the United States. That is definitely not a very big market (as I said I am guessing and rounding off here with numbers). As for the money issue, Emmett is right on track - these athletes that make millions of dollars make more out of endorsements of products consumers will buy - Lance Armstrong wins one of the most prestigious bike races, the one million dollar purse he divides up to his team (racers and support crew) of course the money he makes from endorsements from being the winner (ie Nike, Trek, Oakley, United States Postal Service, etc) is far more than the TDF prize. Ion you mentioned how people that put a high priority on money bother you, yet you want to contribute to that same system by offering prize money to get better athletes at swim meets? Jeff

Beauty or boredom is definitely in the eye of the beholder. Being from Charlotte, NC, I can say I know a lot more about car racing than someone from So Cal. What you find boring is hands down the fastest growing spectator sport in the nation, bar none. What you describe as boring has the most loyal fan base of any major sport, hence the corporate appeal. What you describe as boring grew from basically nothing into a multi million dollar industry doing nothing more than what you are advocating - namely by presenting a family oriented, homegrown appeal that all fans can relate to. NASCAR is from the school of hard knocks and made it's money the hard way. Most, if not all, sports would kill to have the loyalty and positive image that NASCAR has. You think the NBA might like to improve their image? Lastly, I am so glad you brag to your friends about all your meets. My co-workers know I am a swimmer and some has come along with me. It doesn't make you better or give you higher standards, it just means you like to self promote. Swimming has nothing to do with higher standards any more than any other sports. It is a sport, that's it. Higher standards are derived from other areas, most notably religion.

Maybe we could have a post called ION...Then we could get around to talking about ION like we always end up doing here anyway....

You keep referring to these "TV bosses." If there is a secret society of bosses their jobs depend solely on their ratings. If Americans gave a wet whoop about swimming, it would be on a lot more. It's not some conspiracy, it's called CAPITALISM. You go on and on about golf. Take a look at golf lately. It is killing the ratings due to Tiger. What you state as watching grass grow is viewed by the rest of the world as historical winning. Maybe swimming needs to emulate golf. I bet if swimming could generate this type of publicity, it would be on a lot more. Your Australian rantings are so out in left field (that's a baseball reference, Ion) that they are without any merit. Why can't you just appreciate the Aussies for what they have and the same with us? Is it so bad that we kick butt in all sports (save luge and cricket) and they are only good at swimming? You went over the top with comments about the media buzzing at USMS meets. I swam a 25.52 free at my last SCY meet and it was my best ever after two years back swimming. How many people in their right mind want to watch some 34 year old dude swim his best time ever and be many, many seconds behind world record pace, not to mention others guys in his own age group? While it may have been my greatest day ever and my team was happy for me, who cares beyond that? Here's the promo at CBS - "Why watch Tiger go for the grand slam when you can watch old cats swim sort of fast?" I bet you could get dozens of viewers worldwide. I suggest you surface from time to time and realize there are land based sports that are very popular, fun to watch/play and can enhance the quality of one's life.

I must be one of the exceptions to the rule about not spending money on my sport. I spend more money on keeping myself in swim suits than I do my regular clothes. They cost more than my running shoes, and they aren't cheap. Sigh. :rolleyes: And I personally feel that having a prize at the LCN or any USMS would defeat one of it's central points. Pro's earn money for their sport. Does the term Pro-swimmer apply to anyone here? I thought, someone correct me if I am wrong, Master's was not geared to that. Aside from the fact that I'd rather swim to swim. not to have my sport televised. Not that my heat (like 20th) would ever get televised. :D Speaking of televised sports... I don't pay attention to golf unless Tiger is on. Frankly, it's not his golfing ability, but the fact that let's face it ladies... he's a doll (men, I don't expect you to, nor want you to comment on that). :) I like Tennis, but really pay little attention to it unless Pete Samprass is on and while because it's a sport I actually play, I appreciate his skills more than I can Tiger's... well..... I watch him on TV as well because I like the view. So why, when I think I cannot be the only person to tune into a show because of the player (s) (I have a thing for Andy Pettite too(baseball for anyone underground during the last few World Series), would people not want to watch our sport at least for the asthetic value, which has to be more attractive than being covered in helmuts and pads? Yeah.... I'm being just *slightly* sarcastic here. :D

I read your entire response, but I will focus on this: Originally posted by Rain Man Ion: ... Swimming = boring. ... I'm prepared for any response. -RM There are points that I had already enumerated, suggesting that swimming is not boring. One point, is that on TV there are sporting events, more boring than swimming, but fueled by big sponsors: golf, car racing. Another point, is that there are nations that made swimming appear to be entertaining on TV, and I gave an example worth emulating. Another point, is that prize money can be raised in USMS through membership, and given away in a well hyped event, for example a match of All Star USMS versus college swimmers, or for example a Long Course Nationals presented on TV like Swim magazine does it on paper; I won't be good enough to make the example of the All Star, but I would root for swimmers I know. Finally, a last point, that I am making now for the first time, is that USMS is also promoted by going to workouts every day, then by going to competitions and letting people, acquainted with you at work for example, know about your swimming benefits and ethics: how many people here, who labeled me in this thread as being 'crazy', 'out of line', and 'ridiculous', stand up for USMS with their acquaintances, by going to 2002 Long Course Nationals, after 2001 Long Course Nationals, after 2000 Long Course Nationals, and so on? At my work, people do know that I do this, and to them I was the image of higher standards, when for example I was preparing for the 2002 Short Course Nationals in Hawaii.

Read the post again, cinc. I said kick butt, not number one. What is the greatest thing that any other country does in the Olympics? The answer is beat the USA in a sport. It is a rare sport we are not in the top 5. Take a look at the last few Olympics. Our medal counts are awesome. Heck, our scrub college and minor league baseball players beat the world in the last Olympics. Every sport you mention the US has medaled in the past 20 years, usually more than once. I must admit ignorance on synchronized swimming. As to figure skating, you are wrong. 68' - gold, 76' - gold, 92' - gold, 98' - gold, 02' - gold.

Geez man, I am not questioning your credibility. From what I understand you are one of the more dedicated USMS members, constantly (over)focusing on your swimming. You attend a lot of meets and are pro-swimming almost to a fault. I don't think people are labelling you the person as crazy. Maybe they are but I'm not one to judge. I do think that your line of thinking on this issue is a little out of whack, if you will. Prize money should only be for pros. That means those who are good enough at their respective skill to be labelled a professional. You probably have a job, let's say accounting (as an example). If you are a highly skilled accountant you go get a job as an accountant, and they pay you. Same with sports. It may be a good idea to have prize money in swimming, but only at the highest levels. That would be some sort of US circuit similar to the World Cup circuit. But then the question is, where do you get the money. Face it, you are living in what you wish were a swimming utopia, problem is reality is 1/10th of a percent of Americans have a clue about competetive swimming. USA-S threw around the idea of adding a surcharge to membership, something nominal say 5-10 US$ to throw into a "general sport promotion" fund. I'm not sure how it was received. I would imagine poorly because I have yet to hear anything else about it. But I imagine part of it would have gone to prize money and/or TV time. Hey, if you want swimming to be popular in America, and have legitimate ideas for how to go about it, more power to you. I think you are barking up the wrong tree here though, there are a lit people with years of swimming experience responding to you who have realized that it probably won't work. Accept swimming for what it is, enjoy it, and hopefully our athletes get some well-deserved attention on occasion... which is the gripe I originally intended. Respectfully, RM