There has been a lot of discussion since Athens about foreign swimmers training in the United States. Most of them attend U.S. Universities, receive athletic scholarships, and compete at NCAA's. Some notable examples include Duje Draganja (Cal), Fred Bousquet and Kirsty Coventry (Auburn), Markus Rogan (Stanford), and the South African sprinters (Arizona). Some train in the U.S., but don't compete for a university (Inge de Bruijn). All of these athletes benefit from U.S. coaching, from training with U.S. swimmers, and in some cases, from financial support provided by U.S. entities (athletic scholarships). They all turn around and then win medals for other countries.
A couple questions: 1) What do you think about this arrangement generally? 2) Is it of benefit or detriment to U.S. swimming to have these foreign athletes training and competing here? 3) Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?
I'm sure there are other issues, but these come directly to mind.
Originally posted by tjburk
Can somebody tell me a College or University that is totally self sufficient? And does not rely on Federal Funding of some sort? I am sure there is one somewhere.
Liberty University? Just a hunch.
Originally posted by Matt S
Tracey, how exactly is your tax money involved if USC or Harvard gives a swimming scholarship to a South African?
Actually, none of the Ivy League schools award swimming scholarships (or athletic scholarships of any kind for that matter). Besides, Harvard is a private university with a privately funded endowment.
BRAVO ECHOCH!!
I agree with Phil - echoch said in a very logical and clear way what I've been trying to say... but from me it came out less clearly and with an edge of sarcasm.
Thanks, echoch!
Mary
Originally posted by tjburk
where, anywhere did I say to limit the number of foreign swimmers in the NCAAs? Where? Never did, never will! It's like talking to a wall!
You seem to be operating on the assumption that the foreign swimmers will come whether they get scholarships or not. Outlawing scholarships for foreign swimmers will almost certainly limit the number of such swimmers going to college in the US. You seem to believe the sole purpose of scholarships is to advance the US Olympic team, other people see broader purposes.
Originally posted by LindsayNB
You seem to be operating on the assumption that the foreign swimmers will come whether they get scholarships or not. Outlawing scholarships for foreign swimmers will almost certainly limit the number of such swimmers going to college in the US. You seem to believe the sole purpose of scholarships is to advance the US Olympic team, other people see broader purposes.
But ehoch posted the following:"The main reason international swimmers like going to US colleges is not the free education -- schools are basically for free in most European countries. The reason is the ability to combine school and swimming (or track and field, water polo, ....)."
Like it or not athletic scholarships are primarily for advancing the sporting success of the school. They are a reward to the athlete for posessing an obvious talent, hardwork and promise of good success and potential within the sport. They are NOT a reflection of academic prowess. One would hope that the athlete would use them wisely for scholastic endeavors to help professional advancement later in life, but this is NOT the motive behind an athletic scholarship.
Don't kid yourself. The coach wants to lure talent and the ability to further his team and his own career in a given sport. This formula and pursuit does help lead to Olympic acheivements.
Handing over this money over to foreigners without citizenship is a slap in the face to American kids training hard for the financial opportunity.
Foreigners can swim on the team of their choice on their own dime.
John Smith
But if what Lindsay says is true, namely that the foreign swimmers won't attend US colleges without a scholarship, presumably because of the cost (?), then we can assume that there are American swimmers in a similar position (who don't have the option of attending a free (?) university in Europe).
Ehoch, A well stated argument from a person directly impacted by our little conversations!
“All the so-called arguments about foreign swimmers taking scholarships away and so on are really off-base and very narrowminded.” These are real arguments and foreign swimmers ARE taking away athletic scholarships from US swimmers. As for narrow minded, okay you got me there… I’m as narrow minded about addressing the topic of swimming scholarships as you are about not addressing it.
“The scholarship is a trade: nothing more and nothing less” Maybe to you your scholarship was just money. However for me my swimming scholarship was a source of great pride in accomplishing one of my goals. It is also a source of great pride and a financial relief in seeing my son awarded his swimming scholarship.
“I am obligating myself to train 10x per week for 2 1/2 hours” Don’t let the NCAA find out about this, 25 hours of in water training is in violation of NCAA rules.
Do foreign swimmers bring up the level of competition within the NCAA? Absolutely, I don’t think anyone is arguing this point. Bousquet’s 50 Free at NCAA’s was the swim of the meet this year (last year’s 50 by Fred wasn’t bad either) and would have hated to see him prohibited because of his citizenship.
And if you don’t mind my asking; how old were you when you came to the USA? As you know most foreign swimmers do not go directly from high school to college, allowing them to get in an additional year or 3 of full time training. This provides these foreign athletes an advantage over US kids who typically go directly to college from high school. I assume this is why the NCAA instituted Rule 14.2.3.2 for swimming and tennis.
Originally posted by gull80
But if what Lindsay says is true, namely that the foreign swimmers won't attend US colleges without a scholarship, presumably because of the cost (?), then we can assume that there are American swimmers in a similar position (who don't have the option of attending a free (?) university in Europe).
In a similar position except for not being Olympic caliber.
As I said early on in the thread, people who do not agree on the purpose of athletic scholarships are unlikely to ever come to agreement on who should or should not receive said scholarships. This thread is going in circles.
It's like trying to argue about the Olympics with some of the people working from the assumption that it is about personal excellence while others are working from the assumption it is about competition between nations...
