Recruiting

To touch on some of the points that Connie made in her last posting: First of all, I agree that we shouldn't inhibit the growth of USMS b/c of things like overcrowding workouts or national swim meets. Longhorn Aquatics has several locations that conduct workouts at different times....and even within one location, there are different practice times to choose from.....so like Connie said, adding more pools (i.e. locations) and workout times (and coaches for that matter to handle the larger sized teams) should be able to help manage team overcrowding sufficiently enough......As far as Nationals is concerned....Like Connie said....Make the qualifying times faster if the meet gets to large.....I for one would rather finish in a lower place but swim against faster competition at Nationals then have fewer swimmers and finish with a higher place......but that's just me speaking of course....Also just b/c we increase membership significantly does not necessarily mean that participation at Nationals will increase as significantly....the majority of the new members could very well be fitness swimmers only (as opposed to competitive swimmers) and/or triatheletes...etc....Also many of the new members may be competitive swimmers ...but not necessarily qualifiers for Nationals (with the qualifying times as they are now)....this is why I believe that a "slight" adjustment to the qualifying times to make them a little faster could help rememdy the already existing overcrowding problem at our Nationals. Finally....I just want to say that even though I am 40 years old (so no longer a starving college student)....I still don't make a lot of money (I'm a teacher for cripes sakes.....so as long as W is in office...and/or the republicans stay in power) I'm likely to be working for next to povertly level income....so just b/c GoodSmith and others can afford to spend x dollars on a nice vacation in Florida every year ...and they don't care about doubling or tripling memebership dues or meet entry fees does NOT mean that others such as myself can so easily afford the increases.....Yaeh, the annual dues are small in size compared to other things perhaps....but when you add in the monthly dues charged by our local swim teams, it would be easier on people like me to keep as many costs as possible as low as possible.....I like vacationing in Florida as much as anyone else...but I am also looking to cut as many corners as possible to be able to go at all....i.e. I drive instead of fly (although with gas prices as they are becoming this may not be such a great budget idea).....I stay in the cheaper hotels and don't have to rent a car b/c I already have my own...etc....AND I don't want to pay one cent more than I have too for entry fees......but that's me...Maybe most of the members in my age group are willing to spend money like water....Heck GoodSmith...since your so anxious to blow money in Florida....How bout buying me some drinks on the strip after the meet...afterall what's a few extra bucks on my drinks compared to the thousands you're already spending anyway?? Newmastersswimmer

Well said, Jim. I certainly can't afford to travel to FLA either; I pay $40 a month and I like to compete, but even local event get a little pricey - i.e., meet costs, hotel costs, food, gas, etc. Please don't double or triple our yearly membership...

Jim, The rationale behind a proposed fee increase for nationals is that the meet host needs to earn some financial return for all their efforts. USMS has a multipage contract that a meet host signs for the right to host our event. We stipulate a number of expensive things that must be provided to our participants. As pool costs and other costs have increased, we are finding that the host is not earning much money. As a result, not many pools are willing to bid for our meets. This is especially true for LC Nationals. I understand that you would prefer not to see fees rise. But when you consider the cost of the meet surcharge is often less than a tank of gas, we are dealing with a small amount relative to the entire cost of the meet. A cheap hotel for 3 nights at $50 - $150 Food for the meet $30 per day - $ 90 Travel from out of town - $300 Meet entry 30 + 6 x $4 per event $ 54 We are talking about raising the $30 surchage by $10. In the grand scheme of things, for the budget traveller we are talking about a less than 2% increase.

Jim, Dude....... stop being so cheap and fork out a couple extra dollars for the meet to make it run more smoothly. I will buy you a round after the meet to help neutralize the cost. Just look for Evil Paul, he's tall like a sasquatch and easy to spot. I'll be trying to stick him with the bill too. John Smith

Originally posted by knelson If only it were so easy, though. For example here in the Puget Sound region we've recently faced closures of city or county run pools. It certainly isn't due to lack of swimmers. We have Olympic gold medalists, many large and successful USA Swimming clubs, a Pac Ten University with both men's and women's swimming teams, etc. yet it's still difficult to keep the pools open we already have--let alone think about building new facilities. And they're closing... why? Let me guess, pool operators don' know how to attract profitable groups tso they can maintain the pool and make living out of doing it. So, to remedy that, wouldn' it help to have more coaches and people interested in organizing the groups of swimmers whose fees will pay to keep the pool open??? I mean, let's go with little common sense here, you wouldn't be building new pools in the areas where there are not enough swimmers to support them, or where pools are closing. You'd look to revive existing facilities first. But, you're puzzling me, on one hand you're saying there's no shortage of swimmers, but on the other hand, you're telling me the pools cant seem to stay afloat. Do we again have a number of swimmers expecting it should all be free, or subsidized by the government? If there's no shortage of swimmers, why are pools closing? Something here doesn't add up. One of the 'marketing' targets that USMS has in mind are the pool operators, and showing them how it would benefit their pool (financially) to have a Masters group hosted there, which in turn just may mean that the pool can stay open, and would mean more lane space for YOU.

Originally posted by Paul Smith Connie, going after the pool operators is a great idea and one that we can all benefit from......geek see "big ideas"! Its very sad that in our sport we basially roll over when pool closures occure or practice times get cut. Try and do that with a soccer field and you'd have every mom for 100 miles screaming and throwing things and end up getting two more fields built and nightime lighting installed! We did not roll over, we fought hard, we worked the media, we worked the lap swimmers, we did everything we did, were at every park district meeting, but the almight dollar of a water park won out. We had the U of I coach talk to them about how to market a competition pool so it would make money, everything, but water park was on their minds and water park is what we will have.

Originally posted by dorothyrde Unfortunately here it does, pools are closing or being replaced with water parks and lazy rivers and slides. In Illinois, the rate of competition pool closures have hit many age group teams very hard, and since kids seem to get priority over adults, that means adults are also getting hit hard. You won't see new pools being built downstate, that's for sure. And if USMS had more exposure, and if there was a LOT more demand for the pools, and if there was actually some profit in operating a pool (whioch would mean most people would have to pay for the value that they're getting) then there would be people operating and buildiong pools left and right. Don't you people see the connection here. Everyone thinks swimming should be for free or somehow subsidized, and yet facilities are closing left and right. I bet if most people thought that there should be no admission to waterparks or amusement parks, and that they should be free, they would be closing too. You can't have something of quality if you aren't willing to support it. If you aren't willing to allow those providing that something to you to make a living. Heck, look at gyms, like 24 hour fitness, they keep opening up left and right, and people are willing to pay hefty fees to go there. I bet a lot of those are the same people that think swimming should not cost very much. Look at the rest of the world, you want something extra, you pay for it. Here within USMS, all you hear is whine whine whine about how they're not getting more for a nominal fee, and acting like quality coaching etc is sort of an entitlement. Like OMG, I pay $30 a month and I don't get enough coaching attention or pool time because there is 25 of us in the group... Look at your local Gym, you'll probably end up paying $50 a month to just get through the door. No coaching, no help, no instruction, no guarantee that it will not be overcrowded.

So then what's the proposed fee hike?

By the way "W" passed the largest education spending bill in history.....fire some of the bloated administration and pay the teachers the difference! Thanks Paul, my thoughts exactly!

W also is getting the govt. sued over the "no child left behind" act by the state of Utah. About 19 other states want changes to the ways it's funded. Might I suggest we NOT emmulate this administrations method of funding programs. Paul, as you have referred to me as a leading left winged bleeding heart liberal and most irritating member of USMS forum (next to Geek), I am all over your undercover pro Republican comments. You are a closet Republican ! Note: CittyKat8 has some good points on pool revenues. John Smith