2 more universities ditch swimming

What is really bad right now is the U of I has their big 50 meter pool closed for 2 years, renovating it. So the women's team had to rent outside the U of I to get pool time. The pool they rented had a fire in July so it is closed waiting for a part. They are driving to another town 45 minutes away to practice. In September, they practiced outdoors at a local country club, and it was one of the coldest Septembers we have had in a long while.

Peggy, at the University of Illinois and at Illinois State where my son goes, the pool facilities are owned and run by the campus recreation departments. The swim teams have to rent for this department. So if the swim team is discontinued, it just means the rec department rents it out to some one else, or sells more lap swim and swim lesson time to others. So when they discontinue the program, the school does not blink twice.

I thought they would not close the pools. Thats a strange budget they have. Renting the college pool to the to the colleges own swim team. I see why you are upset with them. The swim team should be a part of their standard sports program. I did see that the US passed a law over internet gambling today outlawing it and making banks responsible for the oversight.. Thats a 6 billion dollar a year "business" and a lot of it is sports related. I dont know what impact that will be having on some non mainstream sports because as I have said without the gambling the intrest to see the sport will not be as great. football/baseball/basketball/Nascar racing/golf will all be fine I predict. Leslie the Olympics are only every 4 years and its natiolnal pride to see the USA win the gold in every kind of sport. Other then the Olympics your right not much intreast by the media in swimming for reasons I gave and some other reasons.

lapswimmr - I think your assocation of gambling as a driver to keep football (etc.) going is simply wrong. Yes there is gambling, both legal and not for football, basketball, but the vast majority of college football fans are simply students, alumni, and parents of students, and very few gamble. What keeps football going is ticket sales and TV. The University of Texas athletic department has a $95M annual budget, second only to Ohio State. The stadium seats 80,000+ and it is sold out for every game at ~ $70 per seat. Two-thirds of their games are televised. They have luxury suites (I've been in them) at more than $20,000 per year plus the cost of tickets. There is a ton of money unrelated to gambling in these sports. UT's very successful swimming program is probably a huge money-loser. Eddie Reese is justifiably one of the best paid coaches around, but he probably earns no more than $150-$200K plus what he makes running swimming camps. That wonderful pool costs a bunch to keep running. People will bet on anything - elections, academy awards, and it doesn't keep these activities going. I bet the UT athletic director doesn't care what Las Vegas is doing. UT can afford to keep men's swimming because of the huge cash flow from football and basketball. If UT decided to charge admission to swim meets, attendance would drop from a few hundred to a few dozen. I'm not picking on UT or praising them. I just happen to live in Austin and am forced to read and hear about them constantly.

First, when I was a sophamore, at the time thats when I hometown started high school, I took my life guard training. We were paired boy-girl. I was assigned to a senior who was tall & blond and very intelligent and a great swimmer. I was skinny, frightened and was sure it would end horribly. It did. Secondly, back to the topic. The editor's message this month in Swimming World is about Rutgers. One of my brothers in law's family mostly went to Rutgers. There is a dorm with their last name on it. He didn't go there though. I wonder what effect closing all of these university swimming programs will have on swimming in about 5 to 10 years. Will we go the way of Australia and have some swimming in colleges but mostly clubs? We seem to be moving that way with so many top level college swimmers staying in swimming now after they graduate. Or will private universities and small liberal arts colleges take it over? Already I know many high school guys who had parents who swam in college who have never swam.

Those East German girls were genetically guys and should have been swimming in mens events. Like the guys who are genetically female can now compete in womens events. I am wondering would could they compete as both.

As my post stated football is "Americas Sport" , yes theres gambling there, and as I stated lots of people who love the game who are not gamblers. My main point is there is no gambling intrest in swimming , so little media coverage . Its great that colleges fund swimming teams because as you point out they make no money like the football team. We all know they give a lot of college students a chance to compete in a team sport, it is unfortunate that some colleges are dropping the swim team sponsership. It does not add up to a well rounded athletic program and takes away from the colleges stature.

lapswimmr - gambling doesn't drive media interest in football! I think you are wrong. Gambling drives SOME interest in many sports. But I think media is both a leader and a follower with coverage of any particular sport. If fans (and advertisers) get interested, the media will follow. When the media covers a sport well, fan interest will grow. Most major college athletic departments are treated as independent organizations with their own finances. They sell tickets, advertising, share TV revenue, raise alumni donor money, etc. and spend money as they see fit. They have to abide by many rules including the NCAA, the federal government, etc. The Title IX "problem" isn't really a budget problem for many football schools. It is a scholarship problem. Football programs generally have up to 85 athletes on scholarships - and they are full scholarships. Add basketball, baseball, etc. and the school must have more women's sports to balance the scholarship count. Most swimmers earn partial scholarships. That's why a team with 9.9 scholarships has 20 or more on the roster. I'm a football AND swimming fan and hate to see men's swimming suffer. I've believed for some time that football would not suffer significantly if the number of scholarships was reduced from 85. I think the revenue side of football really wouldn't change.

Why do people watch swimmming during the Olympics, but not the other three years? Because it is well produced. First, swimming is part of the Olympic package of nation versus nation, and counting the medals, that we all find so compelling. If there was a tiddlewinks competition with an American having a chance to medal, we'd all care about tiddlewinks. In contrast, some of us wouldn't give a rat's rear-end about basketball, except in the Olympics. Second, the coverage is way more interesting than the meet because it is edited to show only the dramatic parts. Forget about slogging through all those prelim heats, or seeing uninterrupted coverage of the 1500 final. Moreover, we don't get 2 mind-numbing hours of swimming. Instead we get 5-10 minutes of the 100 fly, then an hour of the other sports, then 5-10 more minutes of the 200 back, etc. (In fact, it's a dirty little network trick to NOT tell you exactly when each sport will be up, so we have to sit still for the tiddlewinks competition if we don't want to miss our favorite sport.) The first step of building interest and popularity in swimming as a spectator sport would start with how to make coverage of it more compelling and watchable. Matt

Most of Olympic sports dont see much action the other 3 years. But who really cares about curling? Aside from the massive drama, most of the races in the Olympics are over too fast - same for swimming. Hold on - what about those distance events! Here's raising a glass to the 400s and 800/1500 free!!