Below are the number of entrants for each event at the Junior Nationals for 2008. What do these figures mean for men's swimming long term? The number of boys in the sport trails girls quite siginficantly in many events. In relays where a team tends to show its depth, boys are out numbered by girls nearly 2:1
If things continue or get worse we've got problems ahead of us in 2 Olympics.
It's a good thing collegiate budgets aren't cutting mens swimming these days.... :-)
ncsassociation.homestead.com/PsychFINAL.htm
.............Women Men
1650/1000... 78.. 75
Med. Relay... 97.. 51
100 free... 264.. 140
100 ***... 179.. 102
200 back... 173.. 111
200 fly... 149.. 91
800 fr rly... 81.. 43
50 fly... 170.. 106
50 ***... 151.. 82
200 free... 252.. 159
400 IM... 183.. 106
400 free rly... 84.. 45
100 back... 194.. 152
500 free... 188.. 112
200 ***... 152.. 82
100 fly... 242.. 161
200 fr rly... 84.. 45
50 back... 135.. 115
200 IM... 268.. 169
50 free... 282.. 153
800/1500 fr... 98.. 67
400 med rly... 105.. 54
Parents
Former Member
Geek,
You are pretty crotchety today.
Face it your figures don't jive with the article Paul posted. It's difficult to tell what's going on with your numbers and the article numbers. That's all I was asking.
Secondly, if you would take the time to read my past post, I clearly stated that "CONTRARY to Title IX" we need something that actually works for both sexes in the sport of swimming and isn't a selfish realignment of money to EITHER sex. Of course AD and football are partly to blame. But then again they have ALWAYS been partly to blame. The trigger was Title IX in the end and you know it. The pot of athletic revenue in a school is finite. title IX was a great idea in its conception that was implemented very poorly and allowed ADs to crush men's secondary sports in order to meet its requirements. Its plain and simple. Title IX is part of the problem in mens secondary sports. No one said it was the entire problem.
Lastly, simply showing concern for boys enrollment does not imply neglect or revenge on girls. This is a pathetic attempt to show sexism. It's classic alarmist women haters mentality and only serves to sideline the real discussion which is the number of participants for the sexes and how to keep them relatively equal and growing.
The fact that you can look at the Junior Nationals entries I've posted and show NO concern or offer no viable answers to the phenomenon at all is what is alarming.
John Smith
Geek,
You are pretty crotchety today.
Face it your figures don't jive with the article Paul posted. It's difficult to tell what's going on with your numbers and the article numbers. That's all I was asking.
Secondly, if you would take the time to read my past post, I clearly stated that "CONTRARY to Title IX" we need something that actually works for both sexes in the sport of swimming and isn't a selfish realignment of money to EITHER sex. Of course AD and football are partly to blame. But then again they have ALWAYS been partly to blame. The trigger was Title IX in the end and you know it. The pot of athletic revenue in a school is finite. title IX was a great idea in its conception that was implemented very poorly and allowed ADs to crush men's secondary sports in order to meet its requirements. Its plain and simple. Title IX is part of the problem in mens secondary sports. No one said it was the entire problem.
Lastly, simply showing concern for boys enrollment does not imply neglect or revenge on girls. This is a pathetic attempt to show sexism. It's classic alarmist women haters mentality and only serves to sideline the real discussion which is the number of participants for the sexes and how to keep them relatively equal and growing.
The fact that you can look at the Junior Nationals entries I've posted and show NO concern or offer no viable answers to the phenomenon at all is what is alarming.
John Smith
