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
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.
So, this discussion has diverged from the original topic a bit. I can agree with you that there is a disparity between the girls and boys at this meet. Without much context though, it's kind of a useless set of numbers. What were the numbers like last year? If this year's numbers are an anomaly, then perhaps it's because the QTs were set too high for boys or too low for girls. I don't know, I'm just asking questions.
I will however, disagree with you that Title IX triggered the demise of men's swimming at the University level. Like I said in my last post, many of those programs would have probably done away with both men's and women's swimming. ADs were forced to keep a women's program to comply with Title IX scholarship numbers.
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.
So, this discussion has diverged from the original topic a bit. I can agree with you that there is a disparity between the girls and boys at this meet. Without much context though, it's kind of a useless set of numbers. What were the numbers like last year? If this year's numbers are an anomaly, then perhaps it's because the QTs were set too high for boys or too low for girls. I don't know, I'm just asking questions.
I will however, disagree with you that Title IX triggered the demise of men's swimming at the University level. Like I said in my last post, many of those programs would have probably done away with both men's and women's swimming. ADs were forced to keep a women's program to comply with Title IX scholarship numbers.
