The Demise of Mens Swimming in the US

dorothyde - your situation is 180 degrees different from here. Teams are busting at the seams. Not appropriate to generalize based on either of our experiences, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Smith - how can you say fewer kids have less of a "commitment, hard work, patience and focus to be an athlete on any level " when participation numbers for both boys and girls are at historic highs and growing year-to-year? That's simply untrue. On any level the numbers are absolutely growing. What we have here is perception that runs totally contrary to all supporting information.

I am sure a lot of folks can recall being told that college opens all kinds of doors for your future. For 4 or 5 or 6 years, you'd open your mind by take all kinds of interesting, thought-provoking classes, explore a new region of the country (and/or world), debate with the brightest students and faculty, socialize with all kinds of folks, try new things, eat different food... I could go on. My experience with high school is that high school is becoming the new college - at least for the afformentioned things. Granted, I went to a private all-boys school with "college" in the name. But in the context of sports, the high school I attended opened (and still opens) all kinds of doors. Having a "freshman-only" team for many sports opened the doors for a lot of folks to test the waters. We had these for football, soccer, basketball, hockey, baseball and lacrosse. Swimming/Diving hands out a freshman letter if you make it through year 1 as a froshie. You don't want to put that on a jacket, but it is still a reward. Football players no longer had to compete against kids 2-3 years their senior if they were bigger than other kids their age. The 14 year old freshmen competed against other freshman. JV was usually made up of Freshmen and Sophomores. New Sports to try - Cross Country, Track & Field, Wrestling, Hockey, Crew, Lacrosse, Rugby, Softball, Tennis, Golf. Didn't have any school-sponsored teams in these sports in elementary school. My Freshman lacrosse team had close to 40 kids, and a LOT of first-timers, including myself. Crew was a HUGE hit when it began during my Sophomore year. They now have water polo and squash. If you're curious, why not try it out? There may be a freshman team and you all can learn together. College requirement for extracurriculars - a 4-year 4.0 GPA doesn't do you any good getting you into Harvard if you don't have any other activities to show you're a well-rounded student. School committment to this is very evident these days - my HS 2nd choice still REQUIRES articipation in at least one sport as a freshman and sophomore. More than one bookworm has discovered a rare athletic talent because of that policy. That being said, it was high school that opened the door to swimming for me. My best friend convinced me that it was NOT as intense as a college-swimming prep program, which I thought it would be. It took me two years to find the cajones to try it out, but I made it to the pool and made significant improvements during my final two years of high school. His convincing and my willingness to try it out certainly shaped MY future. I realize I am the exception, but along the way, I am sure some of the same things I encountered over a decade ago still apply today. The boys do not like wearing form-fitting suits. No one has thrown it out there yet but inferences are easily made towards male swimmers and divers about their sexual preference - and High School is NOT a good time to be hearing those. I know I've heard my share of them.

dorothyde - your situation is 180 degrees different from here. Teams are busting at the seams. Not appropriate to generalize based on either of our experiences, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Smith - how can you say fewer kids have less of a "commitment, hard work, patience and focus to be an athlete on any level " when participation numbers for both boys and girls are at historic highs and growing year-to-year? That's simply untrue. On any level the numbers are absolutely growing. What we have here is perception that runs totally contrary to all supporting information. Signing up for "participation" vs. long term retention are two very differant things my geeky friend. Show me what the turnover is from someone swimming at 11 or 12 and making it thru high school and on to college and how that is tied to general population increases... I don't have the stats to back it up but based on discussions I've had with club coaches/college coaches I would bet the turnover is VERY high. JS and I were talking about this the other day after his son (12) blasted a 25.5 50 fly....how do you keep a kid that talentedl involved for the next 6 years an on into college....especially as he pointed out its a full time battle getting him away from his video games? And Dorthy is correct....with far less colleges offering swimming programs let alone scholoraships....what parent would want to encourage their kids to stay in the sport? I already told JS to get his kid a baseball and start working on his left handed fastball....and I'll be his agent!

I hate the focus on college scholarships. I realize that some parents need financial assistance to send their kids to college because tuition is now outrageous outside of in-state schools. But it's this focus on scholarships that creates loco parents who push, push, push. College is not just about sports, although participating in college sports can be very rewarding. Kids who truly love our niche sport will stick with it. If they don't love it, they won't be able to survive the grueling workout schedule. Personally, I see my daughter picking up a field hockey and lacrosse stick right quick. Myself, I went to a school that didn't give athletic scholarships and swam anyway.

Seriously - following your ever changing arguments is really hard. First you said that boys swimming is decreasing. Well, that was disproven by your own facts. Then, you said participation is down ON ALL LEVELS, which, again, is completely incorrect with participation at an all time high. Toss in the video game theory (btw - video game systems have been around since the early to mid 80s), the fat kid theory, and it all becomes too hard to keep up with. I totally agree on the baseball thing. Even a cruddy left handed pitcher is gonna be a zillionare in MLB. My daughter is a lefty but I can't stand baseball parents so it's swimming for us. Girls can't play baseball allegedly, have to play softball (and there's a stigma with that sport). USA Swimming has retention rate information as well. Again, you are dead wrong. Boys and girls retain at about the same percentage over 5 years (70.4% (g) to 69.2% (b)). So, turnouver really isn't that high and certainly no noticeable difference between the sexes. If you walk into a ball room and see 90 boys and 10 girls in 1975 and then walk into that same ballroom in 2007 and see 150 girls and 135 boys you naturally might think there are fewer boys. Don't confuse perception with reality. Course, as a boy, I'd be happy with more girls. You, conversely, seem to find it a problem. Heart versus head debates are always interesting.

Seriously - following your ever changing arguments is really hard. First you said that boys swimming is decreasing. Well, that was disproven by your own facts. Then, you said participation is down ON ALL LEVELS, which, again, is completely incorrect with participation at an all time high. Toss in the video game theory (btw - video game systems have been around since the early to mid 80s), the fat kid theory, and it all becomes too hard to keep up with. I totally agree on the baseball thing. Even a cruddy left handed pitcher is gonna be a zillionare in MLB. My daughter is a lefty but I can't stand baseball parents so it's swimming for us. Girls can't play baseball allegedly, have to play softball (and there's a stigma with that sport). USA Swimming has retention rate information as well. Again, you are dead wrong. Boys and girls retain at about the same percentage over 5 years (70.4% (g) to 69.2% (b)). So, turnouver really isn't that high and certainly no noticeable difference between the sexes. If you walk into a ball room and see 90 boys and 10 girls in 1975 and then walk into that same ballroom in 2007 and see 150 girls and 135 boys you naturally might think there are fewer boys. Don't confuse perception with reality. Course, as a boy, I'd be happy with more girls. You, conversely, seem to find it a problem. Heart versus head debates are always interesting. What part of your brain can't grasp the point I'm trying to make....that is that although participation in sports at the grade, middle and even high school levels shows an increase...the amount of swimmers...specifically boys...that stay in the sport and go on to more elite levels (later part of high school/college) according to many coaches is off. I'm suggesting that lots of kids each year sign up and because there are ever increasing numbers that enter its more likely do to a growing population vs increasing interest by kids in general to play sports...and that makes me think the stats are decieving and I want to see more detailed information on how long the average kid stays in a sport....what was the age range on the USS stats you have shown? Since its USS i doubt it extends into college. Fort...I don't think its so much the issue of focusing on scholarships as it is finding a school these days that even offers a mens swimming program.

I hate the focus on college scholarships. I realize that some parents need financial assistance to send their kids to college because tuition is now outrageous outside of in-state schools. But it's this focus on scholarships that creates loco parents who push, push, push. College is not just about sports, although participating in college sports can be very rewarding. Kids who truly love our niche sport will stick with it. If they don't love it, they won't be able to survive the grueling workout schedule. Personally, I see my daughter picking up a field hockey and lacrosse stick right quick. Myself, I went to a school that didn't give athletic scholarships and swam anyway. Amen, sister, though I realize that it is hypocritical of me to say so (I had a full ride). The financial assistance is very helpful for many BUT...I know some swimmers (the teens, not the parents) who eliminate whole classes of schools simply because they cannot get a full or partial scholarship, regardless of their parents' ability to pay. It is a pride thing. Now that I am on the other side of the fence, I also realize how ludicrous it is to choose a school based largely on its athletic program. It is an important consideration, sure: if you plan to spend 3-6 hours a day training, you probably want to make sure you like the coach, enjoy the team, have good facilities, etc. But for most the "glory" of swimming, such as it is, fades much more quickly than the impact of your education. Paul, I have to side with Aquageek and the others on this. I respect the opinions of the experts but I'll take hard numbers over perception any time. Check out the Junior National results (going on right now) to see some very fast swimming by youngsters. And whether one approves of the practice or not, the reality is that many (most?) college swim coaches have been recruiting internationally for decades. It doesn't portend any great disaster for US swimming. I'm surprised US dominance of swimming has held on as long as it has; in fact, I think we are more dominant now than at some points in the past. Look at international basketball: we were far more dominant at one point, and then later once again they let the pros play (remember the first Dream Team?). Those days are long gone.

What part of your brain can't grasp the point I'm trying to make....that is that although participation in sports at the grade, middle and even high school levels shows an increase...the amount of swimmers...specifically boys...that stay in the sport and go on to more elite levels (later part of high school/college) according to many coaches is off. Probably the part of my brain that is saturated with basketball at present. You have yet to provide a single shred of factual information to support your assertion, other than there being a lot of girls at an upcoming meet and you've talked to some folks. Retention and growth rates for boys are on par with girls from 12 to 19 and over. Your argument has morphed yet again. Now, you are stating "elite." Here's yet more facts - boys swimming for 18 and 19 and over has grown faster than girls AND there are more boys than girls in these two age groups by approximately 1000 swimmers. Further, boys have a higher retention rate than girls in these two age groups. I'd be more inclined to believe you if I saw some stats. To Chris' point, there are not many sports played internationally where the US can claim a pretty much uninterupted streak of dominance for over a quarter of a century. I would suspect most view swimming in the USA as pretty good and getting better. That's just what my heart tells me, no facts to support that, although that's not stopping this healthy debate.

Listen guys, I concede the stats show a different story but I simply refuse to sit back and say everything is "OK" in our sport. This may help make a bit more sense of what I've been trying to articulate: www.usaswimming.org/.../ViewMiscArticle.aspx

How does this growth compare to the growth of US swimming? I already answered this in an earlier post but US Swimming only goes back to 1986, so that is the best comparison I could make. From post #9, USA Swimming has increased roughly 50% since 1986, which outpaces the population growth in the USA. Liars figure and figures lie.