USOC tries to cap swimming deals

With the swimmers who are lucky enough to score contracts with companies.... is there something specifically written in their contracts about wearing their items at Olympic Trials or big meets - do they get paid more if they do this (or less if they aren't able to)? If the meet requires swimmers to tone it down, then I don't have a problem with it - rules are rules. Speedo, Nike, TYR, etc. should respect the meet regulations and not penalize their athletes (if that is what is happening). I am unaware what they do at other sports Olympic Trials... same rules? On a personal note, I honestly wouldn't mind if someone had a big TYR or Nike logo on at a major swim meet... it's competitive swimming and those names are what assist us in our endeavors. Swimming is in the limelight once every 4 years... why not get as much attention as we can during that one week? The problem with a big TYR or Nike logo is that it is no different than a Pepsi, Gatorade, or Ford logo. I believe that if they allow a TYR logo they would (have to) allow any logo. I'm sorry but I don't want our swimmers to look like billboards.

The problem with a big TYR or Nike logo is that it is no different than a Pepsi, Gatorade, or Ford logo. I believe that if they allow a TYR logo they would (have to) allow any logo. I'm sorry but I don't want our swimmers to look like billboards. I completely understand what you are saying. But with the big 3 suit makers in the USA - it's a little bit more sport-specific than what you are saying with your example of Pepsi and others. I don't see the harm in allowing competitive swimming products around at Trials... that's all. However... especially in this country, sports-related companies are using their athletes as billboards. I don't want our swimmers looking like nascars either. ;)

If Starbucks knew of the amount of performance-enhancing caffeine consumed by the Smith brothers alone, I'm sure they'd jump at the chance to sponsor us... I don't drink coffee, but I'd wear that cap! Lefty, The Fourbucks comment was hilarious.

Greedy pigs. Now you are speaking my language. Greed is good.

It's good to know that as I was becoming confused, a common occurrence for me.

I believe Speedo is a British company, not entirely sure. From Yahoo! Finance: Pentland Group PLC Company Profile The firm behind the Speedo, Pentland Group owns nearly a dozen brands of sports and leisure apparel, activewear, footwear, and sporting goods. Besides Speedo, some include Berghaus, Ellesse, KangaROOS, Mitre, and One True Saxon, as well as the exclusive worldwide footwear license for the Lacoste brand. Pentland also has licensing rights to the Ted Baker footwear collection outside of the US and Canada. Its brands are marketed in more than 170 countries. The Rubin family founded Pentland in 1932. The family's investment firm, Robert Stephen Holdings, took Pentland private in 1999 and now owns the company

Geek, who makes the mansierre that you wear on your trike?

It's going to be interesting to see if and how USS athletes can ever "own" the ad space on their person. I see the USOC's title sponsorships just like a title sponsorship any any other sport...except one big thing...virtually no prize money. Golf; lots of prize money and Tiger with Nike logo's everywhere. Heck, you ever flip thru the channels and happen to spend more than 10 seconds on a bowling championship? Players are almost at the NASCAR level. Swimming is still stuck in this "half pregnant" (denial) mindset that its not really professional yet the reality it is yet the amount of money is miniscule and outside of the Olympics no one watches it so the reality is the cap space is important...even to some masters swimmers (do you think KPN wears Speedo because she likes it). I think they should allow any sponsorship logo a swimmer wants if their good enough to get sponsored with the exception being that prime placement like the actual Games, World Cups, etc. where its country vs. country then the prime placment is owned...not at the Trials or other national/international meets.

I completely understand what you are saying. But with the big 3 suit makers in the USA - it's a little bit more sport-specific than what you are saying with your example of Pepsi and others. I don't see the harm in allowing competitive swimming products around at Trials... that's all. However... especially in this country, sports-related companies are using their athletes as billboards. I don't want our swimmers looking like nascars either. ;) I think you are missing the point. It is not that the USOC doesn't want athletes to be billboards, it is that they want to be the ones to collect the revenue for said billboards. They are taking a signifcant earning potential away from individuals and keeping it for themselves. This is a good thing according to Geek because the result will be reduced entry fees for Masters meets.

The amateur status thing has long since passed. You need to look more closely at this decision before you make comments. The USOC is a private organization and can set its own rules. Athletes realize that when they elect to compete. They don't have to like the rules. If the USOC has entered into private contracts with companies to advertise, and thus fund, a percentage of their operations and generate overall income for the Olympic movement, then all athletes will benefit. Since the vast majority of athletes have zero sponsorship the impact of this is negligible since it won't impact them anyway. If it's for any reason other than that, well then it does make very little sense.