What does it mean when we look at the performance of the US men's swimming team at Beijing without Phelps....... i.e. without the man carrying the team? Is he merely the "Vince Young" of a slightly above average football Team?
We essentially lose the 400 free relay, 100 fly (Ian moves form 4th to 3rd), 200 IM and 400 IM (Lochted moves to silver), 200 free and 200 fly. That's makes 6 less golds and one extra bronze.
The US would effectively only win 2 individual events...... the 200 and 100 back.
Is Phelps a true representation of the state of US men's swimming or and exception?
www.nbcolympics.com/.../index.html
I know local swim clubs and USA Swimming have been expecting an increase in membership following the Olympics, perhaps even greater than in past Olympic years due to Phelps' popularity. Does anyone know whether that has been realized? The time to join seems to have been the beginning of the fall short course season in September or so. I wonder whether any increases in USA registrations have been equally split among boys and girls.
There is no doubt that Phelps is a once in a generation phenom exceeding Spitz, Thorpe, etc. Interesting article awhile back on this forum from I believe an LA Times columnist that downplayed this however.
As for the US team's performance if you pull Phelps from the equation I think there should be some concern as much of the rest of the world seems to have caught up if you will...and yes in some countries like France & South Africa with a little help from our college programs.
So where do we stand today? I think some major questions are being asked in light of Nike pulling out of our sport and possible funding opportunities drying up for that 2nd tier of swimmers who didn't make the team this last go around and may not have the means to train for 2012 (Nick Brunelli being a possible example).
Now the big question, how limited could training opportunities become if the economy continues to go south? I know of one major pool project in AZ that has been put on the back burner and with budgets getting whacked big time how many public/high school pools will get shut down? How many college programs that are not endowed will get the axe?
The full demographics of USA Swimming for 2007 are available below:
www.usaswimming.org/.../Statistics-2007.pdf
It shows almost continuous growth over the reporting period (since 1986).
There is some interesting data in the report.
At younger ages - females strongly outnumber males. For example 17,392 females vs. 11,154 males 12 years old.
But as the age moves up, more females drop out. At age 17, there were 8,232 females vs. 6,797 males. That is interesting to me since college swimming scholarships are more available for females.
The number of clubs dropped slightly (-20) from 2006 to 2007.
The athletes are overwhelmingly white or "no response". Not a surprise but an area for improvement. Surely many of America's best athletes are in other sports.
Geek,
The question is the growth and onward success of US MEN in the sport...... not the growth of men and women combined.
US swimming represents less than a tenth of a percent of US the population.
It doesn't take much to swing the stats largely in either direction with such a small comparative base.
The sport is not doing well for enrollment for age group boys.
You have still failed to respond to my initial question directly. Absent Mr. Phelp's performance, this years medal haul could be viewed as marginal.
John Smith
NOW who's getting emotional.
Look..... why is it so controversial to take a closer look at US Men's Swimming and extrapolate the genetic mutation that basically carried the team?
John Smith
I think another problem with this assertion is that it is a false premise, and certainly not applicable to swimming alone. It doesn't tell the story of swimming or any sport for that matter. A few dominant individuals in all sports will bloat the medal count and there are hundreds of examples. Pick any individual sport and you have the same potential argument. What would Jamaica have been without Bolt, US t and f without Lewis, speed skating without Jansen, gymanstics without whichever pixie was hot that year, the list is endless. Randomly excluding the top performer and then comparing the accomplishments of those remaining doesn't tell any story - the story is the whole picture.
Rather than the incessant pessimism you exhibit over the state of US swimming, I prefer to look at it as we are a country that consistently produces the top level performers, and that is applicable to all sports, not just swimming, with the notable exception of curling.
More hypotheticals:
What if you took the top three swimmers like in the old days? It favors USA.
What if you took the top 4 swimmers from each country per event and score it like NCAAs or for A/B/C finals? USA looks better than the other countries, I'm sure. (Consider the backstrokes)
What if you took the top 8 swimmers from each country and score it like NCAA's? USA looks fantastic.
The deeper the cuts/scoring, the better the US looks.
A USA mens olympic B relay would probably not be in the medal hunt, but would be in finals, in 4th-6th, well ahead of most all other B relays.
Furthermore, if you make the points go to where you train rather than your home country, we look better still (Mellouli, S Africa, Cavic, etc.)
I can't come up with a hypothetical under which the US looks worse other than taking away swimmers, which seems rather dumb.
