Further cuts to come for men's sports

I am alumni of a school (Texas Tech) that had its mens and womens swimming program cut way back in 1986 right after my senior year. We had a middle of the pack program (at best). We worked hard and had a lot of pride, but frankly lacked the ability to attract talent (lack of resources for the program, etc.) to compete with Texas, Texas A&M, SMU, etc. The history of the swimming program was that it was started as a club team back in the 50s and was a club team for quite a while before it developed enough support to be picked up within the athletic department. Alumni funded all the scholarships and the athletic department funded the annual costs which if I recall correctly was around $200k to 250k per year. That doesn't seem like a lot, but it was probably $6 to $8k or so per student athlete/year because we only had about 30 swimmers and divers on the team. I hate to say it, but most businesses (and universities and athletic departments are businesses) would have cut a program that didn't have prospects of funding itself. Now, similar to ASU the TTU program was cut very quickly and with no discussion of self-funding which angered many people. It was long before the internet and the alumni and swimming communities didn't react immediately and it was gone quickly with minimal struggle. I am sure there are many similar stories and from much better swimming schools than TTU. Also, at the same time, the football program was realizing that it was never going to compete in the long-run with Texas and Texas A&M and they were building an indoor practice facility so they could compete in recruiting, etc. The facility was just underway my senior year and the rumor was that the athletic department had the construction costs funded and realized that the maintenance on the facility wasn't budgeted well and cutting the swim teams just made up the difference. I don't know if we would have ever been able to raise $250k per year to run the program even if we would have had time, but if I were the head of any college swimming program I would make sure my program was self-funded by alumni or other fundraising. If not, shame on you because there have been countless learning experiences in the last 25 years. If you are self-funded the only excuse for cutting the program is Title IX. You can whine all you want about Title IX, but until you take away the financial argument for cutting the program swimmers are making it a really easy choice for athletic directors who likely have to take finances and Title IX into consideration. Also, if you are self-funded presumably you could have a club team that could still compete at a high-level (I am not sure if club teams can compete at NCAAs, but they should). I have been impressed with the University of Colorado club team - they don't have any superstars and appear to be more or less self-coached, but they care a lot about the sport (it seems a lot like masters swimming actually). Maybe that is the future for many university swim teams who can't compete with Texas and Stanford, etc. Remember, swimming in college is a privelege and not a right. That privelege is getting harder to earn every year and it is probably more due to finances than Title IX. It seems like schools with the best finances almost always keep all their programs including mens swimming. I must say when Crabtree caught the touchdown pass to beat Texas this year I thought to myself that cutting the swim team probably helped make that happen and football is king in Texas. I have my Cotton Bowl tickets so I must not be too bitter. For those of you lucky enough to have competed at more financially priveleged schools and enjoyed some of the greatest coaching and facilities money can buy and probably never have any worries that your swim program will be cut, stop your whining about swimming programs being cut. Actually, the better and stronger your overall athletic programs get due to their financial strength the harder it is for lesser universities to commit financially to try to compete with you in every sport and swimming is among the first to go. Maybe there should be some sort of athletic department cap for various sports to even out the playing field and take some of the money out of big-money sports and spread it around to other sports (yeah, like that will happen). If swimming is going to thrive in the future at the college level for more than the most elite schools and swimmers, it most likely will need to be self-funded (by alumni, parents, and the fund-raising). Most states don't have the money to provide some basic services so why are swim teams important to anyone outside the swimming community? Essentially, alumni need to open up their check-books and swim coaches need to get involved in fund-raising in almost every school and parents might need to kick-in some too to fund your athletes aspirations in college. It is a cruel financial world and everything must stand on its own. Tim

I am alumni of a school (Texas Tech) that had its mens and womens swimming program cut way back in 1986 right after my senior year. We had a middle of the pack program (at best). We worked hard and had a lot of pride, but frankly lacked the ability to attract talent (lack of resources for the program, etc.) to compete with Texas, Texas A&M, SMU, etc. The history of the swimming program was that it was started as a club team back in the 50s and was a club team for quite a while before it developed enough support to be picked up within the athletic department. Alumni funded all the scholarships and the athletic department funded the annual costs which if I recall correctly was around $200k to 250k per year. That doesn't seem like a lot, but it was probably $6 to $8k or so per student athlete/year because we only had about 30 swimmers and divers on the team. I hate to say it, but most businesses (and universities and athletic departments are businesses) would have cut a program that didn't have prospects of funding itself. Now, similar to ASU the TTU program was cut very quickly and with no discussion of self-funding which angered many people. It was long before the internet and the alumni and swimming communities didn't react immediately and it was gone quickly with minimal struggle. I am sure there are many similar stories and from much better swimming schools than TTU. Also, at the same time, the football program was realizing that it was never going to compete in the long-run with Texas and Texas A&M and they were building an indoor practice facility so they could compete in recruiting, etc. The facility was just underway my senior year and the rumor was that the athletic department had the construction costs funded and realized that the maintenance on the facility wasn't budgeted well and cutting the swim teams just made up the difference. I don't know if we would have ever been able to raise $250k per year to run the program even if we would have had time, but if I were the head of any college swimming program I would make sure my program was self-funded by alumni or other fundraising. If not, shame on you because there have been countless learning experiences in the last 25 years. If you are self-funded the only excuse for cutting the program is Title IX. You can whine all you want about Title IX, but until you take away the financial argument for cutting the program swimmers are making it a really easy choice for athletic directors who likely have to take finances and Title IX into consideration. Also, if you are self-funded presumably you could have a club team that could still compete at a high-level (I am not sure if club teams can compete at NCAAs, but they should). I have been impressed with the University of Colorado club team - they don't have any superstars and appear to be more or less self-coached, but they care a lot about the sport (it seems a lot like masters swimming actually). Maybe that is the future for many university swim teams who can't compete with Texas and Stanford, etc. Remember, swimming in college is a privelege and not a right. That privelege is getting harder to earn every year and it is probably more due to finances than Title IX. It seems like schools with the best finances almost always keep all their programs including mens swimming. I must say when Crabtree caught the touchdown pass to beat Texas this year I thought to myself that cutting the swim team probably helped make that happen and football is king in Texas. I have my Cotton Bowl tickets so I must not be too bitter. For those of you lucky enough to have competed at more financially priveleged schools and enjoyed some of the greatest coaching and facilities money can buy and probably never have any worries that your swim program will be cut, stop your whining about swimming programs being cut. Actually, the better and stronger your overall athletic programs get due to their financial strength the harder it is for lesser universities to commit financially to try to compete with you in every sport and swimming is among the first to go. Maybe there should be some sort of athletic department cap for various sports to even out the playing field and take some of the money out of big-money sports and spread it around to other sports (yeah, like that will happen). If swimming is going to thrive in the future at the college level for more than the most elite schools and swimmers, it most likely will need to be self-funded (by alumni, parents, and the fund-raising). Most states don't have the money to provide some basic services so why are swim teams important to anyone outside the swimming community? Essentially, alumni need to open up their check-books and swim coaches need to get involved in fund-raising in almost every school and parents might need to kick-in some too to fund your athletes aspirations in college. It is a cruel financial world and everything must stand on its own. Tim