2012 Olympics: Swimming

Every other country in the world disagrees with you. No other country in the world comes close to our swimming dominance so we are just fine. You could make a case for Australia I guess but since we compete with them quite effectively it is hard to say there is a major issue with our plan. Plus, it works with our swimming system. The "only two go" rule is a legacy of the US men's team's dominance in 1976. The world is much flatter now. We wind up with some of the best swimmers in the world (including Tyler Clary and various Japanese breastrokers) not at the Olympics simply because of a rule technicality and where they were born. All rules are technicalities in every sport. Just because it doesn't suit your particular tastes doesn't make it trivial or a technicality. If we took the top 3,4,5,etc some hotshot is still going to be on the outside looking in. My point is that the current system has pros who live/eat/breathe swimming competing against college kids who also have classes, jobs etc to worry about. As the men's results shows, it's not a fair fight. You wind up with a few dominant swimmers qualifying in multiple events at the expense of a broader team. Because of the way our current system works, these dominant swimmers have had to consciously make the decision to go pro and lead the monastic life that that dictates. It’s probable that some of the best talent doesn't want to make that decision and end up abandoning swimming. Again, it's not clear that's a bad thing, but it could potentially discourage talent over time. As I said, it’s not clear that this is a bad thing in terms of developing the best talent, just the implications aren’t yet clear. Here we go with the fair fight thing. Take a look at our team top to bottom. There are kids from all types of teams, all parts of the country, high schoolers, college kids and pros. You state isn't a bad thing but I have seen it in action every day for the past four years. It is a good, no, great thing. The implications aren't fuzzy, they are crystal clear and beneficial in the real world, in real pools, with real swimmers. Could discourage talent over time? Seriously, that's crazy. Having pros be accessible and visible does nothing but encourage swimming at all levels. And, if you think being a pro swimmer requires a monastic life, I suggest you follow a few on Twitter to see the life they are living. Many have jobs and their schedule is extremely hectic. And, our parking lot is full of nice cars when the pros train, Jones especially, nicer than the coaches often. The system you are proposing would be far worse for swimming than what we have now. Our system works because it is integrated into the nationwide college and AG seasons and allows for swimmers of all levels to make Trials. Limiting it to top 10s and holding it in the middle of short course AG championship season would be far more detrimental. Obviously, it isn't perfect, but it is pretty darn good.

Every other country in the world disagrees with you. No other country in the world comes close to our swimming dominance so we are just fine. You could make a case for Australia I guess but since we compete with them quite effectively it is hard to say there is a major issue with our plan. Plus, it works with our swimming system. The "only two go" rule is a legacy of the US men's team's dominance in 1976. The world is much flatter now. We wind up with some of the best swimmers in the world (including Tyler Clary and various Japanese breastrokers) not at the Olympics simply because of a rule technicality and where they were born. All rules are technicalities in every sport. Just because it doesn't suit your particular tastes doesn't make it trivial or a technicality. If we took the top 3,4,5,etc some hotshot is still going to be on the outside looking in. My point is that the current system has pros who live/eat/breathe swimming competing against college kids who also have classes, jobs etc to worry about. As the men's results shows, it's not a fair fight. You wind up with a few dominant swimmers qualifying in multiple events at the expense of a broader team. Because of the way our current system works, these dominant swimmers have had to consciously make the decision to go pro and lead the monastic life that that dictates. It’s probable that some of the best talent doesn't want to make that decision and end up abandoning swimming. Again, it's not clear that's a bad thing, but it could potentially discourage talent over time. As I said, it’s not clear that this is a bad thing in terms of developing the best talent, just the implications aren’t yet clear. Here we go with the fair fight thing. Take a look at our team top to bottom. There are kids from all types of teams, all parts of the country, high schoolers, college kids and pros. You state isn't a bad thing but I have seen it in action every day for the past four years. It is a good, no, great thing. The implications aren't fuzzy, they are crystal clear and beneficial in the real world, in real pools, with real swimmers. Could discourage talent over time? Seriously, that's crazy. Having pros be accessible and visible does nothing but encourage swimming at all levels. And, if you think being a pro swimmer requires a monastic life, I suggest you follow a few on Twitter to see the life they are living. Many have jobs and their schedule is extremely hectic. And, our parking lot is full of nice cars when the pros train, Jones especially, nicer than the coaches often. The system you are proposing would be far worse for swimming than what we have now. Our system works because it is integrated into the nationwide college and AG seasons and allows for swimmers of all levels to make Trials. Limiting it to top 10s and holding it in the middle of short course AG championship season would be far more detrimental. Obviously, it isn't perfect, but it is pretty darn good.