For Better or Worse: My Thoughts on USA Swimming’s Athlete Partnership Agreement

Column by Garrett McCaffrey

PHOENIX, Arizona, June 25. AT the core of USA Swimming's proposed Athlete Partnership Agreement (APA) is financial support for the professional swimmer. Being a pro swimmer is not a part-time job, and it's not cheap to eat right, live well and train full time.

A $29,000 raise, from $21,000 to $50,000, helps the national team athletes who are trying to make a living swimming. I've heard five different sides of this topic through interviews on Split Time. If this proposal passes as is, there will be an immediate impact beyond financial support for the national team. For better or worse, the APA is a jump from stipend to sponsorship and doesn't stop there.

On page four of the proposal under The Approach it states, "With the ultimate goal of winning Olympic and international gold medals…" Seems obvious enough. It's safe to say that winning Olympic medals is the highest achievement in the sport. It's even safe to say that 99 percent of the pro swimmers share this goal.

It's a goal that USA Swimming has succeeded in for decades and it's no secret that Olympic success leads to big-time money for the governing body. Public records show that the organization brought in 32 million dollars in 2008. The goal is nothing new, and neither is the pay out. But, the APA reaches beyond the focus on international success.

Official acquisition of name and image rights is one of the biggest concerns from APA critics. This is where the proposal clearly crosses that line from stipend to sponsorship. Under Marketing on page eight of the proposal it says, "Promote USA Swimming on the same level as athlete's corporate partners." Is it safe to assume that athletes' "corporate partners" are sponsors? The requirements that accompany the agreement lead one to believe the same.

Appearances, autographs and use of national teamers' images are already things we see USA Swimming doing with its national team members. The APA would formalize those PR roles, giving more control to the governing body. Athlete appearances are a common requirement of sponsors, but controlling the swimmer's competition schedule is where USA Swimming reaches beyond the financial support of the athlete. The APA agreement requires that swimmers that take part in the program will have to attend at least five USA Swimming events each year.

Any coach will agree that five required meets a year will tremendously impact a swimmer's annual schedule. Any club that hosts a major invite will agree that this threatens its ability to get big names to their meet. Essentially, USA Swimming is forcing the top athletes in the sport to attend events to which it holds exclusive broadcast and advertising rights.

College football fans can relate to this type of motivation. In recent months, teams have switched conferences away from rivals for one reason: money. Specifically, broadcast money. Nothing is better for the growth of a sport than television. If USA Swimming can guarantee the top swimmers in the country will compete at certain meets, it's more likely to attract television interest.

Mark Schubert, USA Swimming's national team head coach, was correct when he said on Split Time that more big names at specific events means more exposure for the sport. We need professional swimming competitions to promote our sport to the general sports fan. This APA appears to be USA Swimming's attempt to plant the seeds of a professional league. You can't argue that the partnership would put the pieces in place. If this is the intent in Colorado Springs, why not make it clear? A pro league would be a great step to take. The problem is that pieces of the APA are unclear. There are parts that appear to reach beyond support of the national team for better or worse.

Supporting the athlete and building a professional swim league would make swimming better, but the possible threat to college swimming also needs to be addressed.

Recently, we've seen multiple swimmers give up their college eligibility, and we're sure to see more by the end of the summer if the APA is approved. What's to stop the top American college swimmers from giving up their college eligibility for an annual income that is on par with the average collegiate graduate? What's to stop USA Swimming from encouraging it?

Beyond the impact it may play on the individual's career, there is a much bigger issue. Athletics departments all too often look at college swimming as expendable. How do we stop that trend if the top swimmers share that view? College swimming has played a huge role in American swimming's proud Olympic success. Today, college swimming desperately needs help. How does approving the APA help?

Although the Olympic dream is the goal of almost all swimmers at one point or another, it's the college scholarship that drives a parent's support of young swimmers' careers. With more college programs being cut every month, fewer swimmers will continue their career after high school. If the trend isn't turned around, why would parents want to get their kids involved in a sport with such a low ceiling? If this agreement takes more of the top American swimmers away from college programs, it lowers the importance of college swimming.

No matter where you stand on USA Swimming's proposed APA, you have to like the governing body's transparency as this proposal moves towards instituted regulation. An open process leads to more feedback, and ultimately more trust.

This proposal puts many policies in place that could have lasting effects on the sport as we know it. The APA meets a lot of top athlete's needs, but the plan is far from flawless. Let's be proactive on this one, so that we don't find ourselves in the far too familiar position of backpedaling. We've seen it with decisions made around the high-tech suits. We've seen it with child protection policies. Transparency is the first step, but the resulting feedback is what makes it effective. Let's take the time to get this one right the first time.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

Welcome to our community. We invite you to join our discussion. Our community guidelines are simple: be respectful and constructive, keep on topic, and support your fellow commenters. Commenting signifies that you agree to our Terms of Use

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x