Clemson drops swimming

[DST Fan]

This item may be of limited interest, but the Clemson athletic department announced yesterday that it is dropping the men's swim and dive program and the women's swim program. (The women's dive team survived.) Although a number of D-1 schools have dropped their men's swimming programs in recent years to maintain Title 9 compliance, Clemson's announcement indicates that the decision was not based on Title 9 considerations:


"This was a difficult decision. It comes as a result of a long review of Clemson's sport offerings in light of our mission to offer sports in which we have the best opportunities to be competitive," said Phillips. "Clemson's all sports program approach requires review of facilities, coaching, and student-athlete recruitment opportunities for all sport offerings. Our job is to focus on areas where we have the necessary underpinnings to be successful."

"While facilities are important in every sport, having an Olympic size pool has become most important in swimming. We have made a decision not to build a 50-meter pool, and thus feel our program is in a state where it will be very difficult to compete at the highest level in the ACC and nationally."


I doubt that many people who follow ACC swimming anticipated Clemson's decision and, for anyone who follows the Duke swim and dive teams, the decision is troubling on a couple of levels. The Duke men's and women's teams have both improved significantly over the past 5 years and, at this point, I think it is fair to say the Duke and Clemson teams are comparable competitively. In addition, Taishoff (Duke's swimming facility) was built in 1972 and has an 8-lane, 25 yard pool.

Given the current economic realities, I doubt any D-1 schools (particularly private universities) will be building new facilities for their swim and dive teams in the near future. Let's hope that Clemson's thinking is not adopted by other athletic departments.


http://clemsontigers.cstv.com/sports/c-swim/spec-rel/043010aaa.html

[BD80]

This is why the "pay college ballplayers" mantra should be ignored. The couple of athletic programs that make money support all of the other athletic programs that don't. That BILLIONS of dollars from the NCAA basketball TV contract to fund sports like swimming. Spending MORE on the basketball players will reduce what can be spent on other programs.

I also fail to see how dropping the men's diving team but not the women's diving team is not related to Title IX.

[SCMatt33]

I also fail to see how dropping the men's diving team but not the women's diving team is not related to Title IX.

It's possible that dropping men's diving is related to Title IX, but dropping both men's and women's obviously has nothing to do with it since it's an even drop on both sides.

[DST Fan]

This is why the "pay college ballplayers" mantra should be ignored. The couple of athletic programs that make money support all of the other athletic programs that don't. That BILLIONS of dollars from the NCAA basketball TV contract to fund sports like swimming. Spending MORE on the basketball players will reduce what can be spent on other programs.

I also fail to see how dropping the men's diving team but not the women's diving team is not related to Title IX.


I suspect you are correct, and I would guess that the first decision was to drop both swim teams because the lack of a 50-meter pool impacts how the swim teams train. Presumably, the existing facility was adequate for both dive teams, which suggests that Title 9 was a factor in dropping the men's dive team.

I'm not an expert on Title 9, but it is difficult for me to see how preserving the women's dive team made much of an impact on the athletic department's Title 9 profile. Clemson has 2 men and 4 women on their dive rosters. Further, it would seem that any savings from cutting the men's team can't amount to much, since the two teams had to be run, for all practical purposes, as a single program with one coach.

[SmartDevil]

I'm curious about what the attendance is at Duke's swim meeets for both the male and female teams.

[OZZIE4DUKE]

I suspect you are correct, and I would guess that the first decision was to drop both swim teams because the lack of a 50-meter pool impacts how the swim teams train. Presumably, the existing facility was adequate for both dive teams, which suggests that Title 9 was a factor in dropping the men's dive team.

I'm not an expert on Title 9, but it is difficult for me to see how preserving the women's dive team made much of an impact on the athletic department's Title 9 profile. Clemson has 2 men and 4 women on their dive rosters. Further, it would seem that any savings from cutting the men's team can't amount to much, since the two teams had to be run, for all practical purposes, as a single program with one coach.
I would think that the men's and women's meets were separate events held at different times and/or venues. Having just one coach for two teams probably wouldn't work out logistically.

[BD80]

I suspect you are correct, and I would guess that the first decision was to drop both swim teams because the lack of a 50-meter pool impacts how the swim teams train. Presumably, the existing facility was adequate for both dive teams, which suggests that Title 9 was a factor in dropping the men's dive team.

I'm not an expert on Title 9, but it is difficult for me to see how preserving the women's dive team made much of an impact on the athletic department's Title 9 profile. Clemson has 2 men and 4 women on their dive rosters. Further, it would seem that any savings from cutting the men's team can't amount to much, since the two teams had to be run, for all practical purposes, as a single program with one coach.

Actually, it is all about Title IX. The money saved is being directed into the women's diving team and into starting a women's golf team:


Clemson [currently] funds 10 scholarships for men’s swimmers and divers and 14 for women. Eight full women’s scholarships would be available for as many as 11 roster members in diving

http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100501/SPORTS/304300052/1004/NEWS01/Clemson-could-add-women-s-golf-team

So a net reduction of 6 women scholarships and 10 men scholarships in swimming/diving and the addition of ? new scholarships for women's golf.

This certainly isn't about whether the swimming teams were contributing to the student-athlete paradigm:


Members of the swim team are among the athletic department’s top performers academically and their track record for community service is incomparable

[DST Fan]

I'm curious about what the attendance is at Duke's swim meeets for both the male and female teams.

The meets are run at the same time, but the men's and women's events alternate and are scored separately. I am not sure exactly what the seating capacity is at Taishoff, but I would guess that it is 300-400, maybe a bit more including some standing room. The stands are full for most of the ACC meets, particularly when the visiting school is within a couple hour drive.

[Acymetric]

I would think that the men's and women's meets were separate events held at different times and/or venues. Having just one coach for two teams probably wouldn't work out logistically.

I'm pretty sure they hold meets at the same time. Its not like basketball or football (or lacrosse, or...) where there are gametime coaching decisions to be made on the fly. Pretty much all coaching happens in practice, during a meet the coach generally just tries to pump people up and makes sure the meet is running smoothly (at least in my experience).

[DST Fan]

I would think that the men's and women's meets were separate events held at different times and/or venues. Having just one coach for two teams probably wouldn't work out logistically.

See my last post. The meets are scheduled at the same time. Other than a very few schools at the top of the D-1 food chain, all D-1 swim and dive teams (and all of the ACC teams) have a single coaching staff for both the men's and women's teams. The teams train together, and function pretty much as a single team.

Duke's staff is a little on the light side, even by ACC standards. There is a head swim coach, a head dive coach, and one assistant swim coach. From time to time, there will be a part time volunteer coach on the staff.

[DST Fan]

Actually, it is all about Title IX. The money saved is being directed into the women's diving team and into starting a women's golf team:



http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20100501/SPORTS/304300052/1004/NEWS01/Clemson-could-add-women-s-golf-team

So a net reduction of 6 women scholarships and 10 men scholarships in swimming/diving and the addition of ? new scholarships for women's golf.

This certainly isn't about whether the swimming teams were contributing to the student-athlete paradigm:

I can understand the point about the women's golf team, but I question whether Clemson will be able to build a national level, stand alone women's dive team.

Miami has a men's dive team (and no men's swim team) that does well, but I can't think of another team that has a similar arrangement. In addition, Miami has a women's swim team.

It is rare that a swim/dive team has more than 3-4 divers (per sex). At swim meets, no more than 3 (or sometimes 4) entries can score points in any event, including diving. I am not sure how Clemson is going to schedule dive meets that can accommdate a roster of 11 (the number cited in the article).

In addition, I think the Clemson athletic department ultimately may be unwilling to incur significant costs in running a dive team independently from a swim team. I believe the costs of a per-athlete basis will be excessive, particularly compared to other non revenue sports. Golf teams tend to be small, but not that small.

[BD80]

I can understand the point about the women's golf team, but I question whether Clemson will be able to build a national level, stand alone women's dive team.

Miami has a men's dive team (and no men's swim team) that does well, but I can't think of another team that has a similar arrangement. In addition, Miami has a women's swim team.

It is rare that a swim/dive team has more than 3-4 divers (per sex). At swim meets, no more than 3 (or sometimes 4) entries can score points in any event, including diving. I am not sure how Clemson is going to schedule dive meets that can accommdate a roster of 11 (the number cited in the article).

In addition, I think the Clemson athletic department ultimately may be unwilling to incur significant costs in running a dive team independently from a swim team. I believe the costs of a per-athlete basis will be excessive, particularly compared to other non revenue sports. Golf teams tend to be small, but not that small.

I wonder if this is more about allocation of costs. I am not familiar with accounting methodology with respect to Title IX, but could Clemson be using the women's dive team as a reason to allocate at least part of the cost of the facility to a women's team? Similarly, the impetus for the women's team is the existence of the former men's facility (the men just moved into a new facility). Is that just making use of an existing facility, or a way to allocate more overhead to women's teams?

[DST Fan]

I wonder if this is more about allocation of costs. I am not familiar with accounting methodology with respect to Title IX, but could Clemson be using the women's dive team as a reason to allocate at least part of the cost of the facility to a women's team? Similarly, the impetus for the women's team is the existence of the former men's facility (the men just moved into a new facility). Is that just making use of an existing facility, or a way to allocate more overhead to women's teams?

I think I follow your point, but I also am unfamiliar with how Title 9 accounts for costs. However, applying your rationale, shouldn't Clemson have retained the women's swim team? That might allow the school to allocate more costs of the swim facility to women's teams and, at the same time, retain 30-35 female atheletes.

[ScreechTDX1847]

Wow. Crazy. One of my best friend's from high school got a full ride to Clemson on a swimming scholarship.

[BD80]

I think I follow your point, but I also am unfamiliar with how Title 9 accounts for costs. However, applying your rationale, shouldn't Clemson have retained the women's swim team? That might allow the school to allocate more costs of the swim facility to women's teams and, at the same time, retain 30-35 female atheletes.

I believe there are several ways of complying with the "equity" requirements of Title IX. Number of scholarships is one. I believe funds allocation is another. By eliminating both swim teams and mens' diving, womens' diving alone is "credited" for the cost of the entire facility. By eliminating the women's swimming team, they can shift scholarships to the women's diving team and create a women's golf team - and allocate the costs of the open existing practice facility to a woman's sport.

The net result is losing 10 men's scholarship but no women's scholarships, and two existing facilities are now wholly credited to the women's programs. All with little or no financial outlay.

[DST Fan]

I believe there are several ways of complying with the "equity" requirements of Title IX. Number of scholarships is one. I believe funds allocation is another. By eliminating both swim teams and mens' diving, womens' diving alone is "credited" for the cost of the entire facility. By eliminating the women's swimming team, they can shift scholarships to the women's diving team and create a women's golf team - and allocate the costs of the open existing practice facility to a woman's sport.

The net result is losing 10 men's scholarship but no women's scholarships, and two existing facilities are now wholly credited to the women's programs. All with little or no financial outlay.

You have a much better understanding of the details of Title IX than I do, but if Clemson is now allowed to allocate the entire cost of the swim facility to the women's dive team for Title IX purposes, it seems to me that something is wrong with the accounting rules.

Clemson's facility (McHugh Natatorium) is fairly typical in that the diving well is separated from the pool by a bulkhead. Once the swim program is gone, I suspect that the swimming pool formerly used by the two swim teams will be turned over to general student use, and the women's dive team will continue to use the diving well. Thus, I can see that the costs of the diving well and perhaps other portions of the facility (such as the seating area and a team locker room) will be allocated solely to a women's team, but it is likely that a large portion of the facility won't be used by any athletic team.

I understand that the scholarships have to be factored into the analysis, but with regard to facility costs, it seems to me that, if the accounting rules are fair, the only way to allocate the entire cost of the facility to women's teams would be to maintain a women's swim team along with the dive team. However, I could be wrong.

[DST Fan]

Wow. Crazy. One of my best friend's from high school got a full ride to Clemson on a swimming scholarship.

The swim teams and the men's dive team are being phased out and will be dropped in two years. Thus, members of the sophomore class will be able to complete their careers on an ACC team.

I would guess that current and incoming freshman on scholarships will start to look to transfer, and Clemson has confirmed it will approve all requests to transfer. However, many D-1 swimming programs are not fully funded and have less than the NCAA maximum number of scholarships to offer. For example, the Duke women's team just became partially funded in the last couple of years and my understanding is that the men's team is still unfunded.

The timing of the annoucment is particularly bad for the incoming freshmen class, some of whom may well have had other scholarship offers a few months ago and committed to Clemson.

[JBDuke]

Folks, I deleted a post from dukeimac that I determined was uncivil according to our standards. I also deleted a number of replies to his post that are no longer necessary.

And I agree with BluBones that the rest of the discussion in this thread is appropriate where it's at.

[BD80]

You have a much better understanding of the details of Title IX than I do, but if Clemson is now allowed to allocate the entire cost of the swim facility to the women's dive team for Title IX purposes, it seems to me that something is wrong with the accounting rules.

Clemson's facility (McHugh Natatorium) is fairly typical in that the diving well is separated from the pool by a bulkhead. Once the swim program is gone, I suspect that the swimming pool formerly used by the two swim teams will be turned over to general student use, and the women's dive team will continue to use the diving well. Thus, I can see that the costs of the diving well and perhaps other portions of the facility (such as the seating area and a team locker room) will be allocated solely to a women's team, but it is likely that a large portion of the facility won't be used by any athletic team.

I understand that the scholarships have to be factored into the analysis, but with regard to facility costs, it seems to me that, if the accounting rules are fair, the only way to allocate the entire cost of the facility to women's teams would be to maintain a women's swim team along with the dive team. However, I could be wrong.

I am just speculating, and hope that others with more info and/or knowledge than I (not a very high hurdle, I know) can help out.

There is always a battle as to which department budget will pay for facilities and their maintenance. Often, deals are struck. My guess is that the Athletic department has been footing the bill at Clemson for the Natatorium. By euthanizing the swim teams, they can now either push the cost of the pool portion over to the student recreation budget, or strike some budgetary deal. With only a single woman's team in the facility, that could really help with respect to Title IX. Similarly with the now vacant golf facility, by starting a women's golf team, the Athletic Department can allocate the costs of the facility to women's sports.

My point is that while it may not initially appear that terminating the men's and women's swim teams was a Title IX decision, the implementation was all about Title IX. The article made it clear the women's swimming scholarships would be redistributed to diving and probably golf. I wonder if other teams will be able to use the men's swimming scholarships; if Clemson was already in "compliance" with its ratio of men's to women's scholarships, perhaps teams with room in their budget can now offer additional scholarships - maybe soccer or baseball.

[formerdukeathlete]

I am just speculating, and hope that others with more info and/or knowledge than I (not a very high hurdle, I know) can help out.

There is always a battle as to which department budget will pay for facilities and their maintenance. Often, deals are struck. My guess is that the Athletic department has been footing the bill at Clemson for the Natatorium. By euthanizing the swim teams, they can now either push the cost of the pool portion over to the student recreation budget, or strike some budgetary deal. With only a single woman's team in the facility, that could really help with respect to Title IX. Similarly with the now vacant golf facility, by starting a women's golf team, the Athletic Department can allocate the costs of the facility to women's sports.

My point is that while it may not initially appear that terminating the men's and women's swim teams was a Title IX decision, the implementation was all about Title IX. The article made it clear the women's swimming scholarships would be redistributed to diving and probably golf. I wonder if other teams will be able to use the men's swimming scholarships; if Clemson was already in "compliance" with its ratio of men's to women's scholarships, perhaps teams with room in their budget can now offer additional scholarships - maybe soccer or baseball.

I think that this may be the answer. As I recall, the Athletic Department at Duke pays to maintain all athletic facilties, including Card, the IM Building, the pools, the track, golf course. In the past there was no revenue sharing from student fees. Now there may be, to help defray the cost of maintaining these facilities. At Clemson, with the huge student body, it makes sense that facilities used by so many would be maintained partially or in large part through the general University budget.

In the debate over Duke's subsidy of the Athletic Department we should take note that the Athletic Department absorbs costs that would otherwise need to be covered through the general University budget, such as maintaining facilities and financial aid for student athletes. And that these costs absorbed exceed the annual subsidy. And, that were the school to de-emphasize sports - drop scholarships and play D-3, that the net cost of running these facilities and providing D-3 sports competitition might actually increase.

I know the Development Office has in mind the need to build a new 50 meter long, 25 yard wide indoor swimming facility. Swimming with few scholarships at Duke brings in a good number of very qualified academically recruits each year. The Program is consistent with the Universities academic goals for student athletes. Like in most all non-revs at Duke, any scholarship assistance most often takes the place of University financial aid which would otherwise need to be awarded. Jack Parsons once asserted that Duke's Swimming team had more physician alums than all the other sports at Duke combined; Jack was credited with establishing the Lax and Swimming progams at Duke. Hopefully Duke Swimming does not meet Lax's (almost) fate. But if the goal is to fund fully all athletic scholarships permitted for each sport, that's about 10 for Men, plus 14 for Women, plus a new pool. Thats a big hurdle. On the other hand, a new pool would provide a nice facility which could be enjoyed by Duke's growing constituencies, large faculty, etc.

[cuswimmer]

I can provide some insight to the situation....

The pool operating costs are footed entirely by Clemson's recreation department. The athletic department does not pay a dime to use the pool. Items such as lane lines, starting blocks, pace clocks, etc. are payed for 50/50 by the athletic department and the recreation department.

The number of scholarships for the sport of "Swimming and Diving" - as the NCAA defines it, are 9.9 for men and 14 for women. The NCAA also requires a team to have a minimum of 11 participants to be recognized as an eligilbe team. Clemson's diving program will have to increase its roster to at least 11 members.

While Clemson's facility is similar to Duke, in that they both have 25 yard pools, Duke as full diving facility. The ACC and NCAA score diving on 1 meter springboard, 3 meter springboard, 5 meter platform, 7.5 meter platform, and 10 meter platform. Clemson does not have any platforms at all. They travel several times a week to the University of Georgia to train platform. The diving track record and lack of facilities will not attract talented divers, unlick the Univerity of Miami (FL).

Title IX will not be a factor - as the University has announced they plan to start a golf team in 2 years. It is our believe that once the golf team is fully funded and several classes recruited, the diving program will be ended as well.

As far as scholarship costs - we are talking about an athletic deparment that just announced their private giving numbers to athletics for the 2009-2010 year - $92.8 million. I think they could manage the $1 million dollar budget for men's and women's swimming and diving...

Duke's program is on the uptick and looking stronger each year. I hope they keep it up, it is great for the conference and the sport!

Thanks!

[BD80]

I can provide some insight to the situation....

The number of scholarships for the sport of "Swimming and Diving" - as the NCAA defines it, are 9.9 for men and 14 for women. The NCAA also requires a team to have a minimum of 11 participants to be recognized as an eligible team. Clemson's diving program will have to increase its roster to at least 11 members. ...

... The ACC and NCAA score diving on 1 meter springboard, 3 meter springboard, 5 meter platform, 7.5 meter platform, and 10 meter platform. Clemson does not have any platforms at all. They travel several times a week to the University of Georgia to train platform. ...

Title IX will not be a factor - as the University has announced they plan to start a golf team in 2 years. It is our believe that once the golf team is fully funded and several classes recruited, the diving program will be ended as well.

As far as scholarship costs - we are talking about an athletic department that just announced their private giving numbers to athletics for the 2009-2010 year - $92.8 million. I think they could manage the $1 million dollar budget for men's and women's swimming and diving...

Why on earth would Clemson field a "team" of eleven divers when only a couple compete in meets, and in a situation where they don't have facilities to train for 3 of the 5 events? That sounds very fishy to me. From a financial standpoint, it seems the money could be better spent elsewhere. This stinks of Title IX.

The bottom line is that the swimming and diving scholarships will be terminated, and new women's scholarships will be created for a golf team. Clearly Title IX, but this isn't as insidious as killing mens programs. I have never opposed adding women's programs.

Of the $93 million of private giving, I would bet close to $90 was earmarked for football. Don't think for a second those boosters would stand for the locker room benches being mere top grain cowhide leather instead of lambskin, even if the difference would fund 5 other sports for the year! The football program spends more on players 81 -85 on the roster (coaches, trainers, equipment, food, scholly, travel etc) than the non-revenue sports spend on 15 players. Still, football brings in the revenue that allows all those non-revenue sports to exist. I think Title IX would be fair if the revenue sports (at least the self-sustaining ones) were left out of the equation.

[hudlow]

I heard they couldn't keep the cows out of the pond.

hud