PDA

View Full Version : Foreign swimmers training in the U.S.



Pages : [1] 2

justforfun
June 16th, 2005, 10:41 AM
There has been a lot of discussion since Athens about foreign swimmers training in the United States. Most of them attend U.S. Universities, receive athletic scholarships, and compete at NCAA's. Some notable examples include Duje Draganja (Cal), Fred Bousquet and Kirsty Coventry (Auburn), Markus Rogan (Stanford), and the South African sprinters (Arizona). Some train in the U.S., but don't compete for a university (Inge de Bruijn). All of these athletes benefit from U.S. coaching, from training with U.S. swimmers, and in some cases, from financial support provided by U.S. entities (athletic scholarships). They all turn around and then win medals for other countries.

A couple questions: 1) What do you think about this arrangement generally? 2) Is it of benefit or detriment to U.S. swimming to have these foreign athletes training and competing here? 3) Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?

I'm sure there are other issues, but these come directly to mind.

Tom Ellison
June 16th, 2005, 10:56 AM
Let me try..and I mean TRY to temper my thoughts on this one...!

The short and long on my thoughts are simple....

Giving athletic scholarships, which are hard to come by in swimming, to foreign athletes is pretty stupid! Need I say more?

thisgirl13
June 16th, 2005, 11:14 AM
Originally posted by justforfun
Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?

What about the US swimmers that spend time abroad, swimming in places like Australia? Isn't that sort of the same thing?

And, I thought scholarships, scarce or not, were given to students to attend university based on their swimming ability, among other things. I believe there's something in our Bill of Rights about not withholding financial aid just because a person originates from another country.

And of course, they have all the right in the world to represent their home countries, even if they swim/attend school here. For crying out loud, if we want to even the scale, make everything "fair", they should go swim for Great Britian, cuz they're certainly coming out the losers on the international swimming circuit, don't you think?

I thought swimming was less selfish, and had a reputation for being better, sportsmanship-wise, than most of the other sports around us.

If you really want to make it fair, let's start requiring all international teams to have an equal number of swimmers, and if they don't have enough, we'll start sending our guys over to swim for them, so that the teams even out, and everybody has a chance. We'll also make sure that everyone trains in the US, to make it fair, and all swimming scholarships will be completely eradicated, so nobody can complain that it wasn't fair.

How's that for ridiculous? It's never going to be fair all the time, and somebody's always going to complain that our US swimmers got cheated by a foreigner, or some foreigner's going to complain that we are unfair to them. That's the beauty of democracy, kids.

Plus, I like Mark Rogan. He's got really nice.....sportsmanship.

tjburk
June 16th, 2005, 11:22 AM
I kind of have to side with Tom on this one! I have a son in HS right now that swims, can't imagine him not being able to go to college because somebody from another country gets his scholarship. If they want to move here permanently and become citizens of the USA and represent us...that's a different story. But, to come here, use our money, coaches and everything else, then go back and represent the country they came from....to me that is way more selfish.

Tom Ellison
June 16th, 2005, 11:23 AM
Bill of Rights ? Oh heck yes....let's make that apply to EVERY PERSON ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH....heck, I stand corrected....let's open the borders and let anyone come here....also, while we are at it....let us send all our jobs offshore to help other countries, lets give free aid to everyone and still have millions go hungry here in the USA....let's give what LITTLE scholarship money we have to anyone... from any place....The heck with taking care of USA Swimmers....give the entire store away....Americans do not need rights, jobs, scholarships or rewards for years of hard work in this country….

SwiminONandON
June 16th, 2005, 11:42 AM
wow, I love this place...

Rob Copeland
June 16th, 2005, 11:49 AM
Stephanie, I don’t know of any elite US swimmers that went to Australian universities with swimming scholarships. Of whom are you speaking?

I also couldn’t track down the financial aid section of the Bill of Rights. I must have an old copy.

But back to the original questions. As the parent of a soon to be college freshman student/athlete (a swimmer of course), I would love to see more scholarship opportunities offered to US swimmers. But the reality of the situation is that coaches at top schools are under great pressures to produce championships and to place high at NCAA. One way to score at NCAA’s is to buy a couple of world class foreign swimmers, at the expense of partial scholarships to a bunch of real good domestic swimmers. I would love to see the NCAA cap the amount of athletic scholarships to foreign athletes to 10% of total scholarships.

For me it is an issue of opportunity and reward, not of international competition. Over 95% of US scholarship swimmers will NEVER represent USA in international competition. But how many kids will choose to quit swimming in college, because there is no reward for all their hard work? How many kids (particularly boys) quit swimming because for most there is no future in swimming after high school (they don’t all know they can swim Masters). How many would stay in swimming if they were give even a partial scholarship in college?

Is it important that the NCAA All-Americans all be Americans? No, but it would be nice to see at least 50% that can speak English.

Selfish? Protective? Guilty!… Just don’t get us started on Title 9

aquageek
June 16th, 2005, 11:54 AM
I have to say that Tom and I don't agree on this one. I have no problem with this situation and am not aware of any situations where top calibre swimmers are denied scholarships or admission because of a foreign student. There are hundreds of millions of dollars of scholarships that aren't used every year so these few swimmers aren't denying anyone an education. We live in a global economy. In order to compete you bring in folks from around the world. A person we give a swimming scholarship to over a working lifetime will more likely return that gift a hundred fold to our country in various forms over their lifetime.

Tom Ellison
June 16th, 2005, 11:54 AM
"Just don’t get us started on Title 9"

And a loud Amen to that ~

ande
June 16th, 2005, 11:58 AM
OK, personally I'm fine with foreign athletes training in the US.
It happens and will continue to happen. We've got some great coaches and athletes are able to train with great peers. Look over lines on maps / nations and do whats best for mankind.

I'd prefer US swimmers getting scholarships. Over the years Eddie Reese at UT has had few foreign swimmers and none to hardly any on scholarship. This hasn't been the case for many other schools. Several foreign swimmers won and scored well at last years div 1 ncaa's

The other part of this worth mentioning are dual citizens, I've swum with several swimmers who were born in the US and lived in the US, but their parents were citizens of other countries, or dual citizens. These swimmers weren't fast enough to make the US olympic team, or didn't want risk trying to make the US Olympic team, but they could make another countries Olympic squad. like Mexico, Hungary, or other countries who's swim squads aren't as fast. That's fine with me too, my friends got to have an Olympic experience. One example is Zubero in the 200 M back in 1992, he swam for Spain at the barcelona olympics and won gold.

Ande


Originally posted by justforfun
There has been a lot of discussion since Athens about foreign swimmers training in the United States. Most of them attend U.S. Universities, receive athletic scholarships, and compete at NCAA's. Some notable examples include Duje Draganja (Cal), Fred Bousquet and Kirsty Coventry (Auburn), Markus Rogan (Stanford), and the South African sprinters (Arizona). Some train in the U.S., but don't compete for a university (Inge de Bruijn). All of these athletes benefit from U.S. coaching, from training with U.S. swimmers, and in some cases, from financial support provided by U.S. entities (athletic scholarships). They all turn around and then win medals for other countries.

A couple questions:
1) What do you think about this arrangement generally?
2) Is it of benefit or detriment to U.S. swimming to have these foreign athletes training and competing here?
3) Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?

I'm sure there are other issues, but these come directly to mind.

Tom Ellison
June 16th, 2005, 12:05 PM
"There are hundreds of millions of dollars of scholarships that aren't used every year so these few swimmers aren't denying anyone an education. "

NOT IN MEN'S SWIMMING IN THIS COUNTRY....SHOW ME ONE DOLLAR IN NCAA MEN'S SWIMMING THAT IS NOT USED....and I WILL WEAR A MOOSE SUIT TO WORLDS....A PINK MOOSE SUIT AT THAT....!

mattson
June 16th, 2005, 12:12 PM
I remember one year when Little Rock-Arkansas stacked their water polo team with international players. If you could get enough of their players ejected (by picking up 3 majors), they would have to put in their sole US player (with no one else on the bench).

Perfectly legal, but taken to that extreme, unsatisfying. (As in all things, moderation is best.)

hooked-on-swimming
June 16th, 2005, 12:31 PM
As a foreigner it sounds selfish when I hear people here whining about foreign swimmers.That is how the world is set up - the best will get the contract, pretty simple!They have something to offer and they will be offered a scholarship in exchange...I mean you want to be all fair but close your eyes on America "buying out" the best "brains" in different fields for its own economical growth.Heck, just from my home country Russia an estimated 100000 fine scientists(!!!) are working in the US contributing TONS to America!!!Are Russians whining about it?Well, actually, yes, because it is painfull to see your best to go and improve another country .But should they whine?Heck no!!!If those guys were provided with the living(money) US has to offer they would have never left...So America is using the rest of the world pretty darn well(which I have to admit is very smart!!!), so let's not talk about what's fair and what's not!And besides - NCAA would be nothing and would not draw as much attention if you couldn't recruit the best of the best!
P.S.Whining is for losers:if a US swimmer was better than his foreign counterpart he would have no problem getting a scholarship over that other guy!So keep on working rather than whining, that's what those guys who got scholarships did...

aquageek
June 16th, 2005, 12:43 PM
Originally posted by hooked-on-swimming
Heck, just from my home country Russia an estimated 100000 fine scientists(!!!) are working in the US contributing TONS to America!!!Are Russians whining about it?Well, actually, yes, because it is painfull to see your best to go and improve another country .But should they whine?Heck no!!!If those guys were provided with the living(money) US has to offer they would have never left...So America is using the rest of the world pretty darn well(which I have to admit is very smart!!!), so let's not talk about what's fair and what's not!

Tom and I have intellectual differences on this, which is fine, but you are flat wrong in your assertion. The sole reason US companies outsorce to foreign nations (India, China, Russia, Brazil) is the labor cost, not the brain power. We have the brains here. A US resource costs anywhere from 2.5 (India) to 8 times (Russian, China, Brazil) as much as these foreign sources (white collar labor). I deal with this every single day from a funding perspective and I assure you there is no reason other than economics driving this.

And, you are also incorrect that these outsourced folks are contributing solely to the US. It's very lucrative for the home countries, check out India. Countries are lining up to provide cheaper and cheaper labor to realize the vast economic benefits to the home countries economy.

It's also completely off-topic. The notion of outsourcing to cheap labor pools is not the same as foreign swimmers on US scholarships.

hooked-on-swimming
June 16th, 2005, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
Tom and I have intellectual differences on this, which is fine, but you are flat wrong in your assertion. The sole reason US companies outsorce to foreign nations (India, China, Russia, Brazil) is the labor cost, not the brain power. We have the brains here. A US resource costs anywhere from 2.5 (India) to 8 times (Russian, China, Brazil) as much as these foreign sources (white collar labor). I deal with this every single day from a funding perspective and I assure you there is no reason other than economics driving this.

And, you are also incorrect that these outsourced folks are contributing solely to the US. It's very lucrative for the home countries, check out India. Countries are lining up to provide cheaper and cheaper labor to realize the vast economic benefits to the home countries economy.

It's also completely off-topic. The notion of outsourcing to cheap labor pools is not the same as foreign swimmers on US scholarships.

Yes, GEEK, it could be off topic, but it is still the question of fair or not fair, which relates to the original topic being fair or not!You cannot draw the perfect line and that is what I am aiming at...
GEEK, talking about our brains here, I am not saying you do not have them here, but a lot of very bright people from Russia came here to work and it is not contributing Russia in any way, moreover it is a hit on a Russian economy, and it is not always labor cost, a lot of those people are paide HUGE!And then, just check out the medical field:how many Indian doctors do you see?Are they paid any less than American ones?I do not think so.Unless you are talking saving on labor cost a-la mexican dishwashers and such there really is not much saving there if you go inot white-collar world ...

aquageek
June 16th, 2005, 01:20 PM
Dima:

If you want to talk about foreigners who come here, it is a well known fact that these immigrants send a significant amount of money back to their families at home. Inflow of American money is massive in foreign countries from families with US workers.

It is absolutely no hit on the Russian ecomony especially when you consider these folks make more money here than in Russia, send a significant percentage home and are EMPLOYED in their desired field. How can this be any detriment to Russia? If Russia feels they are losing so much, close the borders back down and realize the incredible benefits of an underemployed white collar class.

I don't understand what you mean by Mexican dishwashers. I have no knowledge of the dishwashing profession. I can assure you there are huge differences in wages paid to foreign workers versus US workers, for skilled professions.

gull
June 16th, 2005, 01:31 PM
The Indian physcians who have completed their training and are practicing in the US are usually US citizens. It remains very difficult for foreign medical graduates to stay in this country unless they practice in an underserved area.

I believe public universities receive government funding which is derived from tax revenue. There may be limits on the number of scholarships offered to foreign students.

The term "mexican dishwasher" could be viewed as offensive.

hooked-on-swimming
June 16th, 2005, 01:58 PM
ok, GEEK, I will give you examples on how a good specialist can contribute to "a new home" and how by losing that specialist the country he moved from loses too.And I will even use swimming as an example!!!Andrey Vorontsov, one of the most brilliant swim coaches Russia had moved to UK to becomethat country's head coach.Since 2000 his swimmers produced 7 UK records, 3 women relay records, 4 junior records, 2 open water records.His swimmer Robert Francis got silver at 2004 worlds and 2003 Europian championship(both SCM) in 400IM.His swimer Alan Bircher is a frequent marathon medal swimmer...
Then there's Aleksandr Seleznev, another great soviet coach, who played a major role in success of Russian(or then CIS) swimmers in Barcelona in 1992.Well he went on to first become the head coach of the national team of Egypt.Under his command his swimmers won the junior all-African championship and then placed second in the main all-african swimming championship, success never known to Egyptian swimming.His swimmer Tamer Zenhum produced a 22.25 50 m freestyle, second time in the world back then (1995).Then Aleksandr moved from Egypt to become one of Croatia's lead coaches and Tamer Zenhum never matched his result again...While in Croatia under Aleksandr's coaching he had Gordan Kozulj to be world and europian champion in backstroke both SCM and LCM 2000-2001, Ante Mashkovich became the europian champ in 50m back in valencia, etc...
What I am trying to say here, that it's not that those guys did not have a job back home, they were just not offered the same as in other countries where they contributed a lot and by leaving Russia they sure did not contribute to Russian swimming, and they took their families with them, so their money is not going back to Russia to help its economy...And that is the case with most good specialists who leave Russia(to US or not)...

hooked-on-swimming
June 16th, 2005, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by gull80
The Indian physcians who have completed their training and are practicing in the US are usually US citizens. It remains very difficult for foreign medical graduates to stay in this country unless they practice in an underserved area.

I believe public universities receive government funding which is derived from tax revenue. There may be limits on the number of scholarships offered to foreign students.

The term "mexican dishwasher" could be viewed as offensive.

Well, yeah, they could be US citizens, but at some point they were not, they were the same foreigners...And that is exactly what I am talking about.Today you are a foreigner and tomorrow a US citizen.I am sure noone is whining about Lenny Kraizelburg winning olympic medals for USA, although you might be forgetting that he was the same foreigner(immigrated fromSoviet Union) at some point.

hooked-on-swimming
June 16th, 2005, 02:09 PM
My point here is:do not forget how and who built America.If you start thinking anti-foreign you pretty much bash yourself, because America is nothing but a concentration of the entire world, citizenship is just paperwork...

aquageek
June 16th, 2005, 02:41 PM
Citizenship is a heck of a lot more than paperwork.

It's very difficult to follow this thread. We start talking about foreign swimmers in the US, which was enjoyable.

I was trying to point out that foreign skilled (read white collar) labor is substantially cheaper than US labor. I also know there are many companies that offer foreign labor in the US for much cheaper than standard US labor rates.

I have no expertise in the area of Russian swimmers in the UK or foreign dishwashers, nor what that has to do with US college scholarships.

You are awfully tough on America, which is the best thing going.

knelson
June 16th, 2005, 02:50 PM
My opinion is no one is entitled to an athletic scholarship. The scholarships should go to the fastest and most talented athletes regardless of their country of origin.

Frank Thompson
June 16th, 2005, 04:01 PM
My opinion is that I don't think there will be any changes in the future regarding foreign swimmers that attend US Universities, receiving athletic scholarships, and compete at the NCAA's. The swimmers do benefit from US coaching, training with US swimmers, and competing in high level meet competitions. Then went the World Championships or Olympics come along they represent there home countries instead of the US where they train. This has been going on for 60 years and I don't see any change because of the history of this being done and no one having an issue with it. The NCAA, AAU, USA swimming actually create opportunties for this with US Open Competitions thru the years.

The first swimmer that I can remember was from Australia and swam for the University of Michigan back in the early 50's. His name was John Davies and he was an Olympic gold medalist. Rumor has it that he wanted to swim for the USA but the USOC did not want him to do so. He became a US citizen and is a Federal Court Judge. You can read about him at www.johndavies.com This is an example of someone that could not swim for the USA. Another example is Lenny Krayzelburg. He was not a US citizen when he started training with Mark Schubert at USC but became one and actually swam for the USA in the Olympics. These are 2 examples and I am sure there are countless others like this. I have read so many stories about swimmers with dual citizenship and some swim for the USA and some don't.

When I think of great swimmers in history that have swam for USA colleges but not the USA, the list is big. For example: Murray Rose, Jon Konrads, Kevin Berry, Juan Bello, Hans Fassncaht, Gunnar Larson, Santiago Esteva, David Wilke, Jonny Skinner, Mark Kerry, Anthony Nesty, and Martin Zubero just to name a few. Almosty every famous NCAA coach has recruited foreign swimmers and it was never an issue until recently. Now I know a lot of these people above were before the Title 9 days and there were more scholarships available so the % of foreign athletes was probably smaller. But I think that we have done it so long that I think it will be hard to change. Plus the USA has been so strong in swimming than any other country, that it never became an issue.

The only way I see it changing is that more foreign swimmers will go professional and go on the World Cup circuit. But if the coaches have skills to recruit those swimmers than I see it not changing. I think its a fact of life that foreign athletes like American sports programs. Look at the NBA and you see it happening there. I think the San Antonio Spurs have 5 foreign players on there squad.

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 16th, 2005, 04:06 PM
My brother-in-law went to Arizona State on a baseball scholarship. He recently got a donationn request to help the foundation that gives out scholarships. In the letter was mentioned all of the Olympian swimmers who had attended AState. He told me that none were fromthe US. He was furious.

Why not expand the number of scholarships given?

Frank Thompson
June 16th, 2005, 04:35 PM
Craiglll:

I just went to the ASU swim site because I was curious what the % of foreign swimmers were to the total team. On the men's team there was 1 foreigner out of 26 on the roster and he was a freshman. He didn't look to have significant international experience. On the women's team 2 out of 27 were foreign swimmers and both of those swimmers swam in the Olympics for there countries. Agnes Kovacs swam for Hungary and was the gold medalist in 2000 in the 200 Breast but got 4th at this Olympics. The other swimmer was Florencia Szigeti of Argentia who swam two events. In the 100 Free took 28th with a :56.71 and in the 200 Free took 25th with a 2:03.29. Significant? I don't think so because there are a lot of USA womens swimmers that could easily do those times. On the other hand Kovacs is a world class swimmer and has been for a long time and was on par with Beard and Kirk thru the years.

Frank Thompson
June 16th, 2005, 04:45 PM
The correct link for John Davies is www.johngdavies.com

hooked-on-swimming
June 16th, 2005, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by aquageek

I have no expertise in the area of Russian swimmers in the UK or foreign dishwashers, nor what that has to do with US college scholarships.

You are awfully tough on America, which is the best thing going.

You obviously did not read my post very carefully:I never mentioned a word about russian swimmers in UK, I was talking about Russian coaches working for other nations and you do not have to have any expertise in the dishwashing area(its not like I do) to know that American businesses have it set with cheap illegal mexican labor(and I am not trying to be offensive, it's just reality).I apologize if I came around being tough on America, which I really am not, just trying to stand up for foreigners as myself who came to this country with good intentions.After all you have to admit, America is a melting pot...I agree I kinda deviated from the main discussion but it is related in a way - it all to the question of fair or not fair...So I brought up the whole foreign thing trying to show that foregners coming here are not necessarily eating off "an American plate" and not giving anything back.Think about it this way:by setting the high-level standard of the competition more and more swimmers will try to reach higher goals in their training and match that kinda level.You did not think about the following:maybe America is ranked in swimming that high due to that constant drive for perfection that NCAA dictates its swimmers.We all know from simple training experience, that when you train with someone who is better that you are you try to match him or beat him, it gives you a stimulus to work out harder, maybe you are being negative to something that actually created American supremacy in swimming.

poolmonkey
June 16th, 2005, 05:22 PM
Recruiting foreign athletes is huge in all sports. When I played hockey in college, there were a number of players from Canada and even a couple from Sweden. But no one says anything as long as you are winning games.

I understand the bite about the scholarships going to these athletes, but when it comes to world class athletes, ones who represented their country at the Olympics or Worlds, I think it would be great to have the opportunity to swim with those people. And hopefully it generates more interest in our sport and gets people into the stands.

They are getting their piece of the American pie as my polish ancestors did and it's still difficult for them to be in a completely unfamiliar place.

Blue Horn
June 16th, 2005, 07:00 PM
US Citizenship is much more than just paper work, and I take great offense to that statement. Unfortunately, many immigrants probably have similar feelings and is the reason for many of the problems in America. America is built upon specific principles and beliefs and it has made this country great. Immigrants that have bought into these principles and beliefs have made this country great. Immigrants that seek to turn America into just another country indistinguishable from the rest of the world will be its downfall.

My grandfather's (my mother's father) family came here from Poland and Russia, but became proud Americans that readily assimilated into this country. They came here because this is the greatest most compassionate country that has ever existed. Does America have its problems? Of course it does, but I am sick and tired of America supporting the rest of the world while watching others attacking our country trying to bring us down instead of trying to climb up to our level.

As far as the US needing brain power, that is laughable. If it wasn't for America all of these people you refer to would not have the opportunities before them. It is not as if they would create the resources that they have out of thin air and poof it would all go to the country of their origin. Sorry, it just doesn't work that way.

Hook'em
Blue

Tom Ellison
June 16th, 2005, 07:01 PM
"The scholarships should go to the fastest and most talented athletes regardless of their country of origin."

And should USA based workers/people pay for that.....? If so WHY?

Blue Horn
June 16th, 2005, 07:03 PM
Oh, on the issue of foriegn athletes, I think they should get the scholarships. It increases that variety and intellectual experiences of the students attending the university and expands the influence of the university further than it once would.

We need to get rid if title 9. That would increase the number of scholarships for everyone, not just men.

Hook'em
Blue

thisgirl13
June 16th, 2005, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by Blue Horn
America is built upon specific principles and beliefs and it has made this country great. Immigrants that have bought into these principles and beliefs have made this country great. Immigrants that seek to turn America into just another country indistinguishable from the rest of the world will be its downfall.

My grandfather's (my mother's father) family came here from Poland and Russia. They came here because this is the greatest most compassionate country that has ever existed.

Well put, Blue, although you wouldn't be able to tell America's compassion from this thread.

It's funny, because I thought the United States was formed out of opression and intolerance. At least, that's the reason my grandparents emigrated from Ireland. Well, that, and lack of food.

I feel badly for people from other countries trying to get "their piece of American pie" as it was put, because the people who founded this country fought, and gave up so much to get ahold of that pie, and now they get to sit back and watch us hoard it. So much for the American spirit. I say that international students have every right to the scholarships offered by the universities they attend, and if they are good enough to make the world stage and compete for their home countries, hooray for them. Except England. I don't like them. It's an Irish thing. :p

And Dima, Geek, you guys are way out of line. There was so much argument about keeping on topic with the threads, and now you guys are turning this topic about international students and swimming scholarships into the next Cold War. Go fight on the Republicans' chat room.

aquageek
June 16th, 2005, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by thisgirl13
And Dima, Geek, you guys are way out of line. There was so much argument about keeping on topic with the threads, and now you guys are turning this topic about international students and swimming scholarships into the next Cold War. Go fight on the Republicans' chat room.

I'm a democrat.

BTW - I agreed with all your points. Dima was the one who felt US citizenship is just a piece of paper. Tell that to our troops in Iraq who are fighting for Dima.

Sabretooth Tiger
June 16th, 2005, 08:09 PM
Here are a few of my random thoughts:

1. International students improve the diversity of college communities and the greater the interaction between students of different cultural, socio-economic, religious, and so forth backgrounds the better the college experience. This in turn pays off in a benefit to society and (hopefully) improved cross cultural understanding.

2. Eliminate all athletic scholarships. Make all scholarships available based on academic potential and need, making the driving ambition providing access to a college education to someone who otherwise might not have that access . . . not on winning NCAA chanpionships.

3. As a corollary of the above, let all student athletes be just that, student athletes just like they are in Div III who play for love of the game.

Aside from my above set forth pipe dreams, I see no harm in giving athletic scholarships to international students, if we're going to give them for sports, then give them to the best/fastest/strongest. As I said above, international students enhance the college community and the college experience for all by exposing students to different cultures. On the other hand, restricting scholarships based on national origin strikes me as a very negative value, smacking of xenophobia.

And Title iX has done an awful lot of good, but that's another discussion.

I guess that's more than my 2 cents . . . .

carl

laineybug
June 16th, 2005, 08:23 PM
I'm against non citizens getting the scholarships. It is American money and it should be spent on Americans 1st! It is the same thing as in our personal lives, you take care of your own first, THEN you help others. What person in their right mind would give away their money and let their family starve?

Tom Ellison
June 16th, 2005, 08:42 PM
Elaine....Well said....

hrietz
June 16th, 2005, 09:39 PM
Originally posted by thisgirl13
What about the US swimmers that spend time abroad, swimming in places like Australia? Isn't that sort of the same thing?


NO IT'S NOT THE SAME THING. Michael Phelps training for a couple of weeks in AUS is not the same thing. I'm sure that he paid his own way.

I'd like for you to name one member of our national team or even one of our Olympic medalists in years past who trained in a foreign country at a university on a full scholarship...

I think foreign athletes training here on US scholarships is WRONG. If they want to train here then they should either pay for it themselves or become a US citizen. I especially have a problem with the state schools because that means that it's my tax dollars going to support this...

thisgirl13
June 16th, 2005, 09:43 PM
Elaine,

I'm going to assume that by "taking care of ours first", you mean the admittance of American students to American universities, and that "then helping others" refers to the international students in the universities.

As far as taking care of ours, I think we've more than got that covered, thanks to the US citizen or permanent resident-only requirement for the Free Application for Federal Student Aid. That provides our American students with the Pell Grant, SEOG Grant, Stafford Loan, Perkins Loan, PLUS Loan, and Federal Work-Study Program. I'm sure y'all have heard of those.

The reason international students are using athletic scholarships to get into American universities is because that's the only way they can pay for it. If you want more Americans to get the scholarships, maybe the government should consider opening the FAFSA to every student.

That is, unless you think only Americans are entitled to furthering their education.

And for those of you who think international students should become permanent residents if they want to swim for our schools, I want you to think about moving permanently to someplace like, oh, Japan, and leaving your family and friends behind. It's not like they can just pack up their families and bring them here, because you're right, US citizenship isn't just paperwork.

And who are you kidding by thinking that international students are only in American universities to swim? Don't be ignorant. I'm pretty sure the three international swimmers at ASU aren't getting Speedo endorsements. But I can tell you they're getting an education. Cuz face it, how many swimmers do you know, American or not, who are swimming their four years of elegibility and then dropping out? THEY AREN'T, although, if you want to talk wasting money, let's talk about the losers I went to school with who attended one big party for three years on the government, and ended up flunking out their junior year, or majoring in pre-law, and then getting rejected by every law school in the country because of their 2.1 GPA.

But I guess it's better to have American students wasting American money, than to have non-Americans actually using it, right?

Geek, my sincerest apologies for calling you a Republican. :D

Sabretooth Tiger
June 16th, 2005, 09:46 PM
Why would you assume it's tax dollars at work rather than alumni donations? That is certainly the case at private universities. Moreover, big public universities get big bucks from alumni too . . .

And do we oppose foreign aid to alleviate starvation in Africa on the grounds that there's still poverty here in the U.S.???

just asking

Glenn
June 16th, 2005, 10:11 PM
Whew...not sure I want to wade in on this one, but here goes. When I first read this thread I automatically thought about Division lll swimming. No scholarships, just school and swimming. Remember school? I thought that was what college was about. Not too many people out there who are making a living as a swimmer after college.

Also, regarding the olympics, for me it's about the best swimmers not which country wins. I really dislike the emphasis put on which country won the most medals. Sure I am proud of Americans for doing well, but don't you like to see good swimming? Remember Michael Gross, Murray Rose, Inge De Bruin? Tell me you didn't enjoy their triumphs regardless of their home country.

Glenn:)

LindsayNB
June 16th, 2005, 10:22 PM
Maybe it would be useful to start by figuring out the intended purpose of athletic scholarships and then figure out if giving them to foreign students makes sense.

If athletic scholarships are meant to attract top notch athletes to contribute to the school's athletic program then giving them to foreign students makes perfect sense.

If you believe that athletic scholarships are purely a charity and that the relationship between school and athlete is all one way with the student getting all the benefits and the school receiving nothing in return, and you also believe that charity is for "your own" first then athletic scholarships should only be awarded to "your own". Probably state schools should only give them to people from that state according to the tax arguments. Of course, you have to wonder why you would have athletic scholarships at all, it would probably make more sense to put the money into academic scholarships.

cinc3100
June 16th, 2005, 10:29 PM
Well, most of the European and Aussie programs are good and don't need to train in the US to be a good swimmer. Its the good third world swimmers who need training in the US or some other first world country, remember back in 1988 when that South America black swimmer beat Blondi in the 100 meter butterfly. Many good latin and Asian swimmers start training in high school in the US since their programs are not that strong. So, I think that western European and Aussie swimmers should train in their own country. I admired Michael Gross who stayed always in Germany instead of training in the US.

laineybug
June 16th, 2005, 11:43 PM
Yes I want the money I pay in taxes (states and federal) that goes to colleges or universities and to grand/scholarship programs to support American students FIRST ! But note when I said you take care of your OWN first, I also said THEN you help others.

I also want the money I give to my alma mater to be spent in a way I agree with. As a matter of fact the last time UGA called to solicit a donation I earmarked my money for minority scholarships rather than specifying my donation for my graduate department (as has been my custom) because I disagree with the direction my the department has taken in the last few years.

I feel for others around the world who can not afford to attend an American university without support, but I'm sure there are insitutes of higher education in most of their countries they could afford to attend, or attend for free. There were a lot of colleges and universities here in the US I couldn't afford to attend when I was in school, so what did I do? Demand the world give me an education that it owed me? No, I found one I could afford to attend and PAID MY OWN WAY THROUGH SCHOOL BY WORKING TWO PART TIME JOBS AND BORROWING MONEY. Least you think I have no idea of what it means to be poor........ when I moved to Athens to attend grad school at UGA, I was a single mom with 300.00 to my name AND no job prospects.

Scholarship money, whether it is academic or athletic, should go to Americans first. If there is money left over, or perhaps as Rob suggested a small percentage of all scholarship money, should be offered to foreign students.

Lainey

hooked-on-swimming
June 17th, 2005, 12:40 AM
Originally posted by aquageek
I'm a democrat.

BTW - I agreed with all your points. Dima was the one who felt US citizenship is just a piece of paper. Tell that to our troops in Iraq who are fighting for Dima.

Fighting for me?What a bunch of nonsense!!!I am the first one to say that I hate the whole war idea in general and war in Iraq makes no sense and kids dying there will not satisfy any "good intentions".Honestly, GEEK, you are so good turning tables around and blaiming(in this case me) everything on someone else.Honestly, all I hear here is:America is the best, we are the best, everyone else sucks, we can rule the world, we decide what we do...Sick!!!Why do you think America has such a reputation among other nations?I was not trying to bring down America by any means, I believe in this country and that is why I am here.IAnd by saying that citizenship is paperwork I meant to say that there is a fine line between a foreigner and a citizen here, because today you can be a foreigner(still believing in America's ideas) and tomorrow a citizen...So are those two different people?And as an immigrant I take offense to the whole "the rest of the world doesn't mean sh*t" kinda attitude, because then I think - well, why in the world did I come here if I'd be poked at as just a foreigner who came from somewhere else?Hey, ther's life outside of the US and actually very light and interesting in many countries, so let us not talk about them as just "the rest".How can you ask for respect if you don't give respect to others?
P.S. Well, enough of that, I am not going to argue, what is the point?I think I will find some other site to go to, 'cause I feel hostility here whenever I try to keep the face for other countries.Talk about hospitability and compassion mentioned here...Farewell to everyone!

laineybug
June 17th, 2005, 12:58 AM
This is certainly an interesting thread and I regret that I won't be around until Sunday to follow it. However, I don't regret it that much since I will be running the timing console for a big meet my DGD's team is hosting. Good swims and fast times to all of the athletes!

Sabretooth Tiger
June 17th, 2005, 03:51 AM
Lainey writes: "Scholarship money, whether it is academic or athletic, should go to Americans first. If there is money left over, or perhaps as Rob suggested a small percentage of all scholarship money, should be offered to foreign students.[/I]

Why? What is so magical about being "American?" Other than for those who moved here and were naturalized isn't it just really an accident of birth? Why draw artificail boundaries?

Here is an example of how arbitrary and silly it is . . . .

In 1920, my dad was born in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. His dad, an American citizen, and child of Norwegian immigrants, moved to Canada to serve in the Canadian Navy to fight in World War I. He did so before America got involved because he thought it was the right thing to do while Wilson pursued an isolationist/pacifist strategy that ultimately failed.

So my dad was born Canadian. His family moved to Boston in the late 20's. My dad grew up in the U.S. and then joined the U.S. Navy, fought in WW II and was granted citizenship after fighting in the Pacific as an Aviation Machinist's Mate First Class and serving as a flight engineer on PBYs.

So all of this "American's First" rhetoric kind of pisses me off. My dad, as a Canadian citizen, was an all state tackle (both ways) at Boston's Weymouth High in '37 and '38 who was offered a full ride football scholarship to Boston University. He didn't take it as it was the depression and he needed to go to work to help support his family. Then, still as a Canadian citizen, he joined the U.S. Navy and fought in the Pacific theatre to preserve democracy for the world . . . and to defeat despots . . . for the world . . .

So who among you thinks that in offering my dad a football scholarship Boston Univeristy was out of line by not serving "American's first?"

So think about that before you adopt the knee jerk "american's first" attitude . . . we are all citizens of the world . . . where we live, and the citizenship we enjoy, is for most of us an accident of birth. The real question is "are we making the world a better place?" Are we contributing? I have to think that spending time erecting walls and creating boundaries is wasted. It's tearing them down that makes the world a better place to live. I want to know why citizens of the country that was the primary force in tearing down the Berlin Wall would want to expend energy in building walls within our own boundaries.

Reasonable people can disagree . . . regardless, I hope that some find this food for thought,

carl

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 05:21 AM
Most of the best colleges and universities owe a great deal of their reputation to their diverse student body. Saying scholarships should be for Americans first is laughable. College is about broadening your horizons, not sitting in class staring at a bunch of folks exactly like yourself.

Close your borders, close your mind. This is a global economy these days.

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 05:26 AM
Originally posted by hooked-on-swimming
And by saying that citizenship is paperwork I meant to say that there is a fine line between a foreigner and a citizen here, because today you can be a foreigner(still believing in America's ideas) and tomorrow a citizen...

As long as you continue to believe citizenship is a piece of paper and the line between an foreigner and a citizen is a fine one, you will never be a true American or understand what being a citizen is all about.

And, you don't have to support the war but our troops are there fighting for us. That's what you don't get about being a citizen.

justforfun
June 17th, 2005, 09:32 AM
I've read everyone else's posts with great interest. Here are my thoughts...

I have no problem with foreign swimmers training in the U.S., with U.S. coaches, and even attending U.S. Universities and competing at NCAA's. I don't believe, however, that we as U.S. citizens should be financially supporting them in these endeavors at the expense of other U.S. swimmers. The way I see it, this support happens in two ways: 1) U.S. tax dollars that support public institutions end up supporting athletic departments and hence, athletic scholarships; 2) other students who pay tuition at these schools (mostly U.S. citizens) end up supporting athletic scholarships for foreigners because tuition is part of the university's budget and makes its way into the athletic budget. It is extremely rare for an athletic department to be completely self-supporting by way of donations and athletic revenue. U.S taxpayers and those paying college tuition have no choice (they are forced) to support these foreign athletes. That's not right.

Here are a couple examples. Arizona has a men's roster of 24, 6 of whom are foreigners. That's 25% of the roster! I have no way of knowing who is receiving scholarships, but I think it's a safe assumption that more of the U.S. swimmers are walk-ons than the foreigners...the foreign swimmers wouldn't be there if they hadn't been recruited and put on scholarship? So, they're likely taking up close to 1/2 the athletic scholarships in that program.

California-Berkely has a men's roster of 33, 9 of whom are foreigners (if you count Milorad Cavic, whose hometown is listed as Anaheim, CA, but who represents another country in international competition). That's 27% of the roster. Again, they're likely taking up around 1/2 the athletic scholarships.

The idealistic solution, as stated by others, is to eliminate athletic scholarships all together. That way, those who simply want an education will still attend. Those who don't, won't. Foreigners who want to come here to train will pay their own way.

I understand the arguments about diversity, global economy, helping countries with less developed swimming programs, etc. But, we're not talking about charity here. Charity is voluntary. We're talking about providing opportunity for an education AND athletic competition. It makes no sense to me that U.S. citizens are forced to provide financial support for the training, coaching, etc. for athletes who intend to compete for another country in international competition. I doubt any other country in the world would consider doing this for a U.S. swimmer, unless he/she intended to compete for their country.

I would prefer that all tax- and tuition-supported athletic scholarships go to U.S. citizens. As this is probably unrealistic, I would support some cap (perhaps 10%), as Rob suggested.

To see the rosters I referred to, check out http://calbears.collegesports.com/sports/m-swim/mtt/cal-m-swim-mtt.html

and

http://www.arizonaathletics.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=1600&KEY=&SPID=525&SPSID=8321

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 10:01 AM
Education as charity, that's new to me. I guess that means for poorer folks or unemployed folks whose children attend public schools, that is charity also.

Rob Copeland
June 17th, 2005, 10:25 AM
Originally posted by botterud
Why? What is so magical about being "American?" Other than for those who moved here and were naturalized isn't it just really an accident of birth? Why draw artificail boundaries?
I don’t think magic has much to do with being an American, but we are each entitled an opinion.

As for drawing artificial boundaries, while I’ll agree that the border between the US and Canada and the US and Mexico are somewhat arbitrary, they are both pretty well fixed by law. And can we agree that the US’s eastern and western boundaries are more than artificial? But I digress; this thread started out discussing NCAA (the “N” stands for National, which in this case is the United States) and the discussion is taking place on the USMS Discussion Forum (the US stands for United States).



Originally posted by LindsayNB
If athletic scholarships are meant to attract top notch athletes to contribute to the school's athletic program then giving them to foreign students makes perfect sense.
Absolutely! And we should also drop the student from student/athlete, allowing the colleges to recruit these top athletes without worrying about things such as education. Let’s turn our college athletic programs into junior programs for the NBA and NFL. And while you’re at it why don’t we pay these athletes.

But, these are way off the original topic “2) Is it of benefit or detriment to U.S. swimming to have these foreign athletes training and competing here?” Personally, I see both benefits and detriments, must of which have already been stated numerous times in this thread. One detriment that has yet to be mentioned is the impact of the talent drain in Irish, English and South African national college swimming. What damage is being done to the quality of competition at the FCAA (French College Athletic Association)?

justforfun
June 17th, 2005, 10:25 AM
Aquageek, you're extending what I said to encompass the entire public education system in the U.S. Don't generalize. I wasn't referring to poor or unemployed people in our country. I'm talking about non-U.S. citizens whose own countries have their own systems for providing education. Yes, presumably foreign swimmers attending U.S. universities on athletic scholarships receive an education here. But, I don't think it's a stretch to say they aren't here for the academics alone. Most of them are here to benefit from U.S. coaches and facilities in order to improve their swimming. For us to support that financially...yes, I consider it charity.

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 10:41 AM
So odd that by helping other nations improve the educational status by educating a few people you consider this charity. Ultimately, US educated folks worldwide benefits us much more that the few thousand dollars we spend on a 4 year degree. Time to look at the big picture. There are many world leaders and dignitaries educated in the US. If you don't think there's a benefit from that, then you are wrong.

It continues to amaze me that people want to close the doors of this country like we are still in the 1800s. You don't go through a single day without tangible benefits from US education being applied to goods and services produced abroad and consumed here. And, yet, you consider this charity, and not a benefit. We live in a global economy. For us to maintain our supremecy in it we have to be willing to be the most active participant and that includes educating a few folks.

justforfun
June 17th, 2005, 10:52 AM
I doubt the world leaders and dignitaries to whom you refer attended U.S. Universities on swimming scholarships.

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 11:03 AM
Are only swimming scholarships charity? Did you ever see Boris Yeltsin swim? Man, he could really move in the 50 fly.

Sabretooth Tiger
June 17th, 2005, 11:08 AM
OK, so it seems that the positive attributes of diversity in a college student body isn't gettting much traction here, so let's try another approach . . .

If I'm a college swim coach, my goal is to win conference and win NCAAs. That type of success will provide me with greater job security, improved income, will help draw faster athletes to a winning program and will help attract alumni dollars, which will, in turn, help the program.

Soooo . . . . who am I going to give my scholarships to? The fastest swimmers and I don't give a rip where they're from. I'll take an NCAA championship breaststroker from the Ukraine over the guy/girl from Mission Viejo that will finish 8th. Because s/he swims for my U.S. based college s/he will be the National Collegiate Athletic Association champion. There are no citizenship requirements/restrictions to participate in NCAA sports.

When s/he particiapates in international meets where team association is determined by citizenship, s/he will represent the Ukraine. The fact that s/he trains and gets an athletic scholarship and good old "United States College" doesn't matter a whit because the goal of teams, whether college, club, or country based, is to win and to have the best and fastest athletes.

Now if the goal of United States collegiate swimming was to be a farm/development team for the U.S. National team, then people who would want to deny athletic scholarships to non-citizens might have a point . . . but that is NOT the goal of collegiate swimming is it?

I'm just sayin' . . .

carl

Tom Ellison
June 17th, 2005, 11:20 AM
Just for fun...! Right on all points IMHO.

justforfun
June 17th, 2005, 11:31 AM
Geek:
The point you continue to make about educating people from other countries eventually benefitting us in the U.S. is well taken. I agree with almost everthing you say. But, you continue to give examples outside of the topic of giving swimming scholarships to foreign athletes. Perhaps a few of these individuals will receive an excellent education, go home and improve things in some way in their own countries, and eventually this will benefit the U.S. due to improved relations, trade, or some other fashion. Perhaps I'm too cynical in believing that all it really does is take scholarships away from U.S. swimmers and win medals for other countries.

What I wish you would respond to is the point that swimming scholarships are extremely scarce in the U.S. I might feel differently if each swimming program had 30 scholarships to give. I have no problem with foreign swimmers attending U.S. universities, getting an education, and competing at NCAA's. I just think that the vast majority (90% or more) of the available swimming scholarships should go to U.S. athletes. I don't think programs like Cal and Arizona should be able to give 1/2, more or less, away to non-U.S. citizens. What do you think?

Sabretooth Tiger
June 17th, 2005, 11:43 AM
Cal and Arizona should be able to give scholarships to the most deserving, qualified athletes consistent with NCAA rules, state and federal law, and the institutions' guidelines for delivery, whatever those rules, laws and guidelines may be . . . which do not appear to include citizenship as a determining factor.

Ultimately, it should be up the institutions and their respective constitiuencies (sp?) to make the call.

nkace
June 17th, 2005, 11:47 AM
Can I just remind everybody that America is not would it would be today w/out having people from all over.
Have we forgotten how this country was founded?
I sometimes can't stand this America is holy-er than thou routine-kind of sickening.

justforfun
June 17th, 2005, 12:15 PM
botterud--I'm not saying Cal or Arizona has broken any rules...they're doing exactly what you say, which is going out and getting the best talent regardless of the country of origin. They've been very successful doing it. I would rather see those coaches recuit promising U.S. athletes and develop them into elite swimmers! I think the rules should change.

nkace--I'm not sure if you're referring to anything I've said, but I don't think people have forgotten that the country is made up of immigrants. But, the immigrants became U.S. citizens! With a few exceptions, the foreign swimmers we're talking about here have not done that.

I don't think it's a holier-than-thou attitude to recognize that we've got some of the best facilities and coaches in the world and that others in the world want to take advantage of it.

Tom Ellison
June 17th, 2005, 12:16 PM
"I sometimes can't stand this America is holy-er than thou routine-kind of sickening."

Gosh, I have not read that into these posts.....

For myself, Justforfun....and a few others ....the point it...USA, AMERICAN SWIMMERS have very few opportunities to get scholarships....so why on earth should our hard earned money be spent on scholarships for foreign swimmers while OUR swimmers go without....Dah…..

This has nothing to do with the USA being the best....or….. who founded our great nation....it has to do with common sense....Common sense for me dictates that I am going to make sure the kid next door or the kids on my son's swim team gets a scholarship to swim at a university or college funded by Americans…. before...giving that money to a foreign swimmer. Heck, where was that foreign swimmer and HIS countries support all the years that USA kid swam HERE IN THE USA....

Rob Copeland
June 17th, 2005, 12:20 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
Are only swimming scholarships charity? Did you ever see Boris Yeltsin swim? Man, he could really move in the 50 fly.

But, Reagan could kick his butt in anything 100 or over:)


Originally posted by nkace
Can I just remind everybody that America is not would it would be today w/out having people from all over.
Have we forgotten how this country was founded?
I sometimes can't stand this America is holy-er than thou routine-kind of sickening.

And to all you human beings out there have you forgotten where you came from? If it wasn’t for pond scum and swamp gasses billions of years ago the human race would have never been founded! I sometimes can't stand mankind is holier than thou routine-kind of sickening.

Are we really that much better then the pond scum?

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 12:38 PM
I sure would like some tangible information that shows promising US swimmers aren't going to college because of foreign swimmers. I think it's being blown way out of proportion.

As to this notion that US hard earned dollars are being wasted on foreigners, that is short sighted. Private schools can do what they want. Public schools also solicit donations from individuals and corporations not housed in the US. Also, many foreign firms and individuals from foreign countries that are here pay US taxes that support public universities. Colleges and University licensed products are sold worldwide. In the case of my U, those proceeds go directly to scholarships (or used to anyway). It's awfully hard to find a US only dollar anywhere these days.

TheGoodSmith
June 17th, 2005, 01:43 PM
Tom Ellison is dead on. If you want a college scholarship from an American University, show commitment and get citizenship. Otherwise pay your own way to the school and swim as a walk-on. US dollars should go to US citizens who will utlimately represent the US in the Olympics AGAINST other athletes from other countries. I'm sick of the US training other countries athletes to kick our own asses on the world stage. The days are over when the US ruled every event in the Olympics like the 1970s. We need to take these countries "down" in Bejing in the 400 free relay. We don't need to stab ourselves in the back and show them how to beat us at our best game.

Better yet.... how about a "thank you" or acknowledgment from the South African relay for their coaching and training in the US after they won their gold medal......... I heard nothing in 2004 from any foreign athlete that trained in the US in terms of thanks or appreciation for a concious decision to leave their own country for something better in the US.

Fact is, most coaches pull in international talent because they fail on the US domestic front in terms of their recruiting endeavors. Ande is right... Eddie Reese has rarely if ever given US money to foreigner swimmers. Why train the enemy that you'll end up facing every 4 years? It's ludicrous !

US kids (and US citizens) should get US money. Foreigners can come swim and join us if they want to in lane 8, but do it on their own dime. We're talking about athletics.... NOT academics here. Don't confuse the two. Competition and winning has NOTHING to do with a well rounded campus.

Sound selfish...... hah...... try winning the 400 free relay at the Olympics.

When you hit the water representing your country, it's a war.


John Smith

Tom Ellison
June 17th, 2005, 02:09 PM
Mr. Smith....Mr. Moose, Ralph or I could not have said that any better if we would of tried....Job well done--and dead on! NEXT....

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 02:49 PM
Good Smith:

If only US kids should get US money, should we exclude making foreigners pay property taxes since property taxes, for the most part, fund local education?

And, just because an athlete doesn't thank the US in the 15 seconds he's interviewed post race, does that mean he/she isn't greatly appreciative? Maybe the next time someone who trains in the US but wins a gold medal for a foreign country is interviewed post race, they shouldn't thanks their parents or coaches but take the time to sincerely thank US taxpayers. I know that's who my kids will be thanking in the event of athletic success.

It still cracks me up that people refer to sports as war. Sports is a cakewalk, not war.

If competition and winning have nothing to do with a well rounded campus, why do all universities place such high emphasis on extra curricular sporting activities? Why even have IM on campus?

thisgirl13
June 17th, 2005, 03:12 PM
*TIME OUT*

We interrupt this cable TV debate for a short commercial.

I would like to thank JustforFun for providing this board with a very lively, spirited debate, that at least most of us seem to be enjoying.

You're right; everyone's entitled to their own opinion. I, for one, enjoy seeing what other opinions there are besides my own.

Things in my life have been rather sh*tcanned right now. You have all provided me with some much-needed distraction and entertainment this week. I thank you for that.

Okay, back to the debate. In the words of the famous Mr. Moose/Ralph/Tom (now wearing the pink moose suit, I imagine):

"NEXT"................:D

TheGoodSmith
June 17th, 2005, 03:19 PM
Aquageek:

Look.... you're talking to a raving liberal democrat. Don't even try to preach to me about the goodness of extending the niceties of our economy and lifestyle (including sharing taxes !) with aliens.... or shall I more nicely refer to them as foreigners.

As for athletes thanking someone post performance, Hell, I'd be impressed if the South Africans just thanked their American coach on TV to acknowledge their US presence.... no such luck...... it was a pure and righteous South African victory all on there own, based on the talent, facilities and coaching skills of South Africa.

The issue isn't about being nice to your fellow international man when you are competing in athletics. That stuff is off the pool deck. Athletics at an NCAA division I level or US Sr. Nationals level is measured ultimately by how much you improve, how you can kick ass, and how close you get to 1st place..... not last place. These qualities don't always square with the goals and priorities of academic life and teh so called sharing of the "American dream". Foreigners are free to attend schools in the US. Don't make my son go to his 2nd best college choice because they ran out of scholarship money because english is a practically a second language in the lockeroom.

If we were competing against Mars and Jupiter, I'd invite all the greatest talent in the globe to the US to train and give them lots of scholarship money and general bribery..... Such is not the case.

Look.... you go train with your enemies and make them better and better. I'll go train just with the people who will ultimately be on the relay that represents my country. We'll see who fairs best in the end.

Oh yeah........ you think sports is a cakewalk? ....... try training in Phelps lane for a few weeks....... let alone try to beat him.


John Smith

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 03:30 PM
Sports is a leisure time activity, war is not. I don't think your son, if he's good enough for a D-I scholarship, will be turned down for a foreigner. That's far fetched. Any swimmer who can get a D-1 scholarship can probably go to any school they want.

Funny how liberal democrats these days want to close the borders but republicans believe in free trade, patriotism and a free market economy. I guess we shold probably set up another gov't program to dictate who goes to college and who gets the scholarship cause that certainly works well. Makes me wonder why I'm still a registered democrat.

Alicat
June 17th, 2005, 03:40 PM
Originally posted by hooked-on-swimming
I mean you want to be all fair but close your eyes on America "buying out" the best "brains" in different fields for its own economical growth.

...So America is using the rest of the world pretty darn well(which I have to admit is very smart!!!), so let's not talk about what's fair and what's not!And besides - NCAA would be nothing and would not draw as much attention if you couldn't recruit the best of the best!


OK hear is my 2 cents...

If we did not have an international representation in the States than the Ivy League in New England/Big Universities would loose a big percentages of the great minds at these institutions.

Our swimming program has been awesome for so long that it's a sign of our greatness as a swimming superpower --Russian and China are teaming up to go against the US at the next Olympics... per a swimming article off the USA Swimming web site, and Australia is our major competition after "The Berlin Wall" has gone down in GDR and drugs testing has increased so fast.

We are a very rich country and we LOVE that about ourselves --generally speaking that is. It takes a lot courage to go somewhere else to live, go to school, or train. It says a lot about how we are perceived by others and our lifestyle.

If non American student athletes are receiving scholarships for American universities that are funded by public dollars then there maybe an argument about that. However, private schools can and usually do, spend scholarship monies on who/how they see fit. There is no problem in my view with this practice. It may not be just about the swimming program, but other (albeit political) reasons not to exclude kids studying their butts off or swimming there butts off to get into an American college or university.

Finally, going back to a really simplistic and elementary ideal: Are we all not immigrants and that is the backbone of how this county works?

TheGoodSmith
June 17th, 2005, 04:00 PM
Aquageek:

Train in a top 5 division I school for a few weeks and tell me if you still think sports is a lovely leisure time activity. I can assure you that 14,000+ a day plus weights is closer to a prisoner of war sentence than you might think.

For you to say that it would be far fetched for my son to be turned down from his 1st choice school because of a forienger is far fetched represents how little you know about the limited number of scholarships that NCAA mens swimming. It's a joke how few there are available.

Let me help you a bit..... simply total the number of foreign athletes at NCAA Div1 championships. That's at least how many scholarships that could have gone to US other citizens. Most of the top NCAA Div. I athletes are on a full ride or something close to it.

Try to twist my words... you will not. I never said anything about not letting foriegners go to our schools or crap about "protecting our borders". I said I dont want to better their training and abilities in athletics at our own expense. It's suicidal.


John Smith

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 04:42 PM
So, just so I get it, obtaining a free education, including housing, food, books, etc and being allowed to do what you love is really just like being a prisoner of war. I actually have family members who were in a war, not a war as you describe as going to college for free, but a real war where there are guns and death, and I can assure you that college life is a touch easier, in their opinions. I also train with a bunch of former D-1 college swimmer at big time universities. I've never heard them complain about their college experience. Matter of fact, they seem to think their "prison sentence" was actually fun. They wear their college training as a badge of honor, not some war wound.

Your encouragement to high school athletes by describing a coveted D-1 sports scholarship as being the victim of a war crime sure is motivating, well done sir!

And, for further clarity, the suicidal demise of American higher education, universally regarded as the best in the world end-to-end, is due to us giving a few dozen or hundred top tier international athletes scholarships.

Who woulda thunk it - college life is like being in a Vietnamese prison camp and American colleges are committing suicide by having an international and diverse student body.

newmastersswimmer
June 17th, 2005, 04:47 PM
Well, Knowing me by now on this discussion board.....I feel an obligation to add my two cents worth here (it's such a lively debate and all!)....only this time it's very brief.....I hate to have to admit this...but I am in 100% agreement with both the Moose Man and the GoodSmith on this one......And GoodSmith is a liberal Democrat too huh?.....What?....Stop it!.....Your ruining that Evil ex UT Swimmer image for me that I was getting so attached to around here!


Newmastersswimmer

TheGoodSmith
June 17th, 2005, 04:50 PM
You've obviously been a real tough competitor in the pool in the past. Sounds like you've trained with the "best of the best" and have enjoyed your liesurely sport tremendously.... :-)

I commend you on your overall knowledge of competitive collegiate swimming sir.


John Smith

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 04:55 PM
Might I suggest if you are no longer enjoying spending your precious free time swimming and consider it warlike toroture activity, maybe you should find a more pleasurable way to spend your time. Might I suggest protecting our beloved public institutions from their suicidal tendencies.

I will tell all the youth on our swim team that swimming is no fun! It is worse than war, it should be terrible! After all, sports is all about not enjoying oneself.

Kellen Winslow, Jr referred to college football as war once also and was universally lampooned. He then signed a multi-million dollar contract, what a war wound! Then, he bought a motorcycle, not a good idea in retrospect.

newmastersswimmer
June 17th, 2005, 05:02 PM
I for one am getting sick and tired of this attitude so many have taken since 911 (I guess?)....where people have to take such simple innocent metaphors like comparing sports contests to War so literally.....Please lighten up.....You sound like Jerry Faldwell over there preaching that garbage...So he said the 400 free relay at the Olympics was war.....what's the big deal.....Why do people like you (i.e. geek) then have to remind us what "real war" is all about?....I think we have some idea of the difference between real war and a competitive war such as in a sports setting....GEEZ!....Nobody ever got so wound up before 911 and Iraq about such a simple metaphor.......Enough is Enough already!!


Newmastersswimmer

TheGoodSmith
June 17th, 2005, 05:04 PM
You are finally getting it. Why do you think people retire from the sport of swimming?......... they get burnt out. I left that type of incredible training regime in 1984. Now I swim for fun.... I grew tired of it the last part of my career. It's beyond work, it's a lifestyle and full commitment. Unless you've put in that kind of yardage year after year, you can never really know how tiring it is.

Masters swimming is great. It' not about how FAST you are, it's more about how FAT your are.... :-)

And... I do still abuse my old friends about their alma matters having foreigners on their team scoring points at NCAAs........ (a National Collegiate Championship.... not an international collegiate championship).

John Smith

SwiminONandON
June 17th, 2005, 05:07 PM
Let's take everything everyone said and totally twist and turn it. Is going to college on a full ride awesome? Yes. Is swimming for a D I program, easy? Not really. It's a lot of hard work. Is it great that these kids get to do something they love? Yeah. Ask them all how much they love it when there alarms are going off at 4:30 or they can't go out partying b/c they are too tired or in taper. There are sacrifices made for being a D-I athlete. Is it worth it? I'll bet the vast majority of them would say yes. Is it really equivolent to being a POW, no of course not. But that was said for dramatic effect.

I'm really torn on how I feel about foreign citizens getting scholarships. But I also understand that the big time programs (UT, Arizona, Auburn, USC, etc.) have a lot of pressure to win NCAAs and produce Olympians or whatever. It makes a program more prestigious if Olympians train there regardless of what country they swim for. The more prestige a program can gather the more top US athletes it can recruit. There may not be a lot of scholarships offered but how many Brendan Hansens are out there that you can NCAA championships out of four years running AND will stay in the program for four years. Most of the cream of the crop leave at some point (Beard, Peirsol, Sandeno, etc) for endorsements, you bet your butt that they are making more as pro swimmers than they will pay out for their educations.

Additionally, it does make the US swimmers better. They are training along side not only some of the best swimmers in the US but also some of the best swimmers in the world.

I know there are coaches for various sports that will not recruit foreign atheltes, too.

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 05:09 PM
I think it's kinda important to remind people what war is about when they start comparing it to things like an athletic contest. From what I hear that Coney Island Hot Dog Eating Contest is a WAR. Imagine the inhumanity of eating all those hot dogs on a hot day for a prize.

You continue to minimalize war and what it involves and if it's ok with you, I'll remind folks it's a bit more serious. Either way, they can pick and choose who to believe.

Ironic to bring up 9/11 to discount the notion of war when that was when we went to war on terror and real people died, not just got wet as we see in swim meets, the other kind of war.

gull
June 17th, 2005, 05:10 PM
One could argue that our society long ago lost any sense of perspective when it comes to sports. So how can we fault our college and universities for recruiting foreign athletes in an effort to assemble championship teams? Personally, I do believe that a state university has a reponsibility to the tax paying citizens of that state (which is why in-state tuition is much lower and there are quotas for out-of-state students). Private institutions are another matter.

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 05:12 PM
gull:

You and your sensible logic. Further proof I am but a man in need of a clown or bear suit. I remain your humble servant.

newmastersswimmer
June 17th, 2005, 05:13 PM
Dude,

I am very sorry about the horrors of war...don't get me wrong...Its just that sports is war type metaphors use to be fairly commonplace in sports writing and other related mediums....People didn't get so bent out of shape about that before ....even after Vietnam and WWII.....I think people are taking metaphors like that WAY to seriously....I for one just don't see them as being so politically incorrect IMHO.......People need to lighten up a little these days!


Newmastersswimmer

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 05:18 PM
I'm sorry I can't lighten up about war with a dozen dead soldiers this week in Iraq. I'm sure the families of those soldiers would gladly trade the horrors of a swim practice for their children back.

I would happily agree the physical training for combat of elite soldiers is comparable to that of elite athletes. Having an army ranger in the family I think the two are similar in some regards.

newmastersswimmer
June 17th, 2005, 05:32 PM
Swim practice can be gruelling.....and so some people will use metaphors like "prison camp" to describe it since we tend to grab at extremes like that to make colorful comparisons.....My coach growing up would use metaphors like that all of the time.....I understand that there are some horrible and unfortunate circumstances right now for soldiers around the world....I have the utmost respect for the young men and women serving in the military....It's gotta be very tough over there indeed!!!.....Even so, I don't think it is necessary for the general public to then become so hyper-sensitive over these kinda word choices when they have been accepted as o.k. for so many years (in the proper context that they are generally intended to be taken in).....I do understand that people have sensitive feelings however about war in general...especially these days......I think people should think of these sports/war type metaphors more in terms ot the context you yourself mentioned...something on the order of physical training and pushing yourself to beat your competitor.....without taking it as a "literal" comparison between sports competition and the life and death type competition associated to a real war ...thats all. Anyway....lets just leave it at that b/c I don't really want to say anything else about it....I hope you and others haven't taken too much offense to my views on the subject....I apologize to anyone that may have been offended by my remarks.

Newmastersswimmer

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 05:34 PM
I can see no need to apologize, unless it's me apologizing to you. Good discourse is fun, often literary war, if you will so indulge me on that.

Frank Thompson
June 17th, 2005, 05:35 PM
John Smith:

You make some valid points, however realistically its never going to change. Why, you ask. Because the NCAA across all sports would have to limit or eliminate foreign scholarships and I don't see that happening. In basketball, because of the NBA it might not be as damaging, but in other sports they have the same problems. The NCAA main purpose is inter collegiate competition and that means recruiting the best athletes available regardless of where they are from. Every great famous NCAA coach has recruited foreign swimmers and this has been going on for over 50 years. Recently there has been a resentment over this and rightly so but because of the limited number of scholarships. I don't think a college coach would rather give a schlorship to a foreigner than an American kid, but because of the cutbacks in swimming, they will recruit the best they can get and if he is foreign so be it.

The NCAA makes it perfectly clear in there TV ads that the purpose of college athletics is train that person to be well rounded in the world and not just be a stamping ground for athletics. In fact, last night during the NBA finals game I saw a commerical with Coach K of Duke explaining what coaching at the
NCAA level means and the mission is not professional athletics.

As long as the NCAA allows it, and the coaches participate in doing it, then it will never change. Actually, I don't how you would be able to change it. When this started some 60 years ago, there were no limits on scholarships and there was not as many foreign swimmers in this country going to school and training here.

Coaches have done this for years and have never given second thoughts about it. At the 1960 Olympics in Rome, USC had nine swimmers and of those six were from countries other than the USA. In the 400 Free, all three medalists were USC swimmers, and not one of them was American. Because this has been common so long, I don't believe it will change.

I also think you have to look at the countries of where the swimmers are coming from. Take South Africa for instance, for years they did not even send anyone to the Olympics because of there political policies. Jonny Skinner couldn't go to the Olympics, even if he wanted to swim for anybody, for fear of his family might be punished because they had a policy of not sending anyone to the Olympics. Because of this history, that country is way behind in developing swimming. Frank Busch said the reason Roland Schoeman attended U of Arizona was because there were not any college programs there to match his talents and if he did not train here in the USA, he would not have continued his swimming. He would have gotten an education but without the means to continue his swimming. He couldn't make the committment because of the lack of funding.

I see the same thing with a country like Zimbabwe and Trinidad & Tobago. The swimmers from those countries don't exactly have colleges, coaches, facilities, and national funding to compete on a level playing field. So college coaches go out and recruit and try to make these swimmers the best they can be.

Is this a benefit to USA Swimming? I say yes for several reasons. It makes for better competition in workouts and meets. It also opens up for a wider range of competition. If all of these people swam for the USA, we wouldn't have as many of our own citizens swimming in the Olympics. It also helps swimming in the sense that the Olympics and World Championships are more competitive and you see better swimming performances from people all around the world.

Also its been quoted that it helps Americans. Greg Troy, who is the coach of Ryan Lochte, said he benefited immensely from practicing with Brazilian Olympians and former Florida swimmers.
He said they help raise the level and American swimmers know that, and I've never seen any resistance on their part.

The detriment to USA Swimming is the lack of scholarships for USA citizens and the decrease in medals at the Olympics. But as long as the NCAA allows it, and the coaches don't change then I believe it will never change. To quote Frank Busch, coach of Univ. of Arizona, "A lot of people complain about giving opportunities to people outside the country. You have to look past that. When you give opportunities, you get opportunities in return."

TheGoodSmith
June 17th, 2005, 05:55 PM
Frank,

I fully realize that things will not change. I am in no position of clout to make them change either.

I have no objections to foreigners training and competing in the US. My objection is one of cash flow. Sure it's great to have a fast foreigner to workout against to make you and him better at the same time. Bring everyone over if they can afford to come. Fine with me.

What I object to is inducing this behavior with American scholarship money at the expense of the kids that have worked hard and paid a price here in the States.

If the NCAA would get off its butt and give swimming 25 -30 scholarships/team to play with my argument would probably fall to pieces. But thats not going to happen either.


John Smith

Paul Smith
June 17th, 2005, 08:19 PM
Actually it is changing...........this fall the NCAA has adopted new guidlines regarding the amount of foreign scholorships........I'll update the details later.

As for all the "yelling" and passion on this thread it seems to be completely out of contest as certain folks have tried to steer the issue away from "scholorships for foreign swimmers" to: diversity, immigration, racism, war...............!!

Give me a break...........tell me of one US Swimmer on a full ride scholoraship in ANY sport in France? OK, how about Japan? No, well how about Mexico? Egypt? What about Russia? Come on......any sport?

I'm for "diversity", I'm pro "legal" immigration, what I am not is happy about any US tax dollars supporting any college sports program that pays the way for a foeighn athelte when there may be even ONE US swimmer who could have it.

By the way, for all you idiots talking about politics on this thread and whining about "anti-immigration/anit-foreigner"......tell me of any other country in the world that you can cross into illegally and; work? get health care? education?

Fair is fair.........

LindsayNB
June 17th, 2005, 09:03 PM
Originally posted by TheGoodSmith
As for athletes thanking someone post performance, Hell, I'd be impressed if the South Africans just thanked their American coach on TV to acknowledge their US presence.... no such luck...... it was a pure and righteous South African victory all on there own, based on the talent, facilities and coaching skills of South Africa.


Actually, in the TV interview with Roland on the CBC he did acknowledge his US coach and stated that he hoped their win would result in better support for swimming in South Africa. Even the member of the team that actually trained in SA talked about the support from his teammates in the US rather than his coach and program at home.

Sabretooth Tiger
June 17th, 2005, 09:17 PM
Tall Paul,

Until your post, this had been, in my view, a pretty spirited and intelligent exchange of ideas. If you think that calling people who disagree with you "idiots" is the way to sway opinion, I might suggest you re-think that tact.

Beyond that, the discussion of diversity on college campuses is intrinsic to the debate. To narrow the parameters to "swimming and scholarships" without putting the issue into the broad context . . . . without permitting discussions of the ramifications that flow from policy discussions, does not promote a healthy and intelligent exchange of ideas.

Moreover, to assert that "political" discussion has no place here would fundamentally eliminate the ability to engage in this debate which is, in fact, rooted in politics. If the only issue was swimming and scholarship, then citizenship would have nothing to do with the discussion. Money would go to the fastest, period.

The premise of this discussion focuses on the notion of citizenship and drawing lines based thereon. Accordingly, politics, civics and cultural issues are part and parcel of the premise that started this discussion.

So my suggestion would be to back off of the insults and engage in intelligent debate or sit back and watch until you can do so.

carl botterud

aquageek
June 17th, 2005, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by Paul Smith
I'm for "diversity", I'm pro "legal" immigration, what I am not is happy about any US tax dollars supporting any college sports program that pays the way for a foeighn athelte when there may be even ONE US swimmer who could have it.


I'd be interested to know your position on foreign companies who pay US taxes. You seem to forget that many foreign corporations pay plenty of US taxes. US tax dollars does not mean that only US corps are paying the tax dollars.

hooked-on-swimming
June 18th, 2005, 03:07 AM
Originally posted by Paul Smith


By the way, for all you idiots talking about politics on this thread and whining about "anti-immigration/anit-foreigner"......tell me of any other country in the world that you can cross into illegally and; work? get health care? education?

Fair is fair.........

Great way to communicate, Paul!!!let's call everyone idiots now , but who is the one who is really in the dark(can't use the same word, sorry, my upbringing is not letting me)?Well, let me tell you this:almost every more or less economically stable country has a problem with illegal immigration who FIND THE WAYS to work AND to study!!!Heck, even Russia(mostly Moscow, though) has a problem with illegals(an estimated 3mln. in just Moscow).So I suggest you do some research before you come with that kind of "info" next time...
Oh, yeah, and about health care - well, I think America needs to be able to figure out how to provide a good health care program to its citizens first...How many people are on the edge of bankrupcy because of "the perfect American healthcare"?Just so that you know in a lot of countries it is government funded and you will not be charged for being treated...

Paul Smith
June 18th, 2005, 10:25 AM
OK, using the the word "idiot: was over the top and I aplogize. However some points of clarification:

- botterud: I did not use that as a reference to people who disagree with me, I'm used to that! f you take the time to read my post carefully before replying you would see that it was a reference to people who changed the thread from a discussion about scholorships for foreign swimmers to a one about anti immigration, racism, etc.

- aquageek; read my message and answer any of the questons that I raised. Happy to go into detail with you on my politics one to one anytime. When those same countries that pay US taxes start offering full ride swimming scholorships to US citizens then I'll be open to returning the favor here.

- hooked on swimming; again read my message carefully (did I call everyone an idiot?) and answer the questions I brought up. I never said anything about other countries not having illegal (research my message a little more carefully before you reply) immigration problems, however do any of them "subsidize" the problem in any way similar to the US? Does th University of Moscow provode swimming scholorships?

Point is this, there are "x" number of swimming programs at colleges in the US and fewer scholorships and I beleive that those should first and foremost go to US citizens. Other countries have scholorship prgrams to support their athletes swimming for US programs (we had mulitple French, Mexican & Swedish swimmers who swam for UCSB and all had their way paid by their governement).

gull
June 18th, 2005, 10:33 AM
Originally posted by hooked-on-swimming
Oh, yeah, and about health care - well, I think America needs to be able to figure out how to provide a good health care program to its citizens first...How many people are on the edge of bankrupcy because of "the perfect American healthcare"?Just so that you know in a lot of countries it is government funded and you will not be charged for being treated...

Yes, lack of affordable health insurance is a significant problem for many Americans. That having been said, unlike other nations, we do not have waiting lists (six months or more) for bypass surgery or hip replacements. And no one can be turned away from an emergency room due to lack of money (federal law). If socialized medicine is the answer, why are other countries now exploring privitization?

Frank Thompson
June 18th, 2005, 11:42 AM
Good Article on this topic is at www.csmonitor.com/2005/0329/p01s03-ussc.html

aquageek
June 18th, 2005, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by Paul Smith
- aquageek; read my message and answer any of the questons that I raised. Happy to go into detail with you on my politics one to one anytime. When those same countries that pay US taxes start offering full ride swimming scholorships to US citizens then I'll be open to returning the favor here.

What about foreign corps that give millions to endowments or build a department building or fund a professorship? Would that be ok by your standards or would they just have to fund a simple swimming scholarship? Also, I'm not aware of any corporations, US or otherwise, that are allowed to fund individual sports scholarships. If a US company does a lot of business overseas maybe we should exclude them also since they could do so much more here if they cut back their business model and were less profitable.

dorothyrde
June 18th, 2005, 01:49 PM
Yay on the U of I being sited in that article on winning Men's tennis without foreign talent. However, I believe our men's tennis coach is now leaving to coach the Australian tennis team.

My understanding on swimming scholarships are, if you are a swimmer of Olympic caliber, you will get a good scholarship, regardless of Nationality. The lesser swimmers(which would be the 99.9% of the rest of them), don't usually get full rides. Colleges piecemeal out the scholarships to get more athletes on scholarships for the minor sports.

I am actually surprised at the number of small colleges sending us information on their swim programs. My son is not swimming anymore, so he is not really looking at them, but he probably could walk on to some of these schools and do well if he wanted to.

He will pick the school based on what is right for his life, not the swimming. A scholarship would be nice, but we don't count on it. They say if you are in swimming for the scholarships, you would be better of taking all the money you spend on your child's swimming from age group up and saving it for college.

Sabretooth Tiger
June 18th, 2005, 02:45 PM
Everyone on this thread should read the Christian Science Monitor article linked by Frank Thompson. Thanks Frank!!! Here it is in its entirety . . . you may recognize our debate within this well presented piece:

America's best collegiate athletes often not American

By Christa Farrand Case | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

When swimmer Ryk Neethling powered South Africa's Olympic relay team to an unprecedented gold medal in Athens last summer, the Americans were surprised, to say the least. Except for US assistant coach Frank Busch.
"We'd talked about it for a long time.... Emotionally, it was an incredible experience," he recalls.

As a teenager, Mr. Neethling had been recruited by Mr. Busch to attend the University of Arizona, where he competed on a generous scholarship - courtesy of the state's taxpayers. In fact, with three of South Africa's four relay medalists having attended Arizona, the school could go into the business of franchising global Olympic athletes.

In some ways, they already have - and they're not alone.

For decades, foreign athletes have come to the US to train and bolster American university teams, boosting the level of competition and bringing Yankee jocks shoulder to shoulder with multiculturalism. But now, with nearly $1 billion to spend in scholarship money and growing pressure to field winning teams, schools are increasingly filling their rosters with foreign athletes.

The trend is fueling a debate about whether taxpayer-funded collegiate programs are developing international talent at the expense of aspiring American athletes - not to mention America's Olympic hopes.

"I think that's something we need to be concerned about," says Chuck Wielgus, executive director of USA Swimming, a governing organization. He points out that at last year's National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I swimming championships, foreign athletes constituted 40 percent of the field. He's worried that the prevalence of foreign athletes means fewer scholarships for Americans - a crucial incentive for talented high schoolers to stay in the pool.

But it's not just swimming that's affected. Nearly one-third of NCAA ice hockey and tennis athletes last season were not American. In other sports, the percentage of foreign athletes is lower, but they're concentrated at the top. Of the 20 "All-Americans" in the final event of this month's NCAA skiing championship, for example, only six were American.

Zachary Violett, a cross-country skier who didn't make that half-dozen, would like to think he'd have pocketed at least three NCAA championships by now if it weren't for the Europeans that dominate his sport. At last year's event, he finished fourth behind three Norwegians.

Is that frustrating? "Well, I like to [complain] about it, but it's great having people to chase," says Mr. Violett, who emphasizes how much he's improved by skiing head-to-head with the Europeans.

Most of them compete for schools that wouldn't even consider Violett when he was applying to colleges, and certainly didn't offer him the full-ride scholarship the "Euros" enjoy.

Not to be defeated, Violett reverse- engineered the process: He went to a ski gymnasium in Gielo, Norway, where he trained "nonstop" and worked late nights in a restaurant to make ends meet. Now a senior with a full scholarship at the University of Alaska, Anchorage, Violett lives with his Norwegian and German teammates.

A quiet revolt

But not everyone is content to accept the situation as is. On Internet message boards, everyone from ex-soccer players to track stars gripes about the problem, while coaches across the country complain from the sidelines.

Pressured to produce the best teams, some feel the only way to win is to follow suit and recruit more aggressively overseas, compounding the problem.

One of the most foreign-flavored - and difficult to change - sports may be men's tennis. Last year, 63 of the top 100 ranked collegiate players were foreigners, many of whom came in as 22-year-old freshmen with several years experience on the European pro circuit.

That didn't dissuade University of Illinois coach Craig Tiley, who made a conscious commitment when he took on the job in 1993 to develop American players, rather than importing ready-made European stars. In 2003, Mr. Tiley's team won the NCAA championship without a single foreign player.

While Tiley, Wielgus, and others chafe at lost slots and scholarships for US athletes, others point to the qualitative benefits foreign athletes bring to a team - and to the classroom.

"They raise the level of appreciation, expectations, and global perspective" of their teammates, says Lance Harter, who coached four-time Olympic track medalist Veronica Campbell of Jamaica at the University of Arkansas. They also appreciate the educational opportunities they have in the US and are often some of the best students, says Kyle Kallander, chair of the NCAA's Olympic Liaison Committee.

For some talented foreigners, athletic accomplishments are the ticket to a virtually free education at some of America's top universities.

Moreover, as Jeff Howard, director of corporate communications for the United States Olympic Committee (USOC), points out: "The United States is a country built upon welcoming people from around the world, and our institutions have benefited from that principle."

Ways to boost ranks of Americans

Still, both the USOC and the NCAA are aware of the concern and have talked about possible solutions. Mr. Kallander would like to explore ways to provide incentives for having more American students on any given team.

Wielgus, on the other hand, recommends putting a cap on the amount of scholarship money available for foreign students. Many coaches acknowledge that's a reasonable and sensible approach, says Wielgus, but few are willing to say so for fear of putting themselves at odds with their athletic departments, whose bottom line is to create the best possible team.

As Busch puts it: "Being an employee of the University of Arizona, my job is to field the best teams I can field, and whether that means recruiting a kid from Arizona or Australia, it really doesn't matter."

geochuck
June 18th, 2005, 03:01 PM
What is the concern, it's been going on since I was a kid. The colleges want their teams to be the best. All of my Canadian friends swam in the US. My brother for U of Maryland, Mike MacLaughlin U of Michigan. Gerry MacNamee USSC, and many others in every state. No scholaships were available in Canada.

Originally posted by gull80
Yes, lack of affordable health insurance is a significant problem for many Americans. That having been said, unlike other nations, we do not have waiting lists (six months or more) for bypass surgery or hip replacements. And no one can be turned away from an emergency room due to lack of money (federal law). If socialized medicine is the answer, why are other countries now exploring privitization? No waiting list in the USA but no one can afford an operation. If everyone who needed an operation were counted the lineups would be very long. I can see my doctor any time I want and don't pay.

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 18th, 2005, 05:20 PM
As I've Written before, of all the alies in this country permanently, the one most likely to be here illegally is a citizen of the UK. Some foreign companies do pay US taxes. Mitsubishi does and I think BP does now that they have bought gas stations. I believe any company listed on US stock exchanges must pay appropriate taxes also.

Also, US universities should never have to worry about how their program fits into US swimming. they should worry about how they aare educating its students. I believe the national average for all entering Freshmen to graduate is either 66% or 88%. I used to know the number but it has slipped my mind. then look at athletes and their graduation rate. Even swimmers have a relatively low ghrad rate. After all Cincinati one year graduated no athletic scholarship students, regardless of the sport and sex. I think the year was 1997 or 1999(?????).

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 18th, 2005, 05:21 PM
Both Arizona and A State have huge foreign student poplulations. And not just in Sports.

Scansy
June 18th, 2005, 10:45 PM
Originally posted by geochuck
What is the concern, it's been going on since I was a kid. The colleges want their teams to be the best. All of my Canadian friends swam in the US. My brother for U of Maryland, Mike MacLaughlin U of Michigan. Gerry MacNamee USSC, and many others in every state. No scholaships were available in Canada.
No waiting list in the USA but no one can afford an operation. If everyone who needed an operation were counted the lineups would be very long. I can see my doctor any time I want and don't pay.

George, if I am not mistaken, Canadian taxes are higher than the US - at least at the federal level. You may not be paying for it directly to the doctor/hospital, but you are paying. And here in the US, if something is controlled by the government, it becomes less efficient and therefore more expensive. I don't know about the Canadian government.

I don't think the US system is perfect. HMO's drive me up a wall sometimes. But I don't think the Canadian system is perfect either.

I guess the best way it to not get sick!;)

gull
June 19th, 2005, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by geochuck
No waiting list in the USA but no one can afford an operation. If everyone who needed an operation were counted the lineups would be very long. I can see my doctor any time I want and don't pay.

Our hospital is a regional medical center serving several counties; patients are admitted and treated regardless of their financial status. Some months a sizable (30%) percentage of our practice's work is not reimbursed (ie we don't get paid for it). Some patients agree to pay $20/month, others never pay at all and their bill is written off as bad debt. These are patients who have undergone lifesaving procedures (angioplasty, bypass surgery, etc.) and received state of the art care. Yes, the system is flawed, but the indigent do receive care--just take a look at our books sometime.

Tom Ellison
June 19th, 2005, 01:38 PM
"Funny how liberal democrats these days want to close the borders but republicans believe in free trade, patriotism and a free market economy. "

Hold the fort here folks....I am way out there on the right....and I think/believe we should CLOSE the borders.....and fast! Why on earth should we continue to fund, pay for, support illegal aliens that are bankrupting most of our border states....and...at the same time create security risks beyond our wildest imaginations?

Maryyyyyy
June 19th, 2005, 02:27 PM
You've all covered pretty much everything already, but I just wanted to add from my personal experience (the only one I've got) at UC Berkeley that the foreign swimmers (I don't know if they received scholarships or not) were not only excellent swimmers but also extremely intelligent students way in the upper percentiles. I don't think CAL would have recruited them otherwise. We loved having them in the water with us, bringing with them not only different swimming and training techniques but also their home cultures and, what blew my mind, language skills!

When I saw Duje Draganja in Athens wearing a CAL swim cap for his races I thought "how cool! he's swimming for his country's team, but he's acknowledging the university where he's training!"

I can understand that seeing USA money going to foreign athletes can give you a twist in the gut. But I'm all for going international in schools, pools and boardrooms. If USA universities want to pay foreign athletes to attract them to their schools ... what are you going to do? There must be a payback for the universities, otherwise, I don't think they'd do it...

Scansy
June 19th, 2005, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
"Funny how liberal democrats these days want to close the borders but republicans believe in free trade, patriotism and a free market economy. "

Hold the fort here folks....I am way out there on the right....and I think/believe we should CLOSE the borders.....and fast! Why on earth should we continue to fund, pay for, support illegal aliens that are bankrupting most of our border states....and...at the same time create security risks beyond our wildest imaginations?

Tom, I agree with you.... with one clarification. I don't support complete closing of the borders. I support CONTROLLED immigration.

I applaud anyone who wants to improve their family's conditions in life. I just don't want them walking across the border at will.... in .... out .... in ...... out..... Somehow, this must be controlled better. And don't get me started about those who want to allow people to vote without ID. I believe proof of citizenship should be required to vote. And I am amazed there hasn't been another terrorist attack here since 9/11..... And how is it that Vincente Fox can get away with allowing his country to need to milk off of others like this - instead of improving his own country's economy....the whole thing is frustrating to me.

I just feel like neither the republicans or democrats want to take that step. Neither is willing to alienate the growing hispanic voter base.

And for the record, I am a registered independent. I vote in every election. I do vote right considerably more than left.

Oh, and on the original topic - I don't have a problem with foreign athletes in our country - scholarship or professional. (If they are here legally.) I figure I can see the best compete that way.

laineybug
June 19th, 2005, 05:25 PM
"Maryyyyyyyy, and others, I certainly agree that foreign students bring a great diversity and promote greater understanding of different cultures and races on college and university campuses. I even picked an apartment in Athens because the children who lived there went to an elementary school where there was a very high enrollment of the children of foreign students. I wanted my daughter to have the experience of knowing children from other countries. But, campus diversity isn't the question really. The question is: are American institutes of higher education denying our students scholarships because they give them to foreign students? If so, is this right? In my opinion, campus diversity isn't worth the cost of an athletic scholarship going to a foreign student.

gull
June 19th, 2005, 05:46 PM
It's not a question of granting foreign athletes admission to a public university, it's a question of whether they should receive an athletic scholarship, of which there are a limited number. I wonder how many academic scholarships are awarded to foreign students by public (state) universities.

aquageek
June 19th, 2005, 07:08 PM
I continue to be amused that the exact same far right crowd that wants to close the border also consistently votes against a living minimum wage. What do those people think attracts illegal aliens? It's the low paying jobs Americans won't do because of the crappy minimum wage that can't support a family. Talk about bankrupting! So, if you want to take this arcane and economically ridiculous step of closing borders, do it for all nations that feed the US people, not just the poorer onces, get off your kiester and support paying Americans a living minimum wage so this problem doesn't continue to grow. You can't have it both ways.

aquageek
June 19th, 2005, 07:13 PM
Originally posted by laineybug
[BIn my opinion, campus diversity isn't worth the cost of an athletic scholarship going to a foreign student. [/B]

Fortunately some institutions universally recognized as excellent (Yale, Harvard, your own UGA, Duke, Stanford, etc, etc, etc) long ago realized that diversity of student body actually promoted the concept of higher education.

Sabretooth Tiger
June 19th, 2005, 07:56 PM
Geez Geek, I'm seeing a whole side of you that I never suspected existed during the great coffee debate of '04.

Rock on dude!

carl

Peter Cruise
June 19th, 2005, 07:57 PM
Just need a clarification; I'm not taking sides (being a Canadian, it comes naturally). Those who would limit (or abolish) athletic scholarships for non-US citizens- would they support the same limitations on academic scholarships? I know this discussion centers on the swimming ramifications but I would like to hear from every one (the usual suspects) their take on that aspect.

Sam Perry
June 19th, 2005, 11:01 PM
After hundreds of posts on this, I felt the need to pipe in for what it's worth.

The simple solution is that if a university athletic program wants foreign athletes, fine. Pay for their education by using alumni money, if the past students/athletes want their funds used to promote the athletic programs with foreign athletes, private money, not public NCAA Title 9 limited funds should be used which would deny American athletes the privelege of attending their Universities that have been supported by their families tax dollars as long as they have been alive.

These arguments about the not so fortunate foreign athlete does not sit with me. Most (not all) of them are supported by their government to live and train wherever they see fit. So if no alumni money available, then let their governments pay for them to attend our schools so our American athletes are not denied the opportunity to train, get a degree and develop into not only better swimmers (or whatever sport) but also degreed well rounded contributors to society.

As far as this debate going into minimum wage discussions, if you understood the basic issues of supply and demand, you would understand why the minimum wage hasn't and never has worked. Whenever you put a floor or ceiling on the supply demand curve, you destroy the basic economic model. Not a political statement, just economics 101.

Tom Ellison
June 20th, 2005, 12:15 AM
Quote from Geek...."Funny how liberal democrats these days want to close the borders but republicans believe in free trade, patriotism and a free market economy. "

Also posted by Geek...."I continue to be amused that the exact same far right crowd that wants to close the border also consistently votes against a living minimum wage. "

Ok, I am just some poor dumb Moose.....Please shine the light in my ears here....which way do you want it....left or right.....Seems to me you play both ends toward the middle....

No one talked of min wage...and that entire issue.....EVER IN THESE THREADS......

Regardless of the left...or the right....and NOTHING to do with min wage.....SHUT THE BORDERS.....and.............. I DO NOT GIVE A RATS A-- ABOUT LEFT OR RIGHT...JUST SHUT THE BORDERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And give 100% of the swimming money to USA kids!
NEXT!!!!!!!

And Geek, you can't post it both ways.....Well, you can but that isn't right......er.....or left................

aquageek
June 20th, 2005, 07:58 AM
It's both economically and physically impossible to close the border. Communist Europe and China tried it and look at them now, moving to the free market economy. There are really about a handful of nations these days that still hang onto the belief that closed borders benefit the economy, Cuba and N. Korea are two notable examples, and fine examples they are. So, move on from that notion. And, I seriously doubt many of the illegal aliens you are so concerned about bankrupting our southern border states are taking up swimming scholarships.

Maryyyyyy
June 20th, 2005, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by laineybug
"Maryyyyyyyy, and others, I certainly agree that foreign students bring a great diversity and promote greater understanding of different cultures and races on college and university campuses. I even picked an apartment in Athens because the children who lived there went to an elementary school where there was a very high enrollment of the children of foreign students. I wanted my daughter to have the experience of knowing children from other countries. But, campus diversity isn't the question really. The question is: are American institutes of higher education denying our students scholarships because they give them to foreign students? If so, is this right? In my opinion, campus diversity isn't worth the cost of an athletic scholarship going to a foreign student.

"There must be a payback for the universities, otherwise, I don't think they'd do it..."

anyway, the way most of you are going on about the issue, if I were a foreign student and read this, it would be enough to keep me away from the States...

TheGoodSmith
June 20th, 2005, 10:30 AM
Peter Cruise and Geochuck,

Look, no one is really talking about Canadians as being foriegners in the US.


Afterall...... Canada is the 51st state.... :-)


John Smith

poolmonkey
June 20th, 2005, 10:40 AM
This is going back a little in this thread. Sorry, but I'm way behind in my e-mail.

When did anyone hear about the last great medical breakthrough in countries with socialized medicine?

And one of the reasons for our astronomical health care costs has to do with outrageous court settlements. I live in a county where a number of these have been handed out and guess what? A huge number of area doctors left the county. It's become a real problem for us. I understand malpractice and the can of worms this opens up, but there needs to be some sort of cap.

As for illegal immigrants... with our imperfect healthcare and as was mentioned before, anyone is treated - even those not paying taxes, which is putting more stress on our already over-burdened system.

Does anyone know of U.S. citizens training in other countries? I've heard of it for other sports, but I'm not aware of this practice taking place in swimming?

laineybug
June 20th, 2005, 12:02 PM
I'm not against foreign students studying or training in the US. What I am not in favor of is the US supporting those studies or training with American dollars when our citizens may go wanting. Heck, I don't even mind supporting some of the foreign students, academically or athletically if there is money left over after American students have been taken care of. My position is, American students MUST HAVE PRIORITY over foreign students.

Lainey

aquageek
June 20th, 2005, 12:15 PM
Would you, therefore, suggest that universities reject donations or tax dollars from foreign corporations?

poolmonkey
June 20th, 2005, 12:38 PM
How does it work with U.S. based companies? Are the tax dollars other countries receive from conglomerates based in the U.S. helping U.S. students go to universities abroad?

Can you name any examples of foreign companies donating money to a university? Just curious about the details surrounding these types of transactions. Maybe it's my paranoia, but I'm always skeptical of donations - from any company wherever they are based. A hidden agenda of some sorts is sometimes involved. Not too many companies do the right thing just for the sake of doing the right thing.

justforfun
June 20th, 2005, 12:53 PM
I've been gone a couple days, but have really enjoyed catching up on the ongoing debate, although I did get a little lost during the "swimming is, or isn't, war" side-issue.

I think the article Skip Thompson directed us to is an excellent, balanced look at the issue. It echos our own debate and folks have made great and valid points on both sides.

Here's a slightly different slant on the issue. I was disturbed by a couple of the article's quotes from Frank Busch, the Arizona coach. In speaking about the South Africans' 400 Fr Relay victory, he says, "we'd talked about it for a long time, emotionally it was an incredible experience." And, "...recruiting a kid from Australia or Arizona, it really doesn't matter."

Look, I can understand that he wants to see the swimmers he coaches do well even outside of collegiate competition. And, I understand that his job is to put the best team in the pool within collegiate competition. But, his first quote makes it sound like he helped plan, and then took great pleasure in the South Africans putting to the U.S. His quotes speak to a program philosophy that I don't agree with. In my opinion, it DOES matter whether he recruits a kid from Arizona or Australia. Recruit from Arizona first! Australia takes care of itself just fine, thank you very much. They don't need our help in the pool.

The reason Australia is so good despite being a smallish country is that they make the committment to being great in swimming. Canada could do it, Great Britain could do it. Even South Africa could do it. But, they're not committed to swimming excellence like the powerful swimming countries are. Many of the foreign swimmers on athletic scholarships that we're talking about come from these countries I've mentioned, or similar countries.

Occasionally, there's an Anthony Nesty from Surinam that I actually feel good about. He trained at Florida and beat Matt Biondi in the 100 Fly in 1988. But, seemed o.k. because I KNEW he didn't have any resources at home. But, what about Duncan Armstrong, who also beat Biondi (in the 200 Free in 88). Armstrong was from Australia, but went to U of Florida. Did he really need a swimming scholarship to train in the U.S.? I don't think guys like that should get financial support to swim in the U.S.

I think it all comes down to program philosophy, which is probably determined almost 100% by the head coach. Guys like Frank Busch have one philosophy and guys like Eddie Reece have another. They both come from state schools and have the same pressure to win. I know athletic scholarships aren't need-based (with respect to a swimmer's own financial or training resources), but I would like to see collegiate coaches making the committment to developing U.S. swimmers--and I can live with a few foreign athletes on scholarship who have no resources at home.

aquageek
June 20th, 2005, 01:13 PM
Many foreign corps provide matching donations to their emps. I know of at least 4 or 5 gigantic corps with home offices out of the country that do this.

Maryyyyyy
June 20th, 2005, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by poolmonkey

Can you name any examples of foreign companies donating money to a university? Just curious about the details surrounding these types of transactions. Maybe it's my paranoia, but I'm always skeptical of donations - from any company wherever they are based. A hidden agenda of some sorts is sometimes involved. Not too many companies do the right thing just for the sake of doing the right thing.

here's one:

TAN Hall UC Berkeley (http://chemistry.berkeley.edu/editor/Publications/journal/volume10/no1/tan_intro.htm)

just one example. Tan Kah Kee is a Taiwanese industrialist who made the main donation for this new building at CAL for the Chemical Engineering Dept. People like to see their names on buildings. I'm sure there are kickbacks!

poolmonkey
June 20th, 2005, 02:09 PM
Thanks Mary. Great example.

No doubt multi-culturalism has greatly benefited this country.

But I think a number of issues could be resolved with a little legislation, such as:

The amount of money an institution receives from foreign investors influences the number of scholarships available to foreign students with a floor and a ceiling.

If you are receiving greater than x number of dollars from your country of origin, then you are not eligible for an athletic scholarship.

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 20th, 2005, 02:26 PM
I keep reading entries to this thread. I can't believe any one thinks that Universities shouldn't offer scholarships to anyone they wasnt too offer them to!!!!!! If you believe so strongly that foreign students shouldn't get scholarships then do somehting about it!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The USA was made great by foreigners. Much investment in real estate in California and the pacific Northwest is being by Chinese. Any company listed on the New York Stock exchange -regarless of where there corp. headquarters are located- must abide by the Sarbannes/Oaxley law, must pay taxes on gains they made through issuing that stock and other US income, and must pay other necessary taxes. Also their is a growing number of US citizens employeed by foreigh firms. some of these peole don't even know who reallyowns the company for which they work.

Our borders are to large to close. There are so many places that cnadians enter into the uSA that aren't protected, it is idiotic to suggest that our borders can be closed! closing our borders woudl destroy our ecomony. Do you know that China only exports roughly 10% of its manufactured goods. However, here inthe USA almost 40% of all manufactured goods come from China!

gull
June 20th, 2005, 02:40 PM
The answer is simple--move to this country, apply for citizenship (like my grandparents did), then compete for a swimming scholarship at one of our many fine public universities. As they say, membership (citizenship) has its privileges.

justforfun
June 20th, 2005, 02:51 PM
Craig:
Check it out:
http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_2811052

Perhaps China and Russia will reconsider and bring U.S. athletes into their deal. Maybe they'll give our swimmers financial support and train them inside their borders. It sure doesn't sound like Chinese prosperity in the U.S. has them feeling very generous, though, at least in terms of Olympic competition.

geochuck
June 20th, 2005, 02:53 PM
That would be fine to become a US citizen but I preferred to live in Canada. My brother prefered to come back to Canada even though he served two terms in the USA army. My other two brothers stayed in the USA they loved it. My wife and I moved to the USA but left after witnessing a shooting in Santa Monica.

gull
June 20th, 2005, 03:04 PM
Sounds suspiciously like a Superteam.

TheGoodSmith
June 20th, 2005, 03:08 PM
Interesting article....... Sounds like "war" in the pool to me.

John Smith



===================================

Taking America down in medals standings
By Bill Briggs
Denver Post Staff Writer


America, enjoy the golden view while you can. Your next stop in the medal count just might be third place after a backroom deal of Olympic proportions.

Russia and China - the most potent Summer Games teams behind the Americans - have formed an unprecedented sporting alliance with brash plans to topple Team USA as the reigning medal monster by 2008.

Under the athletic pact, signed last week during a visit to China by the Russian Olympic Committee, the two nations will share coaches, training secrets and medical advances, according to the Russian newspaper Izvestia daily. Russia and China also plan to split up certain sports, each applying its national muscle against American strongholds.

"(The Chinese) hope that we will take some of the medals in sports that are traditionally considered American, i.e., swimming and track and field," Russian Olympic Committee president Leonid Tyagachev told the newspaper. "They speak openly about it: We cannot give in to the U.S." ..............

aquageek
June 20th, 2005, 03:14 PM
This is good motivation for our athletes. I'm sure it will be posted in locker rooms for the next few years.

I'm a little suspicious about "Chinese medical advances." I recall some of their advances at previous Olympics and the way drug testing curtailed those advances.

To be honest, the Russians and Chinese have never agreed on anything so their alleged unity could turn to squabbling and nothing will come of this.

justforfun
June 20th, 2005, 06:14 PM
Superteam! Nice touch.

I agree with aquageek about this. I remember reading a couple articles about a month or two ago about how China had employed one of the primary scientists involved in doping in East Germany. Apparently, she disappeared from E Germany after the scandal and escaped being arrested. Chinese swimming hired her recently as a "flume expert." But, one article said she had no expertise in swimming flumes. Hmmmm...

Peter Cruise
June 20th, 2005, 06:17 PM
re the estimable GoodSmith mistaking Canada for the 51st state: well I was busy mistaking several of the northwest states as being potential provinces of Canada, considering prevailing political views therein esp. regarding medical care, drug costs & the fact that Canada is rapidly becoming America's major source of oil & natural gas. Of course GoodSmith is probably severely oxygen-depleted (still) from his 1000yard excellent adventure...

TheGoodSmith
June 20th, 2005, 06:49 PM
Peter,

We will gladly swap you Montana, North Dakota and the Upper Pennisula of Michigan for Ontario. Hell, these days we may throw in Guantanamo just to sweeten the deal.


John Smith

Peter Cruise
June 20th, 2005, 07:32 PM
Gee John, I guess you could make me a dandy deal on some swampland (with a view), eh?

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 20th, 2005, 07:48 PM
My best friend lives in Denver. He had already faxed me the story. I truly believe that schools can only be responsbile to them selves. If they wast to give scholarships to non-USA citizens, fine by me. I just talked to a friend. He son graduated from high school this spring. he applied to many US colleges. The best deal he got was from McGill in Canada and Truman State in Missouri. He is going to Truman on an academic scholarship.

Maybe we should revert to old times when no one got scholarships of any kind and only those who are extremely wealthy or very hard workers can go to college. I only got $1,000 for my freshman year at DePauw and $1,000 for my senoir year at Knox. I worked 60 hour weeks at a state mental health facility to pay my tuition. I also tried to swim. It was truly a learning experience. For those of you who don't know both Knox & DePauw are in the top 100 colleges/universities in the nation according to US News. I graduated with a high B average. So many people waste so much tiem in college. I was even able to drink & participate in Flunk Day! It really bothers me when people bitch about scholarships at state schools. Is the complaining really disguised racism or other negative nationalistic thoughts?

aquageek
June 20th, 2005, 08:55 PM
Originally posted by Peter Cruise
the fact that Canada is rapidly becoming America's major source of oil & natural gas.

Don't forget the major supplier of mad cow disease also.

geochuck
June 20th, 2005, 10:02 PM
Mad cow ??? The hidden disease of the USA cows. The US tests all suspected cases. The results are always lost.

Paul Smith
June 20th, 2005, 10:42 PM
Geek,

- How about US companies paying taxes in foreign countries, doesn't that based on your argument then "entitle" US athletes to receive finacial support in their universities or clubs? Yes, some US athletes train oversees but I doubt that they aren't paying for that oppurtunity.

- Also, still waiting for you to stop "throwing bombs" and instead answer one of my questions? Name another country anywhere in the world that provides athletic scholorships to US swimmers? track & field? how about hockey? Name any other country in the world that provides free health sevices, education and drivers licenses to "illegal" immigrants?

geochuck
June 20th, 2005, 10:58 PM
Hey Paul

You are right, US colleges have allways done this they want to win in their leagues. If they want to train other nations swimmers to beat them in the Olympics, that is the way it is. The athletes are happy that the schools train and educate them.

Phil Arcuni
June 20th, 2005, 11:52 PM
Paul,

Please let us know of *any* foreign university (outside of Canada) that provides athletic scholarships to anybody. It is an unusual feature of the U.S. system that athletics are so closely tied to academic study (or at least pretend to be.)

Anyway, since when do American swimmers have a "right" to an athletic scholarship? If they are good enough they will get one, if not, they should get better. Competition can only make people faster.

This area where I work is most successful when it (and the national government) allows the best and brightest to come here. That is also true for our universities, and for our sport programs.

hooked-on-swimming
June 21st, 2005, 03:08 AM
Originally posted by Paul Smith
Name any other country in the world that provides free health sevices, education and drivers licenses to "illegal" immigrants?

Free health services?You must be dreaming,Paul, where did you see free health services here in the US?You'll be treated but it will not be free...

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 05:20 AM
Originally posted by Paul Smith
Name any other country in the world that provides free health sevices, education and drivers licenses to "illegal" immigrants?

I believe Canada, France and England on this. Our Canadian friends can correct me if I'm wrong.

Just out of curiosity, you ever hear of the Rhodes (sp ?) scholarship? It is possibly the most coveted scholarship in the world.

TheGoodSmith
June 21st, 2005, 09:19 AM
CraigIII,

No one on this thread has ever suggested any racist or negative international thought. The issue is not whether foreign athletes can and should be able to train in the US. This is widely accepted. The concern is that we are funding their experience at the expense of US citizens applying for the same position on the collegiate team.

Again, invite all the foreigners over to train you want. Just don't have US colleges pay their way.

John Smith

gull
June 21st, 2005, 09:26 AM
Those darn immigrants! (Sorry Grandma)

John, I think you need to distinguish between private universities and state universities (which are funded at least in part by the taxpayers).

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by TheGoodSmith

Again, invite all the foreigners over to train you want. Just don't have US colleges pay their way.

John Smith

There has yet to be a single compelling argument for why we should not give foreign students a scholarship or two. First, it's part of the process of higher education to be exposed to different people. Secondly, and most importantly, it gives us a competitive advantage, not just in sports but also academics and business, to train and study with the best. I guess if your intent is to have US kids not compete against the best, you are definitely on the right track. Personally, if I hire a college grad, I'm assuming they had a broad exposure and are ready to compete for my company against everyone.

gull
June 21st, 2005, 09:29 AM
Originally posted by hooked-on-swimming
Free health services?You must be dreaming,Paul, where did you see free health services here in the US?You'll be treated but it will not be free...

Why should health care be free?

poolmonkey
June 21st, 2005, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by aquageek
There has yet to be a single compelling argument for why we should not give foreign students a scholarship or two.

Um, for public universities, how about that foreign students haven't been paying taxes, which these instutitions receive a chunk of?

And one of the original beefs was with foreigners making up 50% of a US collegiate team. If a number of scholarships are available, then a scholarship or two should be open for foreign students, with more scholarships possibly available if an institution receives donations from foreign companies.

Once again, there is no issue with foreigners training here. The issue is with us, the taxpayers, paying for them to train here.


Just out of curiosity, you ever hear of the Rhodes (sp ?) scholarship? It is possibly the most coveted scholarship in the world.

I didn't realize that you could be selected for this based on swimming. Maybe I need to re-read their selection criteria.

Tom Ellison
June 21st, 2005, 10:03 AM
Heck, I will give you one...MY SON....Honor student all A's...good swimmer....and had very little chances for a ride of any kind....
He went to the US Merchant Marine Academy where he does swim and is doing very well...but little was out there when he was looking....WHY THE HECK SHOULD USA SWIMMERS TAKE 2nd BASE TO FOREIGN SWIMMERS....?
I for one am damn sick and tired of giving the damn store away and getting very little in return....sure, bring them here if they want to swim....but let them pay their way! ANY PUBLIC funding should NOT be spent on foreign swimmers....Heck, take the fast young lady from Africa that swam for Auburn (today's USA Today article)...and SWAM for her home country in the Olympics.....ON A FULL RIDE NO LESS!

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 21st, 2005, 10:28 AM
Although not as weighted as it used ot be, atheletic ability and performace is one criteria for decision making in determining who becomes a Rhodes Scholar. Haven't you read Clinton's book, My Life." If you want to learn how to become president, it is the best book about what type of character (good or bad) it takes to become president.

Also, almost any debate about foreigners coming to the uS to use services has some aspect of racism or negative internationalism in it. It is by defintion the nature of the debate. This does include swimmers taking scholarships. How can you complain about a son getting a free education at a service academy?

As for health care, almost evedry hospital in the US has a foundaton attached to it. That foundation pays a get deal of its 5-7% annually to cover hospital bills for clients who are unable to pay. It used to be called Hill/Burton Act. Some of the money was reimbursed by the fedral government. Now it isn't.

What about foreign students who come to the US on other types of scholarships? If it weren't for foreign students most large univerities woudn't have enough teachers to teach physics and mathematics to undergrads.

I think Denmark, India, Ireland (if you have aan Irish relative no more than two generations back), and Sweden also provides licenses to citizens of other countries and some will even let you take some university classes for free if you have one parent who is a citizen of that country but you aren't.

gull
June 21st, 2005, 10:38 AM
I guess you could consider the education at a service academy "free" if you ignore the commitment to serve in the armed forces after graduation.

Paul Smith
June 21st, 2005, 10:55 AM
Dima,
I was unaware that I could cross the border illegally into Russia and: attend school, get a drivers license and if sick/injured show up at a hospital emergency room and get free treatment? I think they handle it a bit differently over there! I also encourage to try it in Mexico some time.

By the way, the NCAA last year adopted a change to their eligibility rules: for every year you wait after graduating from high school that you do not enroll in college you lose a year of eligibiliy (you also lose a year for every year a person is older than 21). This was pushed thru because of major fuss that came ou of tennis in the college ranks.

justforfun
June 21st, 2005, 10:57 AM
I don't think there is a single point that anyone has made on this thread when arguing that swimming scholarships should go to U.S. citizens first that could be considered racist. It's fine if you disagree with that viewpoint, but it is completely irresponsible to make a serious accusation like racism without cause. It is not by definition the nature of the debate, as you state. I haven't heard anyone say that we shouldn't welcome people of all nationalities to attend U.S. universities and compete. We are simply having a discussion about who should pay for it.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by gull80
Why should health care be free?

Health care should be paid for with public money because it is a public good--like roads, and far more essential. It should also be paid for with public money because putting for-profit companies in charge of goods that are essential leads to public extortion (see the manufactured California electricity "shortage"). Further, it is cheaper, in the long run, to encourage people to get preventive care than to force them to wait until something is so acute that they must go to the emergeny room. As a doctor, you should know that.

And it isn't only the indigent who are screwed. In fact, it is the lower middle class who are caught up most--too wealthy for public subsidy, too poor to afford healthcare on their own, employed by companies that don't offer insurance or charge too much while paying too little, hammered by the hospitals when they do finally show up with a problem: the situation is next to impossible. Not to mention that the inunsured are charged more for hospital services because of the ceilings on what insurance companies are willing to pay. There is a reason that the kids I know give fake names when they finally end up in the hospital, usually for problems that could have been taken care of if they could've afforded a doctor visit.

gull
June 21st, 2005, 11:46 AM
Arguably food and shelter are for the public good, neither of which are free (note I did not say affordable--clearly the health care system has problems). By the way, I don't believe that the millions of Americans who smoke receive their cigarettes for free--they pay for them.

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 11:50 AM
Originally posted by some_girl
Health care should be paid for with public money because it is a public good--like roads, and far more essential.

What makes you think public money makes something free? You might not pay for that visit when you leave the doctor's office, but you pay for it when you buy milk, use a toll-way, buy a new TV, etc. And, I have yet to ever see a single public institution manage anything more efficiently than private enterprise. I don't want to see my taxes go up so some gov't agency can mismanage the money and provide no additional health care services.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
What makes you think public money makes something free? You might not pay for that visit when you leave the doctor's office, but you pay for it when you buy milk, use a toll-way, buy a new TV, etc. And, I have yet to ever see a single public institution manage anything more efficiently than private enterprise. I don't want to see my taxes go up so some gov't agency can mismanage the money and provide no additional health care services.

Yes, but the difference is you need healthcare and you don't need any of those things. And I already gave you an instance where public companies did better--the California electricity boondoggle. Every town that had municipal electricity had power and the rates didn't go up. Every place that privatized had blackouts and high rates. Or take the British rail system: it has gone to hell with partial privitization, while French trains, still under government control (I believe--I haven't checked it out in a while) are a freaking dream to ride. They apologize when they are five minutes late and the trains are always clean and present.

What Americans do is starve government entities, demand they do too much, then bitch about the result. Well, duh.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by gull80
Arguably food and shelter are for the public good, neither of which are free (note I did not say affordable--clearly the health care system has problems). By the way, I don't believe that the millions of Americans who smoke receive their cigarettes for free--they pay for them.

Actually, you can qualify for free food with more money than you can qualify for free healthcare. And where I live, the city *does* have to house you if you show up at the homeless office. Because you know that's what tells you how civilized a nation is--how they take care of their least fortunate.

I don't see what cigarettes has to do with it, as you can live without smoking.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 12:11 PM
Oops, I also forgot to mention that the government does keep your food cheap: the vast subsidies for agribusiness.

gull
June 21st, 2005, 12:20 PM
Should healthcare be affordable? Definitely. Should it be free? That's an entirely different question. The problem is that most discourse in this country is polarized to the extreme--Democrat vs. Republican, dove vs. hawk, anaerobic vs. aerobic, sprints vs. distance, etc.

My point was simply that cigarettes are not free--people choose to pay for them, just as they do for other goods and services (essential ones like food, housing, water, electricity, etc.), despite the fact that the health risks (and corresponding medical costs) are well known.

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
What Americans do is starve government entities, demand they do too much, then bitch about the result. Well, duh.

Have you looked at your paycheck lately? I don't think the government is in any jeopardy of starving. I don't think I'm demanding too much of anything when I take home far less than what I earn.

And, the French train system as synonymous with the US Healthcare system?

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 01:12 PM
Well, gull, you're right, nothing is actually free. The question is how we all pay for it: by screwing the middle to make money for private companies or by charging people what they can afford yet delivering a constant standard, also known as taxation and national health service. The cigarette argument is inane precisely because they are not essential--you can not buy cigarettes and live a full life, even if it is unpleasant for the first few weeks. The same cannot be said of food or housing or healthcare. Thus providing the latter regardless of ability to pay is both civilized and ethical.

Aquageek: Americans pay less in taxes than almost any other advanced nation. I know how much of my money goes to taxes (more than yours dollar for dollar probably since about half my income is freelance and thus taxed at a higher rate because no company is paying half). Geez, I pay for roads I don't even use, seeing as I take the subway. Then again, when anyone needs emergency services, they're glad the roads are there. I pay for schools even though I don't have kids. Then again, an educated populace is good for all of us. If I can buy fewer books, CDs, and vacations so that others can have a roof, some food, and decent healthcare, I am ethically obligated to do so. I'm proud to pay my taxes, not bitter. They are the dues of a decent society.

Then again, paying more taxes doesn't necessarily equal less money for you. People in countries with higher taxes have no health insurance to pay for and generally they don't pay for higher education either. In fact, the US population pays more for comparable healthcare than do people in lands with nationalized healthcare. The point about the French trains is just that sometimes public systems are better than the private alternative.

gull
June 21st, 2005, 01:40 PM
Just because there is a healthcare "crisis" in this country, it does not follow that a program run by the federal gov't is the answer. I think you need to look more critically at the track record of socialized medicine. As for your comments regarding a civilized society, I don't believe the founding fathers envisioned big government and countless entitlement programs. Maybe they weren't civilized enough.

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 01:56 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
Americans pay less in taxes than almost any other advanced nation.

Are you saying that a sign of an advanced nation is the tax burden on it's citizens? Isn't one of the reasons the colonies had their little war was the whole concept of taxation? Why is it more ethical for you to pay more taxes than for me to pay less taxes? Is there some arbitrary percentage where you can take the moral high ground on taxation but I can't by paying less? Is it OK for me to give to charitable organizations that use their money wisely in addition to my tax load?

I do believe the country recently roundly repudiated the notion that in order to be a better nation we have to tax ourselves to death.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 02:18 PM
I'm saying the sign of an advanced nation is the willingness to provide a decent standard of living for all its citizens regardless of their economic situation. And the sign of a decent human is a willingness look beyond your own narrow interests. And no one ever died from paying taxes, so let's not get histrionic.

And frankly, your appeal to the founders is poor. They also thought women, blacks, and white men without property shouldn't be allowed to vote; that slavery was okey-dokey; and that genocide was just peachy. Forgive me for not genuflecting to those paragons of progressivism. We learn from the mistakes of our forbears. Or else we used to until we let fear and anti-intellectualism make up our minds for us.

Gull, again you are right. There might be a non-nationalized alternative that is fair and reasonable. I haven't seen it, but I don't know everything. Any suggestions?

gull
June 21st, 2005, 02:25 PM
The question is, what is the role of the federal gov't? The founding fathers had their view (which was the point of my reference), you have yours. If there were a simple solution to healthcare, we would have seen it already. But as I have previously posted, if socialized medicine is the answer, why are other countries now exploring privitization?

What this has to do with foreign athletes is becoming a bit fuzzy, unless of course they need a rotator cuff repair (in which case they can always return home and wait six months for elective surgery).

Blue Horn
June 21st, 2005, 02:28 PM
Oh yeah, the founders were idiots and the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are no more valuable than toilet paper. Hurrah for communism.

Hook'em
Blue

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
I'm saying the sign of an advanced nation is the willingness to provide a decent standard of living for all its citizens regardless of their economic situation. And the sign of a decent human is a willingness look beyond your own narrow interests. And no one ever died from paying taxes, so let's not get histrionic.


Why is the only way to accomplish this by levying more taxes? I doubt anyone on this forum wants folks to not have a decent standard of living. I just find it incredible that some believe the only way for this to be possible is to have greater taxes. Throwing more money at an inefficient gov't system has never proven a good use of that money.

I personally believe the interests of our country, not just my own narrow interests, are fewer taxes and less gov't. Have you been to a gov't office lately? Were you impressed with your level of service?

gull
June 21st, 2005, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
Have you been to a gov't office lately? Were you impressed with your level of service?

How about a VA hospital? Personally I think our veterans deserve better than that.

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 03:23 PM
Yeah, the VAs are in pretty bad shape. My mother does work at one here in the state. I think I read where Walter Reed was on the closure list earlier this month. But, I'm not convinced more tax dollars is the only answer for this situation.

justforfun
June 21st, 2005, 03:28 PM
Geek, you said you are a Democrat, but you sound more like a Libertarian.

poolmonkey
June 21st, 2005, 03:36 PM
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson

Also google Alexander Tyler.

some_girl - You lost me on the genocide part. Views that were once popular are not seen in the same light today. Hind sight is always 20/20 and it's not for us to pass judgement. They obviously did something right as we are the only remaining super power. Swimmers from all over the world come here to train and we have been a swimming power house for quite some time. ( Have to somehow tie swimming in here. ) And how we treat our people in this country is substantially better than many countries even in today's terms. Some places in the world, women still do not have many rights and China is killing thousands of its people due to the waste from industrialization.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 03:45 PM
Yeah, Blue, pointing out that the founders weren't right about everything clearly makes me a Constitution-hating commie. Thanks for your nuanced argument.

Geek and Gull, have you been to a hospital that serves only poor communities, say the one that serves Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg, and parts of Bushwick, Brooklyn (all poor neighborhoods, though the second is gentrifying quickly)? People who go there would be freaking thrilled to go to a VA hospital. (As the kids in the neighborhood put it, you go in there with a scratch and come out in a box.) Not to mention, VA hospitals would be a lot better if the government wasn't cutting their funding like nobody's business. And to answer you, I was totally pleased the last time I went to a government office. I got my expedited passport from a wonderful lady who not only did her job well, but had awesome benefits and a decent salary. When my friend dropped her keys down the sewer grate, she called 311 (the city's public line), and the next day a bunch of city workers showed up with a machine to remove the grate and find the keys.

Do you know what a nation with low taxes and less government looks like? Read some books on the Gilded Age, then check out some Jacob Riis and Walker Evans photos and get back to me. When was America great? The fifties? Do you know what tax rates were in the fifties? I'll give you a hint, it isn't lower. But if you really think your vision is compelling, argue for it, give positive examples of how it would help the least fortunate among us. Tell me how low taxes are going to make people too poor to pay taxes afford healthcare.

Why then are other nations moving away from socialism? Two main reasons: (a) globalization is a race to the bottom and they are trying to compete with nations where it's okay to force eight year olds to work for pennies a day, and (b) European nations have a combination of againg populations and antipathy to immigration that makes it difficult to sustain themselves.

Anyway, yeah, this is long and off topic. Sorry. I'll be happy to leave it here if you are.

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 03:47 PM
Originally posted by justforfun
Geek, you said you are a Democrat, but you sound more like a Libertarian.

I did vote libertarian in '04, good observation. Unfortunately in NC, you can't vote in the primaries unless you are either registered with either party AND then you can only vote in that party's primary.

Regardless of affiliation, I don't think being a democrat means you have to believe that raising taxes is the only way to solve problems.

We've strayed from the original topic. There have been some good comments on foreign swimmers and scholarships. While still not a big deal to me, I do some valid concerns but not enough to think our country is in peril from the mad swimming foreigners.

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 03:54 PM
Okay, I lied about leaving it. I just wanted to respond. Pool_monkey, if you think people are poor because they won't work, I'd look at _The Working Poor: Invisible in America_ and _Nickel and Dimed_. Laziness isn't the problem.

Genocide: see Native Americans. But yeah, the founders were wrong and we've rectified those wrongs. That was my point, my response to people who were trying to say the founders were for low taxes and thus low taxes are good. And yeah, America is better than lots of other places and not as good as some others. When you swim, are you happy to be in the middle, or do you want to keep getting better?

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 03:54 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
Why then are other nations moving away from socialism? Two main reasons: (a) globalization is a race to the bottom and they are trying to compete with nations where it's okay to force eight year olds to work for pennies a day, and (b) European nations have a combination of againg populations and antipathy to immigration that makes it difficult to sustain themselves.


It finally comes out, long awaited, the anti Starbucks crowd.

You have yet to state how taking more of my money will improve an inefficient gov't program. You just want more of my money. I'm sure you have poor hospitals but does that mean more money spent poorly will improve them? Seems to me you'd be more interest in reform to make things better.

Keep your paws out of my wallet!

some_girl
June 21st, 2005, 04:04 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
It finally comes out, long awaited, the anti Starbucks crowd.

You have yet to state how taking more of my money will improve an inefficient gov't program. You just want more of my money. I'm sure you have poor hospitals but does that mean more money spent poorly will improve them? Seems to me you'd be more interest in reform to make things better.

Keep your paws out of my wallet!

At long last it comes out: the utter selfishness at the bottom of "libertarianism"! Look, the hospital I mentioned isn't actually my hospital (mine is in a nice middle-class neighborhood and is much more pleasant). And what is this mythical "reform to make things better" that doesn't involve money? Is that like the magical pill that won't make me fat anymore?

I know, I know, you can't actually answer concrete questions with real answers. Insults and assumptions are just so much easier.

aquageek
June 21st, 2005, 04:18 PM
You want an example of gov't reform that actually didn't cost more, improved efficiencies and even the left crowd liked - WELFORM REFORM.

Since paying taxes is not voluntary, I'm not sure why you consider me selfish. Would the fact that folks contribute to other causes besides our gov't be ok with you or is it only acceptable to pay more taxes to prove your worth? What about people who tithe to their churches or volunteer their time? That acceptable?

poolmonkey
June 21st, 2005, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
Pool_monkey, if you think people are poor because they won't work, I'd look at _The Working Poor: Invisible in America_ and _Nickel and Dimed_. Laziness isn't the problem.

some_girl: I'll look at the book. Thanks. But we used to give gifts to some of the poor of our community and one year we gave to a family with a young man in his twenties, who didn't work because he didn't want to. He was satisfied with the amount of aid he received from the government, plus what we suspected to be some not so legal side activities, but we were very upset that we were giving food and Christmas presents to this family, because this man did not want to work and provide for his family. Years ago, I worked with people who didn't care if they got fired, so they could get back on unemployment. And a number of people keep their hours down, so they get additional benefits from the government. I cannot condone the activities of these people that take advantage of the system.

To me some foreign swimmers fall into this same category. It is unacceptable for a person to have their way paid for by their country and receive scholarships from our institutions. To those that are paying their own way, they should have access to some swimming scholarships.

My history is fuzy, but I believe the founding fathers were against taxation without representation and big government, not necessary taxes themselves, but I could be wrong.

Tom Ellison
June 21st, 2005, 05:36 PM
I vehemently resent your accusation that my son has a free ride at the US Merchant Marine Academy. The truth to that is quite the opposite with his MULTI YEAR commitment to the US Navy after graduation.

And I might point out that the US Merchant Marine Academy is the ONLY Academy that 142 of its’ Midshipmen lost their lives while serving this great Nation in time of war, while STILL ENROLLED IN THE ACADEMY.

gull
June 21st, 2005, 05:45 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
Geek and Gull, have you been to a hospital that serves only poor communities, say the one that serves Bed-Stuy, Williamsburg, and parts of Bushwick, Brooklyn (all poor neighborhoods, though the second is gentrifying quickly)?


I trained in Houston and spent quite a bit of time at Ben Taub, the county hospital. What I saw were dedicated physicians working long hours to deliver quality care to indigent patients. Ben Taub is a Level I trauma center and is considered the place to go if you're shot, stabbed or in a motor vehicle accident (the private hospitals aren't nearly as well-equipped to handle those problems). Sorry if that doesn't fit your view of the American healthcare system.

Kae1
June 21st, 2005, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
"There are hundreds of millions of dollars of scholarships that aren't used every year so these few swimmers aren't denying anyone an education. "

NOT IN MEN'S SWIMMING IN THIS COUNTRY....SHOW ME ONE DOLLAR IN NCAA MEN'S SWIMMING THAT IS NOT USED....and I WILL WEAR A MOOSE SUIT TO WORLDS....A PINK MOOSE SUIT AT THAT....!

While trying desparately to find money for college, I kept hearing about the "hundreds of millions of dollars" in scholarships that are not used every year. Thinking (as many did) "I can get a scholarship", I started looking for the money. Often times, what they don't tell you is that these large pools of money are often for VERY SPECIFIC scholarships. There may very well be swimming scholarship money not used at American colleges and universities. Why? Perhaps the scholarship also requires you to major in Comparative Literature and have a documentable Polish background. Perhaps the swim team consist of 12 people and is coached by the dean's wife. Maybe it requires you to spend your summers teaching swimming in Third World countries. The point is, most unused scholarship money is unused because of the way the money is set up.

I noticed, Tom, that in responding to the info about scholarship $$, you specified "NCAA" - when the original poster didn't mention which schools may have money going unused.

I used to do applicatant interviews for my alma mater and always warned parents and students about the dangers of assuming their kids are "shoe-ins" for scholarships - whether academic or athletic. If you're worried about paying for your kids college, better to do the research on need-based aid, college/university endowments, and financing. They're much better bets than performance-based scholarships.

Kae (who worked for 2 years as an assistant to a financial aid advisor at a private university and got more money from the private university as need-based aid than from the public uni I attended for grad school, thanks to a better endowment).

Tom Ellison
June 21st, 2005, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
"There are hundreds of millions of dollars of scholarships that aren't used every year so these few swimmers aren't denying anyone an education. "

I was quoting another post here....I DO NOT BELIEVE THIS STATEMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! At all!

Kae1
June 21st, 2005, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by poolmonkey
Years ago, I worked with people who didn't care if they got fired, so they could get back on unemployment. And a number of people keep their hours down, so they get additional benefits from the government. I cannot condone the activities of these people that take advantage of the system.



Maybe it's the rampant liberal in me, but all this means to me is that perhaps, as a country, we should do something to make sure that if ARE working, you can afford to provide for yourself and your family. This doesn't mean subsistence living, either - it means decent food, permanent shelter, clothing, health care (preventative and curative), reliable transportation (maybe not a car, but public transport costs money, too), and the ability to save something in case of emergency. I know in my current state of residence as well as in my home state of Missouri, making minimum wage does not cover these things and yet is considered too high of an income to qualify for state aid. I heard a report not too long ago that in Missouri you have to be making less than somthing like $8,000/ year to qualify for public assistance. How many of you could afford a place to live, food to eat and feed your kids, costs for education, transportation, health insurance, etc. on that?

To get this back to swimming scholarships, my theory is that if you're good enough to get 'em, you should get 'em, regardless of where you were born. After all, aren't foreigners educated in the US more likely to stay in the US after graduation? And therefore contribute to our country? What REALLY sticks in my craw is the schools that lower their ACADEMIC standards to get athletes.

That should be enough to get me lynched if I ever get to one of the big meets :D
Kae

Blue Horn
June 21st, 2005, 07:26 PM
Some_girl,

Sorry if you thought my post was contained a nuanced argument. Assuming that you understand the definition of nuanced. Actually, I wasn't making much of an argument. I was simply using sarcasim to point out your failure to employ logical reasoning.

Assuming that you also felt that I misrepresented your post, I don't see how I mispresented anything. Maybe you simply prefer to think of yourself as a socialist instead of a communist. Either way, you are advocating a communistic/socialistic approach in that you think that the government should provide for everyone a decent standard of living. You specifically stated, "I'm saying the sign of an advanced nation is the willingness to provide a decent standard of living for all its citizens regardless of their economic situation." Your words not mine.

As for the constitution hating, I never said that. I was simply pointing out the flaw in your dismissing of the founder's rational for declaring independence. Specifically, you bash Geek for relying on the founding father's ideals to be free from taxation without representation. His reliance on the founding fathers, which you ppointed out as being "poor", was one of the main reasons that the documents I referenced were created. In essence you completely dismissed the reliance on any of the ideals and beliefs of our founding fathers because of their views on a few issues unrelated to taxation. Then you go on to say that we are supposed to learn from our forefathers. Thats funny considering your complete disregard of them. How can you learn from our forefathers if you completely dismiss all the ideals of people that had a few bad ideas and acts? ALL societies, including ours today, have problems, but that doesn't mean you dismiss everything else.

So, exactly how did I misrepresent your post?

Hook'em
Blue

Sabretooth Tiger
June 21st, 2005, 09:18 PM
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much it is whether we provide enough for those who have little."

Franklin D. Roosevelt

(Niether a socialist nor a communist)

Scansy
June 21st, 2005, 09:39 PM
Oh boy, I can't believe I'm getting involved in this.....

Maybe its the rampant conservative in me, but I believe that people need to help themselves. If someone is working a minimum wage job..... look for another job. If you don't like your standard of living..... do something about it. And I don't mean whine to the government that you need a handout.

I believe that the worst thing that has happened to this country was the creation of the entitlement attitude... mostly as a result of government programs.... and compounded day in and day out by the lawsuit happy court system, continued handouts and probably other influences that I am not aware of. Everyone thinks they are entitled to a handout. What I think is that people are entitled to one thing... opportunity. And opportunity does existing in this country. Period.

I grew up in a house where hard work happened all the time. Unfortunately, many children grow up in a house where the only form of income is the government. These children grow up learning that the way to survive is to have your hand out. It's an evil cycle that gets those family's nowhere over time. But somehow I think many of our government leaders like it that way. If you have a large group of people that is beholden to you - needs you to keep giving them money - you have a steady stream of votes as long as you keep their cash flow going.

OK Libs.... blast away!


Originally posted by Kae1
Maybe it's the rampant liberal in me, but all this means to me is that perhaps, as a country, we should do something to make sure that if ARE working, you can afford to provide for yourself and your family. This doesn't mean subsistence living, either - it means decent food, permanent shelter, clothing, health care (preventative and curative), reliable transportation (maybe not a car, but public transport costs money, too), and the ability to save something in case of emergency. I know in my current state of residence as well as in my home state of Missouri, making minimum wage does not cover these things and yet is considered too high of an income to qualify for state aid. I heard a report not too long ago that in Missouri you have to be making less than somthing like $8,000/ year to qualify for public assistance. How many of you could afford a place to live, food to eat and feed your kids, costs for education, transportation, health insurance, etc. on that?

To get this back to swimming scholarships, my theory is that if you're good enough to get 'em, you should get 'em, regardless of where you were born. After all, aren't foreigners educated in the US more likely to stay in the US after graduation? And therefore contribute to our country? What REALLY sticks in my craw is the schools that lower their ACADEMIC standards to get athletes.

That should be enough to get me lynched if I ever get to one of the big meets :D
Kae

Conniekat8
June 22nd, 2005, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by justforfun
3) Should we be giving athletic scholarships, which are a scarce resource in swimming, to foreign athletes who will represent their own countries internationally instead of U.S.-born swimmers who will represent us internationally?


It'
s not just aboutthe swimmers, it;s about the coaches and their careers, and it;s about the athletic programs who have a better chance of surviving witg more quality swimmers, even if they came from abroad.
In most cases, these swimmers represent their schools in almost all competitions, withthe exception of certain international events... But even then, it is usually well known where they've gotten the training that took them to the top...So that benefits the coaches and the schools. And eventually, a *few* of those foreign athletes will end up getting the US citizenship, and end uo representing the US. I think it's important for the coaches to work with the top talent, regardless of what country that talent came from. That will only benefit our own talent.

As for Duje Draganja... Well, he came from my old country, and is swimming in my new country (US), so I'm especially biased in his case ;)

Conniekat8
June 22nd, 2005, 12:35 AM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
Bill of Rights ? Oh heck yes....let's make that apply to EVERY PERSON ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH....heck, I stand corrected....let's open the borders and let anyone come here....also, while we are at it....let us send all our jobs offshore to help other countries, lets give free aid to everyone and still have millions go hungry here in the USA....let's give what LITTLE scholarship money we have to anyone... from any place....The heck with taking care of USA Swimmers....give the entire store away....Americans do not need rights, jobs, scholarships or rewards for years of hard work in this country….

Looking sternly at Tom, tapping her foot...
Ya know, I'm not from 'round here originally.... gotta problem with that?
Sounds like if it was up to you, I;d never make it over here... and now, whadda ya know, I pay enough in taxes to cover your entire salary! Not exactly talking aboit people on public assistance.
:P
Don't make me get mad at you and hafta kick yer bum!!!
[Extracts Tom's foot out of his mouth]

dorothyrde
June 22nd, 2005, 06:20 AM
I wonder how many of the foreign athletes who get scholarships actually live here, and their parents live here and pay taxes here.
Our age group swim team has an assistant coach who swam for Bulgaria in the Olympics. His son is on full-ride scholarship here and also swam for Bulgaria last year. They have lived here since their son was small and work here and pay taxes here. So how many of the "foreign" athletes actually pay taxes in the USA?

Maryyyyyy
June 22nd, 2005, 09:33 AM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
"There are hundreds of millions of dollars of scholarships that aren't used every year so these few swimmers aren't denying anyone an education. "

NOT IN MEN'S SWIMMING IN THIS COUNTRY....SHOW ME ONE DOLLAR IN NCAA MEN'S SWIMMING THAT IS NOT USED....and I WILL WEAR A MOOSE SUIT TO WORLDS....A PINK MOOSE SUIT AT THAT....!

It would be a pretty sad, lonely worlds if the USA were to decide to close its borders... hmmmmm less competition... the USA will win all the medals... now wouldn't THAT be nice? :rolleyes:

Dear Mr Moore,
Please note that the borders to the United States of America have been closed, and only USA citizens will be competing in the upcoming World Championships in Palo Alto 2006...
Signed,
Mary Lokken
Florence Italy

PS: Given that I have duel Italian / USA citizenship I CAN slip through your nation's borders and WILL be attending the World Championships. I will swim for the Italian team, and will be wearing an Italian swim cap in appreciation of the kind masters spirit they have shown me during my 22 years in this country. I have regularly paid my team dues, and have received no scholarships in any country on this planet...

ande
June 22nd, 2005, 09:45 AM
uh mary

a duel is where a man would fight another man to win or defend your honor.

dual might be the spelling you intented to go with
now there have been duels in pools too
maybe we could do italians vs amercians
;-)

ande


Originally posted by Maryyyyyy
PS: Given that I have duel Italian / USA citizenship I CAN slip through your nation's borders and WILL be attending the World Championships. I will swim for the Italian team, and will be wearing an Italian swim cap in appreciation of the kind masters spirit they have shown me during my 22 years in this country. I have regularly paid my team dues, and have received no scholarships in any country on this planet...

Tom Ellison
June 22nd, 2005, 09:57 AM
Connie:

You immigrated to this country legally and became a productive citizen, and in doing so actions like that are what made our country great. I am not espousing that we close our borders to everyone. What I am saying, we need to close our borders to anyone who wants to come here illegally without US Immigration granting them permission to come here. Unless we do that the USA will become the welfare Country for every nation on earth and US Citizens will end up footing a bill we cannot afford. Hey, do not take my word for that, simply look at every single border county in Texas, AZ and California to see how STRETCHED to the limit their budgets are due to illegal immigrants taxing their health care and other social services.

I stand by my beliefs that ONLY US Citizens should be allowed scholarship money to swim. MOST, foreign swimmers come here to get an education on the United State’s nickel and then they end up competing for their home countries against the USA in world competition. I will NEVER be comfortable with that….ever…

Tom Ellison
June 22nd, 2005, 10:03 AM
Oh, and Connie, I have always respected your posts.....Having said that...this one is way out of line and lacks class....

"and now, whadda ya know, I pay enough in taxes to cover your entire salary! "

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 22nd, 2005, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by gull80
I trained in Houston and spent quite a bit of time at Ben Taub, the county hospital. What I saw were dedicated physicians working long hours to deliver quality care to indigent patients. Ben Taub is a Level I trauma center and is considered the place to go if you're shot, stabbed or in a motor vehicle accident (the private hospitals aren't nearly as well-equipped to handle those problems). Sorry if that doesn't fit your view of the American healthcare system.

Once wwhen I was visiting my siblings in Houston, my oldest brother is an ER nurse at Texas Children's, I had a terrible asthma attack. I went to the first ER I could find. It was at Hermann. The next day the same thing happened. I went back to Hermann. the woman at the front desk told me that people like me shoudl go to Ben Taub. I wenmt there three days later & got better service. then i went to my sister's in Pearland. I went to the nearby brach of Memorial. teh bill from memorial was at least three times more expensive than any ER hospital bill I had ever gotten.

Whe i licved in St. Louis, my job was very close to the County Hospital. Twice Ihad an attack at work. I got the same type ofservice that I got at Jewish near my appartment.

Sabretooth Tiger
June 22nd, 2005, 10:53 AM
OK, now even I have to question whether we want this thread to travel down the path related to unauthorized immigration, the economic realities of that process, the number of jobs that create the incentives for such actions, the merits of guest worker programs and the value of providing educational and health benefits to residents and their children as opposed to leaving them illiterate and diseased.

But this is a far astray from the issue of athletic scholarships and diversity on college campuses . . .

so let's not go there . . .

just a suggestion . . . but I will certainly yield to the majority and dive right in if people want to travel this path

carl

Tom Ellison
June 22nd, 2005, 11:12 AM
"OK, now even I have to question whether we want this thread to travel down the path related to unauthorized immigration, the economic realities of that process, the number of jobs that create the incentives for such actions, the merits of guest worker programs and the value of providing educational and health benefits to residents and their children as opposed to leaving them illiterate and diseased."

Naa, I guess we should not travel down the path related to discussing illegal immigrants.....The fact is, they should not be here in the first place and if they were NOT here....we would not have anything talk about, educate or provide health benefits to....

Does the word Moot....come to mind?

Scansy
June 22nd, 2005, 11:45 AM
OK, although I posted my opinion and believe what I said, I am sorry that I went so far off the original topic....... Sometimes my mind wanders!

On topic...I stated earlier in the thread that I do not have a problem with swimmers (or athletes in general) from other countries coming to the US - for scholarships or a paycheck - as long as it is done legally. It is a selfish thing. When I attend or watch a sports event, I want to see the best.


Originally posted by Scansy
Oh boy, I can't believe I'm getting involved in this.....

Maybe its the rampant conservative in me, but I believe that people need to help themselves. If someone is working a minimum wage job..... look for another job. If you don't like your standard of living..... do something about it. And I don't mean whine to the government that you need a handout.

I believe that the worst thing that has happened to this country was the creation of the entitlement attitude... mostly as a result of government programs.... and compounded day in and day out by the lawsuit happy court system, continued handouts and probably other influences that I am not aware of. Everyone thinks they are entitled to a handout. What I think is that people are entitled to one thing... opportunity. And opportunity does existing in this country. Period.

I grew up in a house where hard work happened all the time. Unfortunately, many children grow up in a house where the only form of income is the government. These children grow up learning that the way to survive is to have your hand out. It's an evil cycle that gets those family's nowhere over time. But somehow I think many of our government leaders like it that way. If you have a large group of people that is beholden to you - needs you to keep giving them money - you have a steady stream of votes as long as you keep their cash flow going.

OK Libs.... blast away!

Maryyyyyy
June 22nd, 2005, 11:47 AM
Originally posted by ande
uh mary

a duel is where a man would fight another man to win or defend your honor.

dual might be the spelling you intented to go with
now there have been duels in pools too
maybe we could do italians vs amercians
;-)

ande

oooooops! that was a good one! a Freudian slip, obviously!!

An Italian vs American dual masters meet? You all would beat us right out of the water... and then we'd cook you up some yummy pasta, give you some wine, and there would be peace in the world of masters swimming... ;)

justforfun
June 22nd, 2005, 12:34 PM
I suppose we've beaten the topic to death since we've moved on to other things...but, I've been wanting to relate this story from my home state to those who are unfamiliar.

The U. of Nebraska mens' swimming team used to be pretty good. They regularly won conference titles in the old Big 8 and had some top 10 NCAA finishes. The men's program was terminated a number of years ago, which is a story in and of itself.

Nebraska's success was largely a product of it's international swimmers, including athletes from South Africa, Australia, Canada and Europe. In the late 1980's and into the 1990's, some of these foreign athletes had a lot of success in international competition. One was a South African named Peter Williams, who briefly held the 50 LCM free record (much to the chagrin of Biondi and Jager, because he set the record in a time trial). Another swimmer was South African Penny Heynes. She was better known because she held both breaststroke world records and was a double Olympic gold winner in 1996.

You might think that being a native Nebraskan and life long fan of all Nebraska sports (even though I didn't attend Nebraska), I would be proud of these accomplishments. Certainly the University promoted those swimmers. But, I never felt good about it, and even felt embarrassed, because I knew the training, coaching, and financial support provided by the University lead directly to these swimmers' success at the expense of U.S. swimmers who finished below them at international competitions. Furthermore, the scholarships they received didn't go to promising local swimmers, people I had competed with and against in high school. I never felt any animosity towards the individual swimmers who were on scholarship. They were certainly nice people and I got along fine with them--they were only taking advantage of an opportunity offered to them.

I can tell you that people who supported the team in various ways, financially, as volunteers, etc. were not happy that so many scholarships went to non-U.S. swimmers. Certainly the international student-athletes at Nebraska were given opportunities they might not have had otherwise. But, shouldn't those opportunities go preferentially to U.S. swimmers? None of the many foreign swimmers who came to Nebraska ever became U.S. citizens and competed for the United States.

Tom Ellison
June 22nd, 2005, 12:48 PM
Justforfun...I rest my case after your last post....You made my point very well.....and I do not feel any animosity towards the foreign swimmers on scholarships in the USA...I just wish they would have been granted to USA Swimmers.....

Heck, ONE OF THE GREATEST USMS SWIMMERS of ALL TIME....and a FINE MAN and friend....Graham Johnston had a scholarship at Oklahoma in the early 50's...and went on to swim the mile in the 52 Olympic Games for S. Africa....A few years later he became a U.S. Citizen....But, had I or my kids been around then....I would have wanted US Swimmers to have this fine man and great swimmers scholarship.....Heck, I am openly for Americans first!

some_girl
June 22nd, 2005, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
You want an example of gov't reform that actually didn't cost more, improved efficiencies and even the left crowd liked - WELFORM REFORM.

Since paying taxes is not voluntary, I'm not sure why you consider me selfish. Would the fact that folks contribute to other causes besides our gov't be ok with you or is it only acceptable to pay more taxes to prove your worth? What about people who tithe to their churches or volunteer their time? That acceptable?

Well, that isn't necessarily true about welfare reform. According to this (http://www.ericdigests.org/2003-4/welfare-reform.html) study digest (the widest nonpartisan link I could find in the short time I have), welfare reform seemed to have good effects only when coupled with increased spending on programs designed to support working parents: childcare, etc. That is, it worked when you spent the money elsewhere, not when you refused to spend it. It is also hard to interpret welfare reform statistics because most studies I found were from 2001 or 2002, which means they were looking at reform in the context of economic expansion. Then again, if there were some innovative approach to healthcare that cost less money but was effective, I would coonsider it. I haven't seen any suggestions in that direction, though.

As for your other question, no I do not think private charity is a reasonable option. Private charity is never disinterested, and I especially don't think people should have to endure prostelyzation to get help. Even the most reprehensible people deserve help and compassion, and a disinterested government is the best way to make sure people are helped regardless of their personal charms.

knelson
June 22nd, 2005, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by justforfun
But, shouldn't those opportunities go preferentially to U.S. swimmers? None of the many foreign swimmers who came to Nebraska ever became U.S. citizens and competed for the United States.

This same theme has come up numerous times and I just don't get it. These foreign swimmers are coming to the U.S. to get a free (or at least cheap) education and train with and compete against some of the best swimmers in the world. I don't really understand why they are in any way obligated to become U.S. citizens or compete for the U.S. and I really don't understand why people think they would. That said, several of the foreign guys I swam with did stay in the U.S. after school and have jobs and familes here now. This may be a different tack than most of our ancestors took to reach the U.S., but the end result is the same, and in my opinion this is one of the things that makes the U.S. great.

I'm sure there are lots of examples, but let me name just one name of someone who came to this country to swim and has had a HUGE positive effect on swimming in the United States: Jon Urbanchek.

Frank Thompson
June 22nd, 2005, 01:00 PM
Kirk:

Was one of the those swimmers named Michael Green who swam for British team in the 1988 Olympics and swam at MSU. He is now a citizen and living, working, and swimming in USMS.

some_girl
June 22nd, 2005, 01:03 PM
Um, the response was sarcastic too. But yes, there is a really big difference between being a democratic socialist and being a communist. You know, like the difference between preferring progressive taxation and nationalization of vital sectors to centrally planned economies and total nationalization.

Anyway, my argument was perfectly logical.
Geek: Low taxes are good because the founders liked them!
Me: That isn't an argument. The founders liked other things that we now recognize aren't good. Therefore, just appealing to the founders' sense of good isn't sufficient.
Others: But the founders did some good stuff.
Me: Of course. And we should retain the good, while making things better.
You: You hate the Declaration of Independence and make no sense. Commie.

That is, you misrepresented my argument by saying I dismissed the founders entirely, when all I dismissed was the notion that because they thought something was good, it is obviously good.

But I have to get back to work, and I'm feeling bad about this giant derail, so I'd be happy to discuss this stuff via PM, but I don't think I'll post in this thread anymore.


Originally posted by Blue Horn
Some_girl,

Sorry if you thought my post was contained a nuanced argument. Assuming that you understand the definition of nuanced. Actually, I wasn't making much of an argument. I was simply using sarcasim to point out your failure to employ logical reasoning.

Assuming that you also felt that I misrepresented your post, I don't see how I mispresented anything. Maybe you simply prefer to think of yourself as a socialist instead of a communist. Either way, you are advocating a communistic/socialistic approach in that you think that the government should provide for everyone a decent standard of living. You specifically stated, "I'm saying the sign of an advanced nation is the willingness to provide a decent standard of living for all its citizens regardless of their economic situation." Your words not mine.

As for the constitution hating, I never said that. I was simply pointing out the flaw in your dismissing of the founder's rational for declaring independence. Specifically, you bash Geek for relying on the founding father's ideals to be free from taxation without representation. His reliance on the founding fathers, which you ppointed out as being "poor", was one of the main reasons that the documents I referenced were created. In essence you completely dismissed the reliance on any of the ideals and beliefs of our founding fathers because of their views on a few issues unrelated to taxation. Then you go on to say that we are supposed to learn from our forefathers. Thats funny considering your complete disregard of them. How can you learn from our forefathers if you completely dismiss all the ideals of people that had a few bad ideas and acts? ALL societies, including ours today, have problems, but that doesn't mean you dismiss everything else.

So, exactly how did I misrepresent your post?

Hook'em
Blue

aquageek
June 22nd, 2005, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by some_girl
As for your other question, no I do not think private charity is a reasonable option. Private charity is never disinterested, and I especially don't think people should have to endure prostelyzation to get help. Even the most reprehensible people deserve help and compassion, and a disinterested government is the best way to make sure people are helped regardless of their personal charms.

So, let me see if I understand you. You contend the only way to help people is to throw high tax dollars at inefficient gov't run program and agencies? Maybe we should all stop giving to charity and just give it all to the gov't, such fine stewards of our money they are. What in the world makes you think the dollars people give to church require prostelyzing? We give to habitat, soup kitchen, homeless shelters, women's shelters. If we never see a single of these folks in our doors, we don't care. That's not what giving is all about.

Are you also saying the gov't should dicatate how I spend my charity dollars? Wow, are you an American?

knelson
June 22nd, 2005, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by Frank Thompson
Kirk:

Was one of the those swimmers named Michael Green who swam for British team in the 1988 Olympics and swam at MSU. He is now a citizen and living, working, and swimming in USMS.

Yes, the two I thought of off the top of my head were Michael Green and Chris Clarke who was from South Africa.

Sam Perry
June 22nd, 2005, 01:11 PM
Just for fun,

I was on one of those Nebraska teams for a semester and swam with Peter as well as the other South Africans and Canadians great guys, but us Americans were definitely second fiddle and maybe we should have been, they were bettter swimmers. I had always felt our rankings and conference titles were hollow due the large amount of foreign swimmers. We were the only program at UNL with so many foreign athletes.

This discussion sure has digressed into political ramblings and differences of opionion that will never be settled on this board.

Again I state my case that if STATE Universities want to support foreign athletes with Alumni money fine. I would love to know how many of these athletes even NEED the scholarships since so many of them are supported by their respective governments any way...

Blue Horn
June 22nd, 2005, 01:22 PM
botterud,

That is a very interesting quote. That quote comes from FDR's second inauguarl speach. Specifically, he was speaking of how to measure his administration. There had been quite a bit of corruption and the depression was taking a toll on a very large portion of our society. Something drastic had to be done and the government needed to be cleaned up. He did not state that government should provide a decent living to all people. On a side note, there are probably many people that believe that FDR was a socialist to a certain degree.

Hook'em
Blue

Blue Horn
June 22nd, 2005, 01:36 PM
some-girl,

Actually, that isn't what you said. Also, that isn't what I said. Anyway, if you think that is sound logic . . .

This thread is way off topic, I am done. Time to get back to work.

Hook'em
Blue

gull
June 22nd, 2005, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
Are you also saying the gov't should dicatate how I spend my charity dollars?

The federal government knows how to spend your money better than you do. You should be happy they let you keep some of it. So shut up and get back to work.

aquageek
June 22nd, 2005, 02:08 PM
It actually does make sense for me to get back to work as tax liberation day usually passes in May, so now I'm theoretically making money for my family and not the government for the rest of the year.

And, you, Gull, lay off! Why don't you go operate on some folks for free. You have a moral and ethical obligation to do all your work for free as a health care provider.

Matt S
June 22nd, 2005, 02:41 PM
Folks,

I'll leave the politics to others. Let me simply observe that we are looking at two distinct problems. First, college is expensive. There is not enough scholarship money to go around to help all or even many swimmers and other deserving students, and male swimmers present a particular problem. Second, many of our most promising age group swimmers chose to quit the sport in their teen years, males especially, and do not participate in college or world class swimming.

Also, some have suggested that the performance of U.S. swimming at the international elite level has suffered recently. I'm not sure I buy that argument.

As a proposed solution, some have suggested changing the rules concerning athletic scholarships so that only U.S. citizens are eligible to receive them. I have to wonder whether this will have much impact on either of the two problems IDed above. The number of swimming scholarships available is miniscule compared to the number of college bound age group & high school swimmers, and miniscule even compared to the number of swimmers who do compete for college teams. I don't see how a couple dozen full rides at a Div I school is going to make much difference helping middle class swimmers who are wondering how they will pay for college (even if you restrict it to swimmers fast enough to compete at the Div I level). I also don't see how a slim chance at a college scholarship is going to be much of an incentive to stay in a sport that has lost its appeal.
("Comrades of high school boys swimming, we must unite against the common enemy!"
"Girls, cars and hanging out with friends!")

Some have argued that regardless of the effect on swimming, athletic scholarships to U.S. universities should be restrictied to U.S. athletes. I'll simply tip my hat to Aquageek's arguement that who is an "American" swimmer and whether money comes from "American" sources are complex issues. Don't get me wrong. I am receptive to arguments that college athletics should have core values in addition to win at all costs. (Graduation would be at the top of my list.) But, I find the value of give the money to the fastest American swimmer, rather than the fastest swimmer, to be a somewhat odd selection.

Bottom line: Swim because you love it. Get an education because it makes good career sense, and pay for it the same way everyone else does. Don't expect the former to bail you out of the latter. You could end of seeing swimming as just another job.

Matt

gull
June 22nd, 2005, 04:29 PM
Maybe I'm misinterpreting your post. If not, I don't believe anyone on this thread proposed anything like "let 'em eat grass." As for "arguing the condition of poor people" while sitting in a "climate controlled space," I can only speak for myself. I have spent many nights caring for indigent patients suffering from life-threatening conditions, neither expecting nor receiving compensation for my work. If we can't save the world, we can try to make our little corner of it a better place.

Matt S
June 22nd, 2005, 06:43 PM
Does anyone have any idea who Bud is and what his previous contribution, if any, to this discussion thread might have been? I've scanned about half the 15 pages hanging off of this thread, and I haven't spotted him once.

Matt

ehoch
June 22nd, 2005, 07:08 PM
Here we go again -- let me start by saying that I am a foreign swimmer that came to the US on a swimming scholarship.

All the so-called arguments about foreign swimmers taking scholarships away and so on are really off-base and very narrowminded.

A couple of things right away:
- any swimmer who has any shot whatsoever of ever representing the US in the Olympics or other international competition will always be able to get a scholarship. In swimming, you know by age 17 or 18 if that person even has the slightest shot of something like that - so that part of the entire argument is just wrong. There are about 40 or so solid division 1 programs, that mean even for the men on average there should be about 100 scholarships each year - if you are not among the top 100 high-schoolswimmers in the nation, let me be the first one to break the news -- you will not make the Olympics.

- the scholarship is a trade: nothing more and nothing less. I will get the education and you will get my ability to swim. I am obligating myself to train 10x per week for 2 1/2 hours in the water, 4 x per week on land , I will be at Christmas training on December 26 at 6:00 AM -- and the university gets my ability to compete in the sport of swimming.

- American swimmers get beat by foreign swimmers training in the US: What are you really crying about ? The US dominates the medal count in swimming. If anything the American swimmers gain from being able to train with the BEST SWIMMERS in the world. Do you think the American sprinters at Auburn suffer from training with Freedie Bousquet ?? Do think the backstrokers at Stanford had a setback when Rogan trained with them ??

- The main reason international swimmers like going to US colleges is not the free education -- schools are basically for free in most European countries. The reason is the ability to combine school and swimming (or trackand field, waterpolo, ....) . Universities in Europe don't really give a "you know what" about sports - they could not care less. You do not hear other countries complaining that the US colleges have (by accident) created a semi-pro system for many Olympic sports.

Phil Arcuni
June 22nd, 2005, 07:57 PM
hear hear for ehoch!

He says what I tried, but failed, to say.

My only quibble? While "people in other countries" may not complain about the semi-pro athletic systems embedded in our educational system, I do! (for what its worth)

Sabretooth Tiger
June 22nd, 2005, 09:04 PM
Well said ehoch!

carl (a non-scholarship, Div III swimming football rugby player . . . long, long ago)

dorothyrde
June 22nd, 2005, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by Matt S

("Comrades of high school boys swimming, we must unite against the common enemy!"
"Girls, cars and hanging out with friends!")


Matt

<chuckle> so true, as my son's swimming is a casualty of the above. He at least is working around a pool as a life guard now!

hooked-on-swimming
June 23rd, 2005, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by Matt S
Does anyone have any idea who Bud is and what his previous contribution, if any, to this discussion thread might have been? I've scanned about half the 15 pages hanging off of this thread, and I haven't spotted him once.

Matt

So what's the point?Are you trying to say that the more you say, the more right you have to be listened to?Any post has its value and just because he posted once does not mean he did not follow the entire thread and dod not have his view on the matter...
P.S. Way to go:let us judge people's views by how many times they've tapped into a thread...

Maryyyyyy
June 23rd, 2005, 04:06 AM
BRAVO ECHOCH!!

I agree with Phil - echoch said in a very logical and clear way what I've been trying to say... but from me it came out less clearly and with an edge of sarcasm.

Thanks, echoch!

Mary

gull
June 23rd, 2005, 09:03 AM
Just so I understand this--state universities have an obligation to the residents of that state, except when it comes to athletics, because fielding a winning team trumps all else?

As for the concept of a trade, I assumed swimming was something you wanted to do, not just a job (like dorm crew), and having the opportunity to train for four years with a great coach was a pretty big perk.

Rob Copeland
June 23rd, 2005, 09:39 AM
Ehoch, A well stated argument from a person directly impacted by our little conversations!

“All the so-called arguments about foreign swimmers taking scholarships away and so on are really off-base and very narrowminded.” These are real arguments and foreign swimmers ARE taking away athletic scholarships from US swimmers. As for narrow minded, okay you got me there… I’m as narrow minded about addressing the topic of swimming scholarships as you are about not addressing it.

“The scholarship is a trade: nothing more and nothing less” Maybe to you your scholarship was just money. However for me my swimming scholarship was a source of great pride in accomplishing one of my goals. It is also a source of great pride and a financial relief in seeing my son awarded his swimming scholarship.

“I am obligating myself to train 10x per week for 2 1/2 hours” Don’t let the NCAA find out about this, 25 hours of in water training is in violation of NCAA rules.

Do foreign swimmers bring up the level of competition within the NCAA? Absolutely, I don’t think anyone is arguing this point. Bousquet’s 50 Free at NCAA’s was the swim of the meet this year (last year’s 50 by Fred wasn’t bad either) and would have hated to see him prohibited because of his citizenship.

And if you don’t mind my asking; how old were you when you came to the USA? As you know most foreign swimmers do not go directly from high school to college, allowing them to get in an additional year or 3 of full time training. This provides these foreign athletes an advantage over US kids who typically go directly to college from high school. I assume this is why the NCAA instituted Rule 14.2.3.2 for swimming and tennis.

tjburk
June 23rd, 2005, 10:01 AM
Alright, I have sat back and read this from beginning to end now. You guys and girls continue to amaze me. It is like listening to the primaries all over again. The diversity of this country is EXACTLY what made this country great! I will never argue against that, heck look at my last name. What I will argue, is exactly what Tom has stated from the beginning. It used to be an honor not a right to become a US citizen. Some immigrants will tell you that the day they EARNED their citizenship was the greatest day of their life. With that said, I agree with Tom...let anybody and everybody that wants to come to this country come.....LEGALLY! That would include athletes who want to train at our colleges! If you want to accept a scholarship you need to be a citizen. Harsh? Narrow minded? Guilty! Guilty! And Guilty again! If you dont' want to become a citizen, you are still more then welcome to come and train....but you need to be funded by the Olympic Team from the country that you will swim for at the end of the day!

This is of course...My Own Humble Opinion!

LindsayNB
June 23rd, 2005, 10:21 AM
Originally posted by gull80
Just so I understand this--state universities have an obligation to the residents of that state, except when it comes to athletics, because fielding a winning team trumps all else?

No, the argument is that it is valid to balance the goal of team building (by adding top level athletes regardless of citizenship) with the desire to support local athletes of lessor ability by giving some of the available scholarships to foreign students. There are too many goals behind awarding athletic scholarships to try and draw simple black and white conclusions, in most cases there will be a balance of competing goals. The converse argument is that who paid what taxes trumps all else.

tjburk
June 23rd, 2005, 10:33 AM
If you look at it from another perspective...a foreign country... I can reap the benefits of some of the best training in the world for my Olympic Team...paid for by the team I'm trying to beat. WOW, think about that!

Tom Ellison
June 23rd, 2005, 10:37 AM
"The main reason international swimmers like going to US colleges is not the free education "

Well good, then don't take the money and leave it for USA Swimmers!

craiglll@yahoo.com
June 23rd, 2005, 10:53 AM
Originally posted by tjburk
Alright, I have sat back and read this from beginning to end now. You guys and girls continue to amaze me. It is like listening to the primaries all over again. The diversity of this country is EXACTLY what made this country great! I will never argue against that, heck look at my last name. What I will argue, is exactly what Tom has stated from the beginning. It used to be an honor not a right to become a US citizen. Some immigrants will tell you that the day they EARNED their citizenship was the greatest day of their life. With that said, I agree with Tom...let anybody and everybody that wants to come to this country come.....LEGALLY! That would include athletes who want to train at our colleges! If you want to accept a scholarship you need to be a citizen. Harsh? Narrow minded? Guilty! Guilty! And Guilty again! If you dont' want to become a citizen, you are still more then welcome to come and train....but you need to be funded by the Olympic Team from the country that you will swim for at the end of the day!

This is of course...My Own Humble Opinion!

But it is extremely hard to get a citizenship now. Just look at the woman who is an ice dancer from Canada. She has been trying for about 10 yrs. Also, if you come on a student visa, you are almost garaunteed not to be allowed to get your citizenship before your visa expires. So you'll have to go back to your country & tell them you want a visa to come to the US so you can become a US citizen. But that's not an offical reason to grant a visa. It is extremely difficult to gety a student visa in the first place from many countries becaseu they are afraid you won't come back!!!!!!!!!

LindsayNB
June 23rd, 2005, 10:59 AM
Originally posted by tjburk
If you look at it from another perspective...a foreign country... I can reap the benefits of some of the best training in the world for my Olympic Team...paid for by the team I'm trying to beat. WOW, think about that!

Unless USOC is paying for the scholarships your logic seems a bit off.

On a slightly more interesting note, Swimming Canada seems to have a problem with our athletes leaving the country to train, the theory being that having your best swimmers scattered around the world has a negative impact on the system at home, i.e. if our best swimmers aren't swimming in our programs the other swimmers in our programs aren't benefiting from swimming with our best.

Our best 1500m swimmer went to Australia to train with Hackett instead of staying here where he had no real competition. He made our qualifying time at the Australian trials swimming against Hackett, but missed them at our own trials where he had to race purely against the clock, so he didn't get to go to the Olympics. Now he'll be at the Worlds in Montreal competing for Australia. Oops, I've gone off topic.

tjburk
June 23rd, 2005, 11:05 AM
Lindsay, how is that logic off? Except for the occasional phenomena like Phelps, I would venture to guess that about 99% of our Olympic swimmers either currently swim college or did at some time. I might be wrong, but I don't think I am.

LindsayNB
June 23rd, 2005, 11:28 AM
The problem with your logic is that a college swimming program is not one and the same as the olympic team. Is a college coach obligated to put the interests of the Olympic team above the interests of his particular college program? Some people here seem to think so but others do not.

If USOC was paying to have foreign swimmers attend the US Olympic training camps I think your original statement would have greater logical validity.

Matt S
June 23rd, 2005, 11:30 AM
OK, I tried gently suggesting. Didn't register, so let me rephrase my remarks with the sharp edges exposed.

I am amazed at the hypocritical sense of entitlement in some people. The people who feel they've been gypped out of a swimming scholarship have been the fastest swimmers on their team for most of their careers. (Memo to swimmers who are not the fastest kids on their club or high school team: you have no shot at a swimming scholarship, with or without foreign swimmers. There are more roster positions in major league baseball or the NFL than there are Div I swimming scholarships. We could take away every single scholarship from a non-U.S. citizen, and you would still not get one. Please stop kidding everyone.) They have benefitted from being the fastest kid on the team during most of their careers. Coaches cater to their swimming goals (if not downright kiss their backsides) and give them more attention. The whole swimming system is about draping gold medals around their necks and sticking trophies in their hands, and generally telling them what terrific people they are because they swim faster than everyone else.

OK, fair enough, that is what competitive sports are all about. But now finally, as they wait for Div I colleges to bestow upon them further benefits not available to everyone else, they suddenly encounter something new. There is someone else faster than them, and darn it, I want an exception to the rule the fastest swimmer wins to take care of ME. The rest of us who qualify as prelims cannon fodder would call this experience REALITY! Get used to it. Everyone, even world record holders, eventually lose to someone else. Even if they retire at the top, eventually some dude from California, or Queensland breaks their old record.

Let's explore the idea that the people who allegedly pay the bills deserve special consideration for athletic scholarships. Let's talk about Indiana, a public University that receives substantial funding from the tax payers of Indiana. Was it inappropriate for Doc Counsilman to offer Mark Spitz, a Californian whose parents paid taxes to California not Indiana, a scholarship rather than the fastest Indianan he could find? Please note, the case for reserving athletic scholarships at publically funded universities to State residents is STRONGER than what we have been discussing here. In that case you can trace funding directly to a State's taxpayers. This is a much more direct than the link U.S. citizens have to the funding for all Div I universities, public or private.

Bottom line: you have lived in a system that gives you special benefits for being the fastest swimmer, without regard for "other factors." Don't try to change the rules the first time you don't like fastest swimmer wins.

Matt

lefty
June 23rd, 2005, 11:34 AM
Does this delineate the two arguments?

One group believes that resources are scarce, and therefore giving them to non-Americans is unjust.

Another group believes that resources are scarce, but values what foreigners contribute to the educational experience and thereby believes that giving resources to non-Americans improves the academic/athletic climate for everyone.

IT seems to me that both arguments have validity. It seems to me that having a different opinion is a great example OF Americanism. Is it a coincidence that the same people who make accusations of anti-Americanism (IE they do not value others beliefs) are the same people who do not see the value of foreigners to Americans.

knelson
June 23rd, 2005, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by Matt S
Let's talk about Indiana, a public University that receives substantial funding from the tax payers of Indiana. Was it inappropriate for Doc Counsilman to offer Mark Spitz, a Californian whose parents paid taxes to California not Indiana, a scholarship rather than the fastest Indianan he could find?

Excellent point, Matt.

Tom Ellison
June 23rd, 2005, 11:55 AM
Gosh, I guess we can water this down to what city or county they swim for...but the fact is...Spitz swam for the USA...and given... the state of California is out there on the left bank....But, the last time I checked it was still a part of the United States....;)

knelson
June 23rd, 2005, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
Gosh, I guess we can water this down to what city or county they swim for...but the fact is...Spitz swam for the USA...and given... the state of California is out there on the left bank....But, the last time I checked it was still a part of the United States....

So your opposition to foreign swimmers getting scholarships boils down to xenophobia, is that it?

aquageek
June 23rd, 2005, 12:08 PM
It is a simpleton idea that you can only give scholarship dollars at American universities to Americans. The world just isn't that simple anymore and hasn't been probably since before WWII.

Let me give an example. The South is full of foreign auto makers employing tens of thousands of US citizens (BMW, Mercedes, Toyota, Honda). These companies contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to the US economy and the US, in turn, buys a bunch of their vehicles. In turn, some of the innovative production processes they have will force our outdated and inefficient domestic producers to improve. This is called competition and everyone benefits. For those wanting to close our borders, the implications are beyond that of a few swimming scholarships.

I'm not sure there is any valid argument as to why we want to limit the comptetion college students receive. We should want our students to face the stiffest competition they can so that when they leave school, they are ready for the real world, not some artificially imposed closed border real world they saw in college.

Tom Ellison
June 23rd, 2005, 12:15 PM
The word Xenophobic is often used as a political insult against Racists, Isolationists, and Nationalists. Gosh Kirk....put your knife away or at the very least.... remove it from my chest....I am ANYTHING but a racist, isolationist or nationalist....and I resent that implication!

I simply do not think it is wise to give foreign swimmers our hard earned money to go onto the WORLD STAGE to swim against the USA. It boils down to a competition issue with me....PROMOTE AMERICA....and that does NOT make me an isolationist or nationalist....and I damn sure am NOT a racist....

lefty
June 23rd, 2005, 12:21 PM
Tom you did not understand the argument.

State schools are paid for (mostly) by state money. If your argument is that those who pay for the benefit should derive the benefit - and that is what it appears to be - than Spitz doesn't belong at IU. Unless you only apply that logic to non-Americans (xenophobic).

Tom Ellison
June 23rd, 2005, 12:31 PM
Lefty....I understand the argument...I just do not agree....

Let's cut to the chase if we may....EVERY NCAA DIV. 1 top ranked swimmer that is a US Citizen WANTS TO SOMEDAY SWIM FOR THE USA IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES....I have never met one, talked to one or heard of one who did not want to swim in the Olympic Games for this nation. Every swim program in this country (United States) wants their swimmers to go on to the Olympic Games and WIN.....

My thinking tells me the "BIG SHOW" in swimming is NOT THE NCAA's...it is the Olympic Games.....So, with that in mind...why should we give our money to foreign swimmers to go back to their countries and swim against the USA? Sure, let them come here to swim if they choose to do so...I WELCOME THAT....I just do not want to pay for it.....and then have to go up agant them.

gull
June 23rd, 2005, 12:31 PM
Why do state universities limit out of state enrollment? (Note I said limit, not eliminate.) Why do they charge much higher tuition to out of state students? Is it xenophobia? Are they not interested in diversity? I don't think so.

Hey lefty--where have you been?

knelson
June 23rd, 2005, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by Tom Ellison
I simply do not think it is wise to give foreign swimmers our hard earned money to go onto the WORLD STAGE to swim against the USA. It boils down to a competition issue with me....PROMOTE AMERICA....and that does NOT make me an isolationist or nationalist....and I damn sure am NOT a racist....

No, I don't mean to imply that you're a racist, but I'll stick to my guns that you're a xenophobe. I think every exceptionally talented swimmer in the world deserves the best coaching and best competition they can get, regardless of their country of origin. My take is that you do not, if that means they might beat U.S. swimmers.

lefty
June 23rd, 2005, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by gull80
Hey lefty--where have you been? [/B]

Trying to stay out of arguments! Ha!

aquageek
June 23rd, 2005, 12:38 PM
Tom:

How can you now claim you aren't an isolationist when you have stated in big bold caps to close the border on this thread? That's like saying you are a vegetarian after eating the big juicy steak.

And just because someone wants to go to the Olympics doesn't mean they have the talent. Most swimming talent is developed by the time you get to college with those 4 years just improving it. Any American who is good enough to go to the Olympics is not going to be wanting for a scholarship. Other than Phelps and some of the teenies on our team, every US Olympian is at a US university or relatively recent grad.

Why are you so interested in reducing the competition at US schools when having the best with our best is not only a compliment to our programs but also very valuable in training?

gull
June 23rd, 2005, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
Most swimming talent is developed by the time you get to college with those 4 years just improving it.

And we all know why that is--VO2max.

Tom Ellison
June 23rd, 2005, 12:47 PM
"I think every exceptionally talented swimmer in the world deserves the best coaching and best competition they can get, regardless of their country of origin. "

PLEASE show me one post where I said otherwise to this statement....I just do not think we should pay for it....and should give that money to USA swimmers that will represent this country in the BIG SHOW!

Every goal setting study I read talked about setting the goal/goals, building a plan to reach that goal/goals....and then work the plan....to me...the ultimate GOAL is to swim in the BIG SHOW FOR THE USA....

Heck, do not take my word for this....just ask any top ranked college swimmer in the USA what his or her ultimate goal is "in swimming"....and I bet dollars to donuts they tell you...TO SWIM IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES!

aquageek
June 23rd, 2005, 12:48 PM
Have I inadvertently backed myself into a supporter of V02Max and early blooming?

gull
June 23rd, 2005, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by aquageek
Have I inadvertently backed myself into a supporter of V02Max and early blooming?

Hey, it was your post. Too late to hit the delete button--everyone saw it.