Sports, Cultural Differences, and National Team Support:
There has been a discussion on Andrew Love's blog, Zen and the Art of Speedskating, about differences between various National Team programs, in terms of how a sport is built on a grassroots level, how athletes are developed up to the elite level, and how the teams are funded. This issue came up because the Canadian and American programs believe they can start a dialogue to learn the best aspects of each others' systems in order to improve their own.
For example, in speedskating, the Canadians have a great grassroots development program that feeds a lot of skaters into their system, while the Americans seem to do a good job of bringing what few skaters they have up to the Olympic podium.
Some people have asked the question of how the culture or society impacts how a country's national teams are supported. I would like to share my ideas on that again, even though I briefly mentioned it when I was first starting this blog.
When most people in the USA think of elite amateur sports, where the final goal is an Olympic medal, they think that the USOC is responsible for the support of National Team-level athletes. Most people I've talked to, throughout the years when I competed for the USA on the World Cup circuit of speedskating, believe that athletes on my level were "all set;" that we lived for free in training centers, had all our meals cooked for us, and didn't have to work. And, although this was the furthest thing imaginable from the true situation of long track skaters who live and train in Salt Lake City (and I'm sure this is the case for most athletes training for the Olympics in other sports), the USOC was pretty much fine with this image being spread around and generally accepted.
Let me give you an example, using the community of long track speedskaters in Salt Lake City. Although the Utah Olympic Oval has been the home base of USSPEEDSKATING's long track National Team program since before the 2002 Olympics, there is no housing available for skaters close to the Oval. The only housing that has been provided is the high altitude house in Park City, which only has room for a few skaters. Besides, even if the housing is free, the extra money spent on the gas needed to drive up and down Parley's Canyon every day pretty much negates the financial benefit.
USSPEEDSKATING gives out stipends of $150 per month to World Cup competitors, and skaters are given the chance to increase their USS stipends by finishing Top 20 in overall World Cup standings at the end of the season. The $150-per-month stipend is a joke -- it won't even buy half an athlete's food for the month! In comparison, Canadian World Cup qualifiers get stipends of $1500 a month (sure, it's in Canadian currency, but it still works out to be almost an order of magnitude more than the American skaters get!!!)
There are also other issues of athlete support relating to the USOC. After I made my first World Cup team in 2001, I started receiving a Level 1 athlete grant from the USOC, of $2500 a year, which isn't much, but at least it was something. But by 2003, this funding was cut out entirely, because the USOC had decided they were only going to support athletes who were "performing," which, to them, meant Top 8 in a World Championship or in overall World Cup standings.
This seems backwards to me. I can't think of a Top 10 speedskater who isn't professionally sponsored! Although I hate to say that someone who has gotten to that level should be denied anything, I'm not the only one who believes that "helping the rich get richer" does not seem to be what the USOC needs to be doing in order to help our National Teams become stronger and deeper.
Another thing that the USOC does that seems backwards to me (and this is probably going to sound really bad to a lot of people, but what the hell...) is awarding $25,000 to Olympic gold medalists. I believe that the gold medal itself opens doors to money-making opportunities for the gold medalist. It's getting there that is the problem. It's getting the athlete there that should be the USOC's problem. Isn't that what the American people expect from the USOC, or am I totally off base?
This could be where cultural differences arise. Some societies and governments are just more willing to direct their resources towards supporting their National Teams. For example, I think it is very important to China right now, as a developing superpower, to show their supremacy in sports, especially with the Beijing Olympics coming up in 2008, so their government has put a lot of money into the development of a strong sports system.
Here in America, our government doesn't have a whole lot of money to direct towards a lot of truly worthwhile pursuits, and, working in the field of biomedical research, I realize this first-hand. I don't think that our sports system is a priority right now, either. Right now our main focus is getting ourselves out of a very expensive war that was started based on a lie.
On the other hand, we're capitalists here, right? So why should we Americans depend on handouts from our government? Why can't we, as athletes or as teams, just try to market ourselves? Are we stuck on this whole "amateur" thing? (By the way, do you know what "amateur" means to me? It means, "I'm a spoiled little brat who doesn't need to get paid for what I do, because my parents are loaded!")
The problem right now seems to be that we're stuck somewhere in a horrible middle ground between "professional" and "amateur," and we haven't decided on a clear direction with clear guidelines. So, in this situation, we end up fighting a bunch of irrational power struggles over sponsorship rights.
The sponsorship fights within USSPEEDSKATING were really bad over the last couple of years. When Andy Gabel was president, he made promises to sponsors (about which athletes would wear a company's logos) that he was unable to keep. Now the sponsors are upset, nobody wants to work with USS, and the federation's funding situation is a disaster.
I think the American sports system is in crisis, because we don't know where we are going or how to get there. I think that companies give a lot of money to organizations like the USOC (which has had its own scandals with CEO's skimming off the top), and that somehow, the money is not getting down to the athletes.
Athletes from other countries are surprised that American athletes have so much trouble because "The USA seems to be THE PLACE for money." I agree: It is the place for money, but the USOC and our sports federations are not doing what they need to be doing in order to take advantage of the situation.
---
(10/26/06) Here's some more info I've recently come across. Take a look at this article about Canadian athlete support:
Winnipeg Free Press
Olympians thankful for RONA's millions
Fri Oct 20 2006
Randy Turner
NO, it's not a fortune, but for Olympians like Winnipeg's Shannon Rempel, it's as good as gold.
Who knows? In four years, it just might lead to a precious medal, too.
What we're talking about is the not-so-little matter of RONA's Growing with Our Athletes program, a five-year sponsorship of 100 of this country's elite Olympians and Paralympians that will be worth a minimum of $4 million.
That works out to $40,000 per athlete, or $8,000 a year, which might not sound like the lottery, but to speed skater Rempel, who won silver in team pursuit at the Turin Olympic Games last February, it's the difference between life and debt.
"That's exactly what it does," Rempel said Thursday from her training base in Calgary. "It allows me to live."
Winnipeg's Jennifer Botterill, a veteran of Canada's women's hockey team, was the only other Manitoban on the funding list.
Of course, as a world-ranked Canadian, the 21-year-old Rempel already receives $1,500 a month in tax-free funding. She also gets a grant from Sport Manitoba of about $1,500 a year.
But when you're paying between $500 and $700 a month in rent and each pair of skating boots costs $2,000, it's not exactly like Rempel has been rolling in wealth the last five years while striving to reach world-class performance levels away from home.
After all, Rempel's main financial backers have been her parents, Shirley and Rick. "The Bank of Mom and Dad," the daughter joked.
"They're really supportive," she added. "But it's nice not to ask for money from them. I can't even imagine how much money they've spent on me and my skating career."
Which is why the involvement of RONA, Canada's largest home improvement retailer, can't be overstated in a country where the funding of Olympic athletes has been such a contentious issue -- and widely considered directly tied to results, both good and bad.
It wasn't long ago, in fact, that many Canadian Olympians were living on funding below the poverty level, prompting a high-profile lobbying effort in which athletes, in grungy urban environments, posed with signs that read, "Will Compete for Money."
The Canadian Olympic Committee's director of international performance, Alex Gardiner, another Winnipegger, believes there will be a direct correlation between corporate funding and Canada's results in Beijing in 2008 and Vancouver in 2010, where Rempel and Botterill are expected to represent the country once again.
"It's huge, but the effect is going to be even more magnified because it's directed to our 100 best athletes," Gardiner said Thursday. "It works out to about $700 a month. That can buy an entire month's rent.
"It's a long way from food stamps," Gardiner added. "We've come a long way in the last three years. But athletes have extraordinary costs."
For some athletes, Rempel noted, the money could be used for trips to international events (unlike speed skating, some sports don't cover travel costs) and even coaching.
Or it simply buys a level of security and reduced stress in paying for everything from physical therapy to car repairs to healthy food.
"Who knows what can come up?" the speed skater said. "It may be the car breaks down, or it may be eating good food like fruits and vegetables, which can be more expensive. Or going to the chiropractor and not have to worry about the cost so much."
Now you might be thinking that if RONA is funding the 100 top Canadian athletes, why aren't Clara Hughes and this country's most decorated Olympian, Cindy Klassen, on the list?
Turns out they both declined the money, and not just because of some scheduling conflicts, but because they thought others who aren't blessed with as much corporate support needed it more, Gardiner said.
Olympian, eh? They know more than anyone just how precious those few extra dollars can be when it comes to the enormous challenge of being one of the best in the world at anything.
"They know how hard it is to get sponsors," Rempel said.
So $700 a month from RONA might not sound like a windfall, but this is Canada, remember, where every nickel in support of amateur athletes is almost as hard-earned as a medal. Almost as hard-earned as the sacrifices made during the four years we don't pay them much attention and less money.
Besides, all we know is this: The less burden and strain you put on an athlete's shoulders, chances are, the faster they will go.
randy.turner@freepress.mb.ca
(No, really, says The Protocol. Didn't USSPEEDSKATING have something similar in place? I believe it was called "BLOWJOBS FOR O-JOBS!!!"
Take a look around at your shitty U.S. women's speedskating team. Now think of all the talented women who left the sport because we have better shit to do with our lives.)
If you look at the article above, you can easily tell the difference in attitudes between the Canadian and American speedskating federations. The Canadians come right out and say that their federation, though it tries its best, still has trouble supporting its athletes to the level they need. They come right out and admit that there is a correlation between a lack of support and poor competitive results, and they want to help their athletes get more support so they can perform better without stressing out about how they're going to cover real expenses such as food, rent, and equipment.
USSPEEDSKATING, on the other hand, tells its athletes that they DON'T NEED support from their federation. In fact, former USS president Andy Gabel has said that the only thing American speedskaters will do if they receive more funding is to spend it all on "video games and stereo systems."
I believe that the purpose of a sports system and sports federation is to support its best athletes and to find ways of helping them perform at the highest level. ANY SPORTS SYSTEM THAT ARGUES THAT ITS ATHLETES DON'T NEED SUPPORT FROM THE FEDERATION IS MAKING A VERY COMPELLING ARGUMENT FOR THE FEDERATION'S OWN NON-EXISTENCE.
There has been a discussion on Andrew Love's blog, Zen and the Art of Speedskating, about differences between various National Team programs, in terms of how a sport is built on a grassroots level, how athletes are developed up to the elite level, and how the teams are funded. This issue came up because the Canadian and American programs believe they can start a dialogue to learn the best aspects of each others' systems in order to improve their own.
For example, in speedskating, the Canadians have a great grassroots development program that feeds a lot of skaters into their system, while the Americans seem to do a good job of bringing what few skaters they have up to the Olympic podium.
Some people have asked the question of how the culture or society impacts how a country's national teams are supported. I would like to share my ideas on that again, even though I briefly mentioned it when I was first starting this blog.
When most people in the USA think of elite amateur sports, where the final goal is an Olympic medal, they think that the USOC is responsible for the support of National Team-level athletes. Most people I've talked to, throughout the years when I competed for the USA on the World Cup circuit of speedskating, believe that athletes on my level were "all set;" that we lived for free in training centers, had all our meals cooked for us, and didn't have to work. And, although this was the furthest thing imaginable from the true situation of long track skaters who live and train in Salt Lake City (and I'm sure this is the case for most athletes training for the Olympics in other sports), the USOC was pretty much fine with this image being spread around and generally accepted.
Let me give you an example, using the community of long track speedskaters in Salt Lake City. Although the Utah Olympic Oval has been the home base of USSPEEDSKATING's long track National Team program since before the 2002 Olympics, there is no housing available for skaters close to the Oval. The only housing that has been provided is the high altitude house in Park City, which only has room for a few skaters. Besides, even if the housing is free, the extra money spent on the gas needed to drive up and down Parley's Canyon every day pretty much negates the financial benefit.
USSPEEDSKATING gives out stipends of $150 per month to World Cup competitors, and skaters are given the chance to increase their USS stipends by finishing Top 20 in overall World Cup standings at the end of the season. The $150-per-month stipend is a joke -- it won't even buy half an athlete's food for the month! In comparison, Canadian World Cup qualifiers get stipends of $1500 a month (sure, it's in Canadian currency, but it still works out to be almost an order of magnitude more than the American skaters get!!!)
There are also other issues of athlete support relating to the USOC. After I made my first World Cup team in 2001, I started receiving a Level 1 athlete grant from the USOC, of $2500 a year, which isn't much, but at least it was something. But by 2003, this funding was cut out entirely, because the USOC had decided they were only going to support athletes who were "performing," which, to them, meant Top 8 in a World Championship or in overall World Cup standings.
This seems backwards to me. I can't think of a Top 10 speedskater who isn't professionally sponsored! Although I hate to say that someone who has gotten to that level should be denied anything, I'm not the only one who believes that "helping the rich get richer" does not seem to be what the USOC needs to be doing in order to help our National Teams become stronger and deeper.
Another thing that the USOC does that seems backwards to me (and this is probably going to sound really bad to a lot of people, but what the hell...) is awarding $25,000 to Olympic gold medalists. I believe that the gold medal itself opens doors to money-making opportunities for the gold medalist. It's getting there that is the problem. It's getting the athlete there that should be the USOC's problem. Isn't that what the American people expect from the USOC, or am I totally off base?
This could be where cultural differences arise. Some societies and governments are just more willing to direct their resources towards supporting their National Teams. For example, I think it is very important to China right now, as a developing superpower, to show their supremacy in sports, especially with the Beijing Olympics coming up in 2008, so their government has put a lot of money into the development of a strong sports system.
Here in America, our government doesn't have a whole lot of money to direct towards a lot of truly worthwhile pursuits, and, working in the field of biomedical research, I realize this first-hand. I don't think that our sports system is a priority right now, either. Right now our main focus is getting ourselves out of a very expensive war that was started based on a lie.
On the other hand, we're capitalists here, right? So why should we Americans depend on handouts from our government? Why can't we, as athletes or as teams, just try to market ourselves? Are we stuck on this whole "amateur" thing? (By the way, do you know what "amateur" means to me? It means, "I'm a spoiled little brat who doesn't need to get paid for what I do, because my parents are loaded!")
The problem right now seems to be that we're stuck somewhere in a horrible middle ground between "professional" and "amateur," and we haven't decided on a clear direction with clear guidelines. So, in this situation, we end up fighting a bunch of irrational power struggles over sponsorship rights.
The sponsorship fights within USSPEEDSKATING were really bad over the last couple of years. When Andy Gabel was president, he made promises to sponsors (about which athletes would wear a company's logos) that he was unable to keep. Now the sponsors are upset, nobody wants to work with USS, and the federation's funding situation is a disaster.
I think the American sports system is in crisis, because we don't know where we are going or how to get there. I think that companies give a lot of money to organizations like the USOC (which has had its own scandals with CEO's skimming off the top), and that somehow, the money is not getting down to the athletes.
Athletes from other countries are surprised that American athletes have so much trouble because "The USA seems to be THE PLACE for money." I agree: It is the place for money, but the USOC and our sports federations are not doing what they need to be doing in order to take advantage of the situation.
---
(10/26/06) Here's some more info I've recently come across. Take a look at this article about Canadian athlete support:
Winnipeg Free Press
Olympians thankful for RONA's millions
Fri Oct 20 2006
Randy Turner
NO, it's not a fortune, but for Olympians like Winnipeg's Shannon Rempel, it's as good as gold.
Who knows? In four years, it just might lead to a precious medal, too.
What we're talking about is the not-so-little matter of RONA's Growing with Our Athletes program, a five-year sponsorship of 100 of this country's elite Olympians and Paralympians that will be worth a minimum of $4 million.
That works out to $40,000 per athlete, or $8,000 a year, which might not sound like the lottery, but to speed skater Rempel, who won silver in team pursuit at the Turin Olympic Games last February, it's the difference between life and debt.
"That's exactly what it does," Rempel said Thursday from her training base in Calgary. "It allows me to live."
Winnipeg's Jennifer Botterill, a veteran of Canada's women's hockey team, was the only other Manitoban on the funding list.
Of course, as a world-ranked Canadian, the 21-year-old Rempel already receives $1,500 a month in tax-free funding. She also gets a grant from Sport Manitoba of about $1,500 a year.
But when you're paying between $500 and $700 a month in rent and each pair of skating boots costs $2,000, it's not exactly like Rempel has been rolling in wealth the last five years while striving to reach world-class performance levels away from home.
After all, Rempel's main financial backers have been her parents, Shirley and Rick. "The Bank of Mom and Dad," the daughter joked.
"They're really supportive," she added. "But it's nice not to ask for money from them. I can't even imagine how much money they've spent on me and my skating career."
Which is why the involvement of RONA, Canada's largest home improvement retailer, can't be overstated in a country where the funding of Olympic athletes has been such a contentious issue -- and widely considered directly tied to results, both good and bad.
It wasn't long ago, in fact, that many Canadian Olympians were living on funding below the poverty level, prompting a high-profile lobbying effort in which athletes, in grungy urban environments, posed with signs that read, "Will Compete for Money."
The Canadian Olympic Committee's director of international performance, Alex Gardiner, another Winnipegger, believes there will be a direct correlation between corporate funding and Canada's results in Beijing in 2008 and Vancouver in 2010, where Rempel and Botterill are expected to represent the country once again.
"It's huge, but the effect is going to be even more magnified because it's directed to our 100 best athletes," Gardiner said Thursday. "It works out to about $700 a month. That can buy an entire month's rent.
"It's a long way from food stamps," Gardiner added. "We've come a long way in the last three years. But athletes have extraordinary costs."
For some athletes, Rempel noted, the money could be used for trips to international events (unlike speed skating, some sports don't cover travel costs) and even coaching.
Or it simply buys a level of security and reduced stress in paying for everything from physical therapy to car repairs to healthy food.
"Who knows what can come up?" the speed skater said. "It may be the car breaks down, or it may be eating good food like fruits and vegetables, which can be more expensive. Or going to the chiropractor and not have to worry about the cost so much."
Now you might be thinking that if RONA is funding the 100 top Canadian athletes, why aren't Clara Hughes and this country's most decorated Olympian, Cindy Klassen, on the list?
Turns out they both declined the money, and not just because of some scheduling conflicts, but because they thought others who aren't blessed with as much corporate support needed it more, Gardiner said.
Olympian, eh? They know more than anyone just how precious those few extra dollars can be when it comes to the enormous challenge of being one of the best in the world at anything.
"They know how hard it is to get sponsors," Rempel said.
So $700 a month from RONA might not sound like a windfall, but this is Canada, remember, where every nickel in support of amateur athletes is almost as hard-earned as a medal. Almost as hard-earned as the sacrifices made during the four years we don't pay them much attention and less money.
Besides, all we know is this: The less burden and strain you put on an athlete's shoulders, chances are, the faster they will go.
randy.turner@freepress.mb.ca
(No, really, says The Protocol. Didn't USSPEEDSKATING have something similar in place? I believe it was called "BLOWJOBS FOR O-JOBS!!!"
Take a look around at your shitty U.S. women's speedskating team. Now think of all the talented women who left the sport because we have better shit to do with our lives.)
If you look at the article above, you can easily tell the difference in attitudes between the Canadian and American speedskating federations. The Canadians come right out and say that their federation, though it tries its best, still has trouble supporting its athletes to the level they need. They come right out and admit that there is a correlation between a lack of support and poor competitive results, and they want to help their athletes get more support so they can perform better without stressing out about how they're going to cover real expenses such as food, rent, and equipment.
USSPEEDSKATING, on the other hand, tells its athletes that they DON'T NEED support from their federation. In fact, former USS president Andy Gabel has said that the only thing American speedskaters will do if they receive more funding is to spend it all on "video games and stereo systems."
I believe that the purpose of a sports system and sports federation is to support its best athletes and to find ways of helping them perform at the highest level. ANY SPORTS SYSTEM THAT ARGUES THAT ITS ATHLETES DON'T NEED SUPPORT FROM THE FEDERATION IS MAKING A VERY COMPELLING ARGUMENT FOR THE FEDERATION'S OWN NON-EXISTENCE.
posted by Eva at 9:22 AM
<< Home