Thoughts on U.S. skating talent

[musicfan80]

I find the idea of getting colleges to care about figure skating to be pretty compelling. Has USFS made meaningful efforts to get involved at the college level? College gymnastics is pretty big, right? Gymnasts who never make it to the Olympics can still have a great college career, I think (but I don't know for sure lol, all I know is sometimes I see college gymnastics on tv).

Not every college has an ice rink, but there are plenty that do.

Parents will be way more likely to invest in their kid's sport career if it's possible to get a college scholarship out of it.

As much as I would love to see more collegiate sports, figure skating will NEVER be a full NCAA sport with colleges giving scholarships.

Most collegiate sports programs' lose A LOT of money for their schools - only football, basketball, baseball bring in A LOT of ticket sales make a profit - and they end up having to cover virtually every other sport. Some women's gymnastics programs might break even because of sales from meets. Yes, college gymnastics is big - but only on the women's side - the number of men's DI programs have now been reduced to less than a dozen.

Many men's sports have been cut because they didn't generate enough or even any revenue. IMHO, the only thing that is keeping most women's sports programs alive are Title IX protections that, among other things, require universities to invest the same $$$ in women's sports as men's. For example, I think there's a rule that they have to offer the same amount of scholarships to female athletes as male athletes.

I honestly can't see universities adding any programs unless they are a net positive financially - which takes A LOT of money to bring in.

 

[karne]

Then any results of poor nutrition are on Adam, not Raf.

Raf viewed Adam as an "elephant". Yeah, NO.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

I honestly can't see universities adding any programs unless they are a net positive financially - which takes A LOT of money to bring in.

Well yes and no. Most schools wouldn’t gain much adding a figure skating program but big schools like USC and others with similarly large athletics could. I mean if you see a USC graduate go to the Olympics and do well it can raise the notarity of the school which even helps bring in sponsorships for the other programs and can help create a positive image for the school. Figure skating does get substantial face time each Olympics. Most schools wouldn’t go for it but even if four or five and one day ten did then it would make a tremendous impact on the sport in the US IMO.

Personally I think the judging would need to be completely revamped to create more fair results and far less subjectivity and is probably the biggest reason there are no singles NCAA programs.

Michigan seems like another school that could take on a team of figure skaters. :cool14:

Just shooting off the top of my head...couldn’t the school just offer figure skating as an elective class and recoup most of the cost by having their team teach it for free. They charge a lot for classes these days and I bet people would take it. It could even increase the exposure and interest in the sport so the USFSA could even see a return from a moderate investment :think:

 

[Smith16]

A lot of colleges have synchronized skating programs. University if Miami, University of Delaware, Cornell University, University of Maryland etc..

https://www.usfigureskating.org/content/CollegeswithSynchro.pdf

 

[gkelly]

Just shooting off the top of my head...couldn’t the school just offer figure skating as an elective class and recoup most of the cost by having their team teach it for free. They charge a lot for classes these days and I bet people would take it.

What do you mean here? A university could sponsor training for elite figure skaters to represent the school at collegiate events (and nationally and internationally if they qualify), and those skaters could teach beginning classes offered as an elective?

[qujote]It could even increase the exposure and interest in the sport so the USFSA could even see a return from a moderate investment :think:[/QUOTE]

Not sure what USFSA would be investing in the colleges or what kind of return they would see.

They could invest in setting up a more attractive collegiate competition structure so that more colleges would invest college funds in supporting a student skating team. And that in turn might help keep people in the sport through high school and college and maybe attract some new skaters/USFS members who wouldn't have been exposed to it otherwise.

But I don't see money going directly from USFS to the collegiate skaters. Some will go to potential international competitors who also happen to be college students, but that's not the same thing.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

A lot of colleges have synchronized skating programs. University if Miami, University of Delaware, Cornell University, University of Maryland etc..

https://www.usfigureskating.org/content/CollegeswithSynchro.pdf

True but those skaters aren’t going to be training the same as singles skaters with jumps and other elements. My original thought on US talent was that with the costs so high that most people quit once they hit college age. Even some at the elite level can’t afford both college and training. I also thought that the overall quality of skaters who continue to skate into their 20’s might improve and some could peak after college. Who knows?

I have several friends who skated college synchro...it’s fun and I support it but it’s not the same discipline so I don’t really think college synchro skaters will likely ever return to singles skating.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

What do you mean here? A university could sponsor training for elite figure skaters to represent the school at collegiate events (and nationally and internationally if they qualify), and those skaters could teach beginning classes offered as an elective?

I would envision something like gymnastics where a team of skaters would compete and combine their scores. Several shorter programs with various elements featured. I’m sure some could be or later become elite skaters but the training they receive probably wouldn’t be at an elite level. They’d likely have to do that on their own. Id imagine the competitions would be more watered down than ISU events with required elements designed for collegiate competition.

The point wasn't to bring elite skating to college but to create incentive for skaters who don’t make elites or almost did to continue to push. Both before and during college. Skaters who invest a lot of resources but never made US National teams. This could inspire skaters to push harder with at least some chance at an athletic scholarship. Who knows how it could affect the talent in the US. My first instinct is Wes see a bit of rise in competitiveness. You’d also likely see situations like Madison Kocian who competed in the Olympics as a gymnast then went to UCLA. It’s not as competitive as elite gymnastics but it keeps her in the game and there is talk she might return to try for Tokyo Olympics.

Not sure what USFSA would be investing in the colleges or what kind of return they would see.

They could invest in setting up a more attractive collegiate competition structure so that more colleges would invest college funds in supporting a student skating team. And that in turn might help keep people in the sport through high school and college and maybe attract some new skaters/USFS members who wouldn't have been exposed to it otherwise.

But I don't see money going directly from USFS to the collegiate skaters. Some will go to potential international competitors who also happen to be college students, but that's not the same thing.

I was just thinking investing in some of these programs to help get them off the ground. Just thinking about how creating a few new skaters via the classes and interest due to the collegiate sport would likely grow figure skating in the US. Maybe a few scholarships...maybe help secure a facility for the collegiate national championships. Who knows...I’m just thinking out loud.

 

[ice coverage]

FWIW:

USFS already has a competition structure for intercollegiate team skating (not the same thing as synchro).

I would mention Elena Pulkinen as an example of a skater who is a bit comparable to Madison Kocian -- meaning that Elena was a senior skater at 2016 U.S. Nats, and collegiate skating is a way for her to stay in the sport.
Elena now attends UCLA and is active in collegiate skating -- both as an individual (fourth in Senior Ladies at 2016 U.S. Collegiates; fifth at 2017 U.S. Collegiates) and for Team UCLA in intercollegiate team competition.

(The Olympics were outside of Elena's reach, so Madison obviously was on another level in that regard.
Elena also competed at sectionals in 2016-17 and 2017-18.)​

---

ETA:

Heidi Munger seems to be a similar case to Elena.

Heidi was second at 2017 Collegiates + she is on Team Boston U, which won 2018 Intercollegiates.
Competed at 2016 U.S. Nats; and at sectionals in 2016-17 and 2017-18.​

---

ETA:

… Michigan seems like another school that could take on a team of figure skaters. :cool14: ...

BTW:

U Mich placed eleventh at 2018 U.S. Intercollegiates.

Per USFS rules, Intercollegiates are for full-time students. (Same as Collegiates.)​

 

[VegMom]

I'm not an expert and certainly don't play one on tv but I wonder if supervised practice sessions at the lower level would be workable since I see a lot of fluffing around on the ice amongst lower level skaters. Perhaps something to replicate that focus that ballet has. Like a coffee club session for kids. Something between just an open session and an actual class.

This is an interesting idea. But there are a few issues:
- Most of the lower level kids who don't practice seriously outside of lessons don't have the passion for it, so setting up a system like that might not actually work for them. When I see these kids on the ice, I think to myself, 'why are their parents wasting money on this expensive sport when they could just do something else?' Often these kids have parents with the passion and these kids are just forced to skate, but don't really like it.
- My skater (who has a strong passion for skating) would be very frustrated if he were constantly being told what to do. He craves the freedom of having ice time without lessons and being able to skate without any criticism or direction. If I could afford to give him his own rink I would.
- My skater's coach is very precise and specific and does not want my skater to be coached by just any random coach; she's very clear that she only approves of certain other coaches. I get the impression that many coaches feel this way and would simply not want their skaters practicing during sessions that were being overseen by random coaches.

I don't know exactly how it works in ballet but one of the reasons my skater doesn't take ballet is because the culture is too strict and he can only handle so much of that kind of structure. If we forced him into ballet too soon it would surely cause him to burnout and quit both skating and dance entirely. I think some kids might need a little extra push, but generally speaking I think (given our American system where sports are paid for by the parents) the kids who need that push are NOT the ones who are likely to become fantastic elite skaters. I think that the kids who are passionate about skating are the kids who deserve the most resources.

It would seem to me that the reasons for racial disparity go far beyond climate and club/rink density. YMMV.

Absolutely. I was just mentioning one factor.

I've said this before and I'll say it again. In California, you can play football, baseball, soccer, tennis, volley ball, and any other outdoor sport such as swimming and diving for free. You can experiment with several sports without it costing more than the price of a ball. Skating is an expensive sport and I think some parents (Mine included) were/are not willing to pay for skates, lessons, and ice time when there's so little chance they'll see a return on their investment.

I agree.

I think also though that there's a bias against individual sports. Team sports are preferred by most parents. So they often don't even try out the sports that aren't team sports.

I have also seen strong gender bias. Many people are shocked to learn that my highly athletic boy is a figure skater. They literally see it as a waste of athletic talent and think he should do hockey or soccer or some other more 'masculine' sport instead. They often don't even recognize the athleticism required by figure skating. So, to spend the equivalent of a private school tuition on skating for a boy just makes no sense to them. They think we're crazy.

The key part is that the parents had to mortgage their house twice. That's a huge sacrifice.

Absolutely. I can see why parents do it (they do this to pay for college or private school too). And I can imagine doing it for my skater if the circumstances warranted it. But it would still be a huge sacrifice. And it would not make financial sense - ever - for any level of skater. Even for an elite skater... going into that level of debt and that type of debt is just a terrible financial decision.

My original thought on US talent was that with the costs so high that most people quit once they hit college age. Even some at the elite level can’t afford both college and training.

I think that's probably part of it. And certainly there is a significant conflict between school and skating - that occurs even at lower school levels. That's why so many elite skaters home-school or use tutors. It's mostly a time conflict, though, not a cost conflict, though at college level it's likely both.

But also, most US teens quit their sports because it's no longer fun. The costs aren't the main reason they quit.

 

[beachmouse]

Nathan mentioned he would be eligible to participate in the U.S. Collegiates (but I think he said this jokingly)

I saw a tweet from someone planning on competing there saying they are going to cry if Nathan is there !

The NCAA amateurism rules only apply to sports that are part of the NCAA system. And not all college sports are. College rodeo (I used to work at a university that had a team) had intentionally opted out of the NCAA system because a good barrel or roping horse costs the equivalent of a whole lot of ice and skating lesson time and the people in charge of college rodeo know that direct sponsorship and prize money help keep athletes in an expensive sport.

I assume figure skating opts out of the NCAA process for similar reasons. And that Nathan is probably perfectly good to go at college nationals if he really wants to.

 

[ribbit]

The NCAA amateurism rules only apply to sports that are part of the NCAA system. And not all college sports are. College rodeo (I used to work at a university that had a team) had intentionally opted out of the NCAA system because a good barrel or roping horse costs the equivalent of a whole lot of ice and skating lesson time and the people in charge of college rodeo know that direct sponsorship and prize money help keep athletes in an expensive sport.

I assume figure skating opts out of the NCAA process for similar reasons. And that Nathan is probably perfectly good to go at college nationals if he really wants to.

The other big obstacle to NCAA certification for figure skating is a further "amateurism" rule which forbids student-athletes from delaying college matriculation in order to compete in their sport. A skater would have not only to forego all endorsements and all prize money beyond the cost of competition, and not use prize money to pay parents' or coaches' expenses, he or she would also have to make a decision at age 17-18 to move straight from high school to college. In effect, there would be a cap on the level of skater who could participate in such a competition. As beachmouse says, college-level figure skating pretty much has to opt out of the NCAA process simply by virtue of how the sport works.

The bigger issue here is the unrealistic assumption that colleges have lots of extra money to throw at one of the most expensive sports going. Adjusted for inflation, last year state spending on higher education was nearly $9 billion below pre-2008 recession levels. That's a major factor in the steep tuition rises that have made college so difficult and so expensive for so many Americans.
[source: https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-lost-decade-in-higher-education-funding]
Along with expansions in administration and amenities, athletics is the third major non-instructional expense that's often pointed to as driving up costs and consequently ripe for cutting. As musicfan80 pointed out above, expensive non-revenue-producing sports are disappearing, not growing. Most colleges simply don't have the money to invest in the infrastructure (building and maintaining rinks or otherwise subsidizing free ice time and access to gyms), payroll (coaches and staff), or equipment (skates, costumes, supplies) that training a single figure skater to a high level requires, never mind dozens. And if they did have that money, there would be literally dozens of needs that are actually related to the core mission of teaching and research competing for it.

Here's a USFS document that gives information about college clubs, including the subsidies that colleges offer their clubs:
http://www.usfsa.org/content/Colleges with Intercollegiate Clubs 2016-17.pdf
As you can see, most of the subsidies are in the high three figures or low four figures. Even at the few schools that are spending over $10,000 on their clubs, that subsidy averages out to about $1000/skater. Those are mostly small private schools. Others don't fund their clubs at all. There are no big bags of cash hidden away in college coffers to support figure skating. And I don't have the impression that USFS has the money to make significant investments in college-level skating, given the size of the subsidies they provide to skaters in the national team envelopes and the challenging media climate.

So what would an expanded college-level skating competition within these financial constraints look like? What kind of support would USFS be asked for, and what is realistically in their power to provide? What other revenue streams might be out there, and what can realistically be done to cultivate them? What level or kind of skater, and what kind of audience, would find that competition satisfying? How does one create a market for it?

 

[Ducky]

Well yes and no. Most schools wouldn’t gain much adding a figure skating program but big schools like USC and others with similarly large athletics could. I mean if you see a USC graduate go to the Olympics and do well it can raise the notarity of the school which even helps bring in sponsorships for the other programs and can help create a positive image for the school. Figure skating does get substantial face time each Olympics. Most schools wouldn’t go for it but even if four or five and one day ten did then it would make a tremendous impact on the sport in the US IMO.

Personally I think the judging would need to be completely revamped to create more fair results and far less subjectivity and is probably the biggest reason there are no singles NCAA programs.

Michigan seems like another school that could take on a team of figure skaters. :cool14:

Just shooting off the top of my head...couldn’t the school just offer figure skating as an elective class and recoup most of the cost by having their team teach it for free. They charge a lot for classes these days and I bet people would take it. It could even increase the exposure and interest in the sport so the USFSA could even see a return from a moderate investment :think:

Boston University offers figure skating at various levels as 1 credit physical education courses, but they don't charge an additional fee unless it's on top of the allotted 18 credit hours per semester.

 

[ribbit]

Boston University offers figure skating at various levels as 1 credit physical education courses, but they don't charge an additional fee unless it's on top of the allotted 18 credit hours per semester.

This is how many (most?) schools handle tuition. A flat fee covers (generally) 12-18 credits or 3-6 courses; your tuition varies from the sticker price only if you take fewer than 12 credits/3-4 courses (in which case you are considered a part-time student and subject to all sorts of other restrictions) or more than 18 credits/6-7 courses. So a skating elective would be unlikely to generate additional tuition revenue, though a school could certainly choose to offer skating courses if it thought they would attract or help retain students who would pay the tuition fees that keep the school running.

There are a few schools that determine unit funding by credit hours taught. This is a bad model for all sorts of reasons, and it's not widely used. But even at such institutions, the revenue generated by those credit hours wouldn't necessarily return directly to the skating program; it would go to the physical education department or the athletic program or whatever the entity that teaches the skating courses would be. That unit could choose to allocate to a skating club whatever profit might be made, after deducting the skating program's running costs and share of the department's running costs.

Here's a site that uses U.S. Department of Education data to calculate average costs of a credit hour: $325 for a four-year public university, $1039 for a four-year private university.
[source: https://studentloanhero.com/featured/cost-per-credit-hour-study/]
Let's say you have 10 students enrolled in a 1-credit figure skating elective. (I assume you wouldn't want many more if you're talking about a course supervised by one student coach at a time. Perhaps you could scale up if you have multiple students coaching at once, and all the students are at basic levels, but you don't want the rink to become too crowded for students to practice effectively.) If the university runs on a financial model that sends tuition revenue back to the department, that's $3250 gross income for the semester. Out of that, you have to pay a big cut to the university; you don't actually get a penny of revenue for every penny you bring in, since the university needs to fund all of its other activities (administration, student services, technology, etc.) as well as teaching and research. Then you have to pay something toward the rink's running costs: perhaps the difference between having the rink open and having the rink closed during that 50-minute session, perhaps the revenue that the rink could otherwise expect to get from a paying public during that time, perhaps a pro-rated share of the rink's running costs. If the students are not coaching otherwise, it would only be right to cover the cost of whatever insurance and coaching certification fees they might need to take on in order to coach for the university. I'm afraid there might not be any profit left. Other posters will know much more than I do about the costs of running a skating program, but I find it hard to imagine that it would be cost-effective to run one through a college.

Here are another pair of challenges to sort out. The school I attended as an undergrad and grad student had a rink that was open through the academic year but didn't rent skates. The school I teach at now has a club but no rink; the club uses the city rink while it's open (mid-October to mid-March) and carpools to rinks about an hour away for the rest of the year. The city rink rents skates. At my undergrad/grad institution, a theoretical skating course could run all semester, but students would have to have their own skates. At my current institution, students could rent skates from each rink, but courses would have to meet in different cities for half of each semester; students would have to make the time to drive an hour each way to class on top of the class time.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Actually there was a law suit and some sports get living stipends. There are questions about fairness b/c most of the sports that make enough $ for that are men's sports and women's sports don't have anything appoaching the popularty (or $$$ cow potential) of football. However Title IX states that opportunity has to be equal.

That's an awkward segue into my second point. Figure skating in the US is considered a women's sport. By virtue of that, it gets less respect. This is true of women's sports across the board (e.g. soccer in the US). It struck me as funny when Johnny Wier skated that they tried to turn it into a guy's (i.e. 'masculine') sport. I think that was b/c Johnny is very effeminate and doesn't care who knows it.

To be honest, women need to take more responsibility and support women athletes. Most men's sports would be viable with a single female fan.

 

[Cindy1983]

I tried to edit this post and it got deleted.

Actually there was a law suit and some sports get living stipends. There are questions about fairness b/c most of the sports that make enough $ for that are men's sports and women's sports don't have anything appoaching the popularty (or $$$ cow potential) of football. However Title IX states that opportunity has to be equal.

That's an awkward segue into my second point. Figure skating in the US is considered a women's sport. By virtue of that, it gets less respect. This is true of women's sports across the board (e.g. soccer in the US). It struck me as funny when Johnny Wier skated that they tried to turn it into a guy's (i.e. 'masculine') sport. I think that was b/c Johnny is very effeminate and doesn't care who knows it.

One lesson you could take from college gymnastics is marketing. When Suzanne Yocolan and Sarah Patterson took over the programs at Georgia and Alabama, respectively, they marketed it in the local communities as events for families. That would be great, especially for televised events. Besides Nationals and Worlds (where the desired live broadcasts could be worked out with the host country), they could televise a few live events in prime time. For the Grand Prix, Skate America and Skate Canada would be ideal for this. Most of these would be on Saturday and Sunday. I'd aim for the 8PM hr because it's the traditional 'family hr', although there's not much that families can watch in that hr. It would give families something to watch together and deal with FS awkward demo of women and young kids, usually girls (sorry, it's true). They could give that ladies at nationals 3 hr blocks live, both short and long programs (Friday and Saturday). Giving up and comers slots at these competitions so that ppl get to know them.

Getting to know the skaters is crucial which segues into my last point. Why did fans connect with personalities like Michelle Kwan, Sasha Cohen, Irena Slutskaya and Katarina Witt or Todd Eldredge and Elvis Stoijko on the men's side? They were accessible and ppl felt they knew them. That's kind of what's behind the Adam Rippon phenomenon. Ppl say it's become about that level of fame, but what helped him achieve that? Accessibility. He's someone you feel you can know and hang out with. The Russian girls (to me) don't have the same accessibility (although I was surprised at how Westernized Med seemed in her Olympic fluff piece). Even on the US ladies side, I don't feel there's anyone with this trait. Jason Brown has it on the Men's side (and is loved for it). For the ladies Osmond has it. I've said that Bradie may be a sign that the US ma be turning the corner and finally adapting to the IJS, but maybe there is another aspect. I saw an Olympic fluff piece on her and came away really impressed with her as a person. Ppl say that with the right choreographer, she could have good artistry. Well, with the a good agent and the right marketing, she could be accessible.

 

[tothepointe]

This is an interesting idea. But there are a few issues:
- Most of the lower level kids who don't practice seriously outside of lessons don't have the passion for it, so setting up a system like that might not actually work for them. When I see these kids on the ice, I think to myself, 'why are their parents wasting money on this expensive sport when they could just do something else?' Often these kids have parents with the passion and these kids are just forced to skate, but don't really like it.
- My skater (who has a strong passion for skating) would be very frustrated if he were constantly being told what to do. He craves the freedom of having ice time without lessons and being able to skate without any criticism or direction. If I could afford to give him his own rink I would.
- My skater's coach is very precise and specific and does not want my skater to be coached by just any random coach; she's very clear that she only approves of certain other coaches. I get the impression that many coaches feel this way and would simply not want their skaters practicing during sessions that were being overseen by random coaches.

I don't know exactly how it works in ballet but one of the reasons my skater doesn't take ballet is because the culture is too strict and he can only handle so much of that kind of structure. If we forced him into ballet too soon it would surely cause him to burnout and quit both skating and dance entirely. I think some kids might need a little extra push, but generally speaking I think (given our American system where sports are paid for by the parents) the kids who need that push are NOT the ones who are likely to become fantastic elite skaters. I think that the kids who are passionate about skating are the kids who deserve the most resources.

My concept is about creating a pool of talent not necessarily creating elite skaters. Done right it wouldn't be a random coach but part of a team approach but started at an early age. A rising tide lifts all boats. You need a strong base to get really good elites. You need students staying in the sport paying the coaches and rinks to make things profitable and attractive.

There are many young female skaters at my rink that are very passionate about skating. The problem is they don't know how to guide their own practice. Maybe it'll develop over time but right now they are wasting their time looking at each other trying to figure out what they are supposed to be doing. Ballet is the opposite in that regard. A typical ballet class takes you through the full range with each exercise building upon each other.

The russian school is collectivism versus individualism.

 

[tothepointe]

If people want figure skating in college then they have to be proactive as students themselves. Start a campus club at the recreational level. Prove that it's popular. Had I stayed on at a graduate student at the university I attended I would have done just this. There is funding for activities like this funded by those student association / activity fees they charge. I was surprised that there was so much money available. It would have been enough to fund a dedicated group class and some ice time for the year as well as entry fees etc.

Someone did mention USC earlier and I would like to point out they do have a figure skating club already.

The problem is if your only focusing money on funding elites before they become elites well there really isn't much incentive to fund a middle school child for most institutions. Figure skating is cursed in the regard that you have to start so early in order to ensure success.

 

[Cindy1983]

Gymnastics is similar and they made it work. Also read my post about what I think about skating going NCAA and skating stars today in general.

 

[ribbit]

Apologies for the very long post! I've edited it a few times, but it doesn't get shorter. tl;dr: skip down to the bolded phrase ("A better question might be...")

Gymnastics is similar and they made it work. Also read my post about what I think about skating going NCAA and skating stars today in general.

I don't know which post you're referring to. If you mean the living stipends you alluded to briefly, those are offered primarily to male football and basketball players and are described by the Washington Post here:

"The stipends, which generally range from $3,000 to $6,000 per year, are calculated by schools and are intended to cover living expenses of college such as food and travel home. Many colleges, particularly in the wealthier so-called “Power Five” conferences, started offering these stipends to scholarship athletes in 2015."
[source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...wyer-jeffrey-kessler/?utm_term=.7f3bfb1ee919]

Agreeing to give football and basketball players a little extra money to buy food because the athletes were kept in practice until after the dining halls closed and were going to bed hungry, because they didn't have the money (or the time to get a job to earn money, because they were spending all their time in practice or in class) is a world away from the finances and other logistics of figure skating we've been discussing: accepting prize money in excess of the cost of entering a competition, using prize money to pay parents' and coaches' expenses, accepting endorsements or money from appearing in commercials, benefiting from the services of an agent, delaying initial college enrollment in order to compete. All of these things are forbidden by the NCAA, and none of them are affected by the lawsuit you mention. If figure skating were ever to become an NCAA sport, skaters would have to choose never to do any of these things in order to remain NCAA-eligible, or to forfeit the possibility of skating in college in order to realize even a small return on investment.

Gymnastics is really not all that similar to figure skating. For one thing, a gymnast's peak years coincide with high school, while a skater's career unfolds more slowly. Forcing promising skaters to choose between an elite competitive career and college competition/scholarships at age 17-18 could take some promising talents out of the sport while frustrating others who gamble on an elite career and are left without that career and without eligibility for college competition/scholarships. For another, gymnastics is not nearly as expensive as figure skating. ABC reported that it costs about $15,000/year to train an elite gymnast:

"An analysis by Forbes magazine found that the average annual cost of raising an Olympic-level gymnast totaled $15,000. Multiply that by the five to eight years it takes to train a world-class athlete and the total can reach $120,000. "
[source: https://abcnews.go.com/US/olympics/olympians-parents-feel-debt-achieving-gold/story?id=16940902]

In other words, the cost of training an Olympic figure skater for a single year approaches the cost of training an Olympic gymnast for her entire career. Colleges simply don't have the money it would cost to train one elite skater, let alone a whole team--and if they did, it wouldn't be considered a part of their core mission of teaching and research, or fair, to spend it subsidizing a single student's athletic training. The cost differential of training gymnasts vs. figure skaters applies to colleges too. It simply doesn't make sense for them to invest their athletic budget in training one figure skater instead of five gymnasts. Again, most colleges that fund their clubs are giving them a few hundred to a few thousand dollars a year, to be shared by up to two dozen skaters. This is a drop in the bucket of what it costs to train at a high level, and what most of those club skaters will have been spending to train pre-college. It limits what you can expect the majority of college skaters to be able to do.

And it conditions that decision about eligibility I mentioned above. If it costs $15,000/year to train, you can probably grit your teeth and pass up endorsements, as Madison Kocian did. And there are enough scholarships available, because there are enough programs running (in no small part to offset the size of a men's football team, which may have up to 85 athletes on scholarships and 125 athletes on the roster) to make it worthwhile to sacrifice income now for the possibility of a scholarship later. If it costs $75,000/year to train, you may not be in a position to turn down even a small reward now in order to preserve your eligibility for a hypothetical college skating career.

I assume that college-level skaters fund the bulk of their training themselves, on top of their tuition fees and living expenses. And college-level skaters combine their training with their course schedules, internships, and possibly jobs. Very few skaters have been able to combine elite competition with full-time studies (props to Max Aaron and, I think, Richard Dornbush!); most skaters who have moved on to college and decide to come back scale back or take time off from their studies (Rachael Flatt, Sarah Hughes, Michelle Kwan all come to mind). Both financially and logistically, it's impractical to expect colleges to serve as a conduit or support system for skaters to compete at elite levels during or after college.

But the NCAA is a red herring, really. As other posters have said, college-level competition does not have to be sanctioned by the NCAA. USFS already organizes the U.S. Collegiate Championships (for intermediate, novice, junior, and senior singles and junior and senior dance and pairs), collegiate synchronized competition, and Intercollegiate team skating for singles. The technical requirements are lower than those of elite competition, presumably to accommodate a larger pool of skaters and to address the challenges of combining school and training and the difficulty of maintaining the hardest skills on reduced training time and funding.*

A better question might be: what could USFS do, either in collaboration with colleges or independently, to raise the profile of the collegiate competitions it already runs? Given that extreme technical difficulty is not going to be the principal selling point, what do you do to build an audience for collegiate skating? I've never had the opportunity to watch it myself, so I don't know what's already being done. But I've seen viral videos of terrific gymnastics floor routines done to recent mega-hits. Should USFS hire a college-skating social media coordinator to run Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram feeds and travel to competitions or solicit video submissions to look for the next "Whip My Hair"? Should they try to pitch ESPNU or the television channels that some of the big college conferences run a highlights package that could be used to fill five minutes of downtime? Should they tweak the judging calculations to privilege showmanship and artistic expression, or even change the requirements for one program to something more like the new Broadmoor artistic competition? What else could they do, or try?

*Technical requirements for the Intercollegiate singles short programs are here: https://fs12.formsite.com/USFSAIT/images/2017-18_Intercollegiate_-_Singles_Short_Program.pdf
Technical requirements for the US Collegiate short programs are here: http://cdn4.sportngin.com/attachmen...egiate_Championships_Announcement_-_FINAL.pdf

The obvious difference is the less demanding jump requirements. I'm not knowledgeable enough to say how the spin requirements differ, and there isn't enough information given about the step sequence to judge.

 

[macy]

A better question might be: what could USFS do, either in collaboration with colleges or independently, to raise the profile of the collegiate competitions it already runs? Given that extreme technical difficulty is not going to be the principal selling point, what do you do to build an audience for collegiate skating? I've never had the opportunity to watch it myself, so I don't know what's already being done. But I've seen viral videos of terrific gymnastics floor routines done to recent mega-hits. Should USFS hire a college-skating social media coordinator to run Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram feeds and travel to competitions or solicit video submissions to look for the next "Whip My Hair"? Should they try to pitch ESPNU or the television channels that some of the big college conferences run a highlights package that could be used to fill five minutes of downtime? Should they tweak the judging calculations to privilege showmanship and artistic expression, or even change the requirements for one program to something more like the new Broadmoor artistic competition? What else could they do, or try?

back in 2010 the collegiate championships were hosted in East Lansing, MI at my home rink, so i was able to volunteer as an ice monitor for most of the competition. from what i remember, it's a very laid back atmosphere and the nerves and pressure you feel in the air like at nationals are not present. everyone is there to have a good time. the high level skaters are mostly doing juvenile-novice level skills with maybe one or two former elite or current elite skaters who more than likely win. the audience is mostly made up of skaters' families and some friends. there are no student cheering sections or really any students from the universities the skaters are representing present to cheer them on. it felt more like a club competition than anything.

i think college gymnastics has done a very good job of using social media to their advantage, and it has paid off for them. Kaitlyn Ohashi's Michael Jackson FX went viral, and everyone loves how the rest of the team knows the gymnast's routine and dances to it on the side of the mat (unfortunately that wouldn't be possible for collegiate skating, since there are no "teams") not to mention many former olympians draw attention to college gymnastics when they start competing for a university. it just isn't like that with skating. i don't know if an olympian has ever competed in collegiates in the last couple decades. i mean, what reason would they have? i don't think skating will ever have the exact same attention college gymnastics has gained, although there is absolutely more USFS could do to draw the public's attention to it. i think it would be really smart to hire someone to begin spreading videos and other posts on social media. there's a lot of potential to change it into something a lot more popular.