Z
ZilphaK
Guest
Some colleges are offering synchro varsity programs (Miami, Adrian, Lindenwood). Alongside that, the synchro skaters are allowed to participate in collegiate solo competitions. A lot of singles athletes are trying out for Adrian because they are really supportive of that structure - or they were when I was in college. Other synchro teams are subsidized by the university at a club varsity level, like University of Michigan. Basically, they get some money for training and some free gear from the school's athletics apparel sponsor. Cal doesn't have a synchro team, but their figure skating team is getting very good at recruitment. I've think that the university itself might play a role in this, but that might just be weird wording from the skater I heard it from.
I think Synchro or Club Figure Skating may go club varsity at more schools because it's relatively cheap to sponsor certain aspects of it (if the university has its own ice arena and an associated athletic brand), but I can't see it going full varsity.
Either way, synchro skaters aren't training to get to the Olympics in ladies singles (or probably even synchro, since it's not in the Olympics). Some top singles skaters do go on to compete collegiately (Mirai comes to mind), but for the most part they don't compete in normal collegiate competitions, only the singles championship over the summer. I do think if more top schools had skating teams it would encourage more who are right below that top level to continue. I believe MIT has a very small one, as does UCLA. Dartmouth's is (or was?) one of the top in the country. University of Michigan's is pretty good as well.
It's not going to save the US ladies. The US Ladies who are competitive internationally are those who survive without thinking much about college right away, and those who compete in college are the ones who think about college. It's two very different groups.
All true. I'd just add that even as a club sport in college, synchro keeps more kids on the ice, for longer, taking tests in MIF and dance, and all this supports the bottom line for a club and/or rink in both $$$ and membership. Same with theater on ice programs and all the club "recreational" competitors. It's a good selling point both for schools and clubs. It just gets more kids (and their parents) who try skating/learn to skate, take a longer view of the sport as something worthwhile pursuing with their time/talent/$$. (Sort of like marching band: my middle kid intends to look for a college with a marching band, not that she'll get $$$ for joining band, but it's a ready-made group within the school to identify with and make the transition easier.)
If the skating team model was brought down to pre-college level, again, I think it would additionally help with training costs and skater retention. It's not a perfect either/or -- you might lose a few kids who flourish under the Pay $$$$$ to Play system in place now, but might bring in more kids overall who could play longer and at higher levels...or be identified sooner for additional training/funding? I know, it's tough to find a perfect answer, especially when skating is such an early-peak sport and puberty can wreak havoc...but with teams and cost-cutting, you might also retain more late bloomers who drop out due to funds running out. I also think that team competitions would give parents a clearer view of their own kids progression and potential...right now, it's tough for new skating parents (and most are) to see the lay of the land as far as how how much money/time/training to put when and where.
Again...this is all pie in the sky right now. But some clubs are moving toward collaborative coaching teams and package pricing, and I think it's a move in the right direction.