From the Pool to the Promise: A Battle for Swimming’s Legacy

This commentary is provided by Darrell Fick, a former U.S. National Team swimmer and a three-time All-American at the University of Texas, who has also worked as a Division I coach at the collegiate level.

Note: The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the overall opinions of SwimSwam.

I was not particularly a prodigy in the water. I was dismissed from swimming lessons on three occasions until my mother pleaded with an instructor to offer me an opportunity. At 9 years old, I finally began to swim. Twelve years later, I represented the United States behind the Iron Curtain as part of the national team. Swimming not only taught me how to swim faster—it imparted resilience, determination, and the significance of having someone believe in you.

Currently, the opportunity I was afforded is disappearing for far too many young competitors. Collegiate swimming, a foundation of opportunity and growth, is now endangered—especially for young men. The SEC’s choice to limit men’s swimming and diving rosters to 22 athletes, while other conferences follow the House v. NCAA settlement’s recommendation of 30, is a narrow-minded decision that threatens the future of our sport. If we don’t take action now, we risk not only eliminating rosters but also extinguishing dreams, opportunities, and the very essence of what makes swimming and diving exceptional.

Why Roster Reductions Impact Us All

Let me quell the trolls right here: This isn’t about instructing a group of “privileged” young competitors to “just swim faster” or “get over it.” These student-athletes have dedicated themselves to reaching their current level. They’ve made sacrifices that most individuals are unwilling to make. Championships are achieved through depth, and development requires time. Reducing rosters undermines both.

Smaller rosters eliminate the opportunity for freshmen to develop, rob teams of the depth needed to handle injuries or illnesses, and foster a “fight-for-your-life” environment that weakens team unity.

Consider Shaun Jordan, for instance. He joined the Texas team without a scholarship and progressed to become a two-time Olympic gold medalist and a member of four consecutive NCAA championship squads. He was a captain during his final year. Shaun recently shared with me that under a 22-athlete limit, he would never have made the team. His narrative is not isolated; it embodies the collegiate swimming experience—a story of opportunity intersecting with hard work and perseverance.

The young men on these teams constitute a solid group—like a family supporting one another. It pains me to envision them being told they no longer have a place at the table. I’ve witnessed the psychological impact this imposes—their education, lives, and sense of belonging are all disrupted. And for what? To save a minuscule amount of funds or adhere to some arbitrary compliance figure? It’s myopic and misguided.

Competitive Disadvantage for the SEC

The 22-athlete roster cap places SEC institutions at a considerable disadvantage compared to teams in other conferences with 30-athlete rosters. Athletic directors within the SEC expend significant resources to achieve competitive advantages—but this resolution does the reverse. Data indicates that championship-winning rosters typically average 35 athletes, and when comparable athletes compete, a 30-person team outperforms a 22-person team 65% of the time.

I understand—supporters of non-SEC institutions may be pleased to see the conference’s dominant teams at a disadvantage. But believe me, the SEC is not halting here. They aim to persuade other conferences to implement the same 22-athlete restriction, which would ultimately harm the sport as a whole. Do we truly wish to level the playing field by bringing everyone down rather than uplifting programs?

It’s crucial to recognize that a 30-athlete limit is already a compromise. Historically, championship squads averaged 35-37 athletes, offering depth, resilience, and development. Further reducing rosters risks undermining the very foundation of competitive collegiate swimming.

Foreseeing the Future of 22-Person Rosters

If we permit 22-person rosters to become standard, the realm of collegiate swimming will undergo a substantial shift—and not for the better. Institutions will only be able to recruit athletes who already meet NCAA Championship A or B final times. How many young men achieve those benchmarks annually? Not enough to sustain the rosters necessary to uphold today’s depth and competitiveness. The balance of athletes will likely shift from Europe and Asia (or transfer portals, perhaps) as recruiting emphasizes immediate results over long-term growth.

And what about diving? Some programs might totally do away with diving to optimize their limited roster positions or eliminate swimming while retaining diving. Events in long-distance swimming could also be cut, as teams sacrifice those areas to concentrate on sprinters and relays for scoring points.

We will also lose exceptional coaches—committed leaders who didn’t enroll in this profession to manage programs characterized by continuous roster turnover, recruiting unpredictability, and constrained opportunities for athlete growth. These are the unintended ramifications of 22-person rosters, and they will hurt not only the competitors but also the very core of collegiate swimming.

The Ripple Effect

Collegiate swimming serves as the foundation of America’s Olympic supremacy. NCAA athletes produced 83% of Team USA’s swimming medals in Tokyo. Reducing rosters to 22 does not merely harm college programs; it weakens the pipeline that nurtures our national teams. With the LA 2028 Olympics approaching, this topic transcends collegiate swimming. It concerns our identity as a nation that prizes excellence and opportunity in athletics. Do we want to be the nation that shortchanged its athletes because reducing rosters was simpler than confronting difficult challenges?

Mentorship and Opportunity

As a coach, mentor, and advocate, I have witnessed how swimming transforms lives. The discipline and tenacity athletes acquire in the pool equip them for success long after their competitive careers conclude. However, these invaluable life lessons are at stake if we persist in undermining opportunities for young athletes.

I think of the student-athletes I mentor—individuals who juggle academics with rigorous training schedules. These young men and women are acquiring skills that mold them into leaders within their communities and sectors. Removing “walk-on” possibilities in men’s and women’s swimming and diving—and across all sports—is catastrophic. Walk-ons have always been among the hardest workers in our domain. From my experience as an athlete to my tenure as a coach, I’ve witnessed how these teammates motivate entire teams. Their time drops in early heats frequently set the trajectory for championship achievements. Many of these individuals go on to excel in their chosen fields and generously contribute back to their programs and communities. Walk-ons are the heart and essence of collegiate sports, and losing them means sacrificing a vital component of what enhances our teams.

Being a swimmer in any program provides a 5-10 year advantage in the real world. When we curtail their opportunities, we are not merely reducing athletes; we are depriving future physicians, engineers, and entrepreneurs.

A Call to Action

Here’s how you can contribute right now:

• Advocate: Reach out to SEC athletic directors and university presidents. Urge them to back the 30-athlete roster limit. Encourage them to assist current athletes in their transition.smoothly, not merely show them the exit.
• Submit Grievances: Present and prospective athletes and coaches can lodge complaints by emailing Tom Wiegand at [email protected] and copy Anna Starobinets at [email protected]. They can offer advice and a framework to guarantee your perspective is acknowledged. Grievances must be submitted by January 31.
• Participate on Social Media: Public influence is effective. Share your narrative and tag key stakeholders, specifically Athletic Directors and their Presidents.
• Back Local Teams by filling the seats at college events, relishing the excitement of competition, and demonstrating to schools that swimming holds significance.

United, we can create an impact for the forthcoming generation of swimmers. Bob Bowman, the coach of Texas swimming and Michael Phelps’ long-term mentor, states, “Reaching intermediate, progressive objectives consistently fosters daily excellence—and keeps your strategy synchronized with your vision.” Let’s synchronize our vision now to safeguard the future of collegiate swimming.

ABOUT DARRELL FLICK

Darrell Fick is a former U.S. National Team swimmer and a three-time All-American for The University of Texas, where he also held the role of team captain. Throughout his remarkable career, Darrell has excelled in the pool, been a founding coach of an age group team, a D1 collegiate coach, and a passionate supporter of swimming. He has dedicated over 40 years to giving back to the sport that molded him, assisting young athletes as a coach, mentor, and fundraiser. Off the pool deck, Darrell has established a thriving 31-year career in pharmaceutical sales and marketing. As a lifelong Longhorn, he continues to assist young swimmers in achieving success both in and out of the water.