18 May 2015
State of Union
College cycling programs in the USA are either "sport clubs" or "varsity sports." As of 2015, 17 varsity programs have been approved by USA Cycling. "Approval" means that the programs have met various requirements set out by USA Cycling. These requirements primarily focus on the level of financial support provided to riders who attend the school and ride on the varsity squad. Nearly all varsity programs will pay for the costs to compete (team clothing, entry fees & travel expenses). Many offer at least $10,000 per year in scholarships. The bigger varsity programs also have various infrastructure items like team vans, trailers, on-campus facilities, and paid staff. Effectively, these varsity programs are supported on the level of many UCI Continental Teams.
Sports Clubs, on the other hand, are typically "pay-to-play," with the students picking up the tab for the majority of expenses. There are a few club teams that receive substantial financial support from their university or college, but most receive a small percentage of what is necessary to run a successful program. Club programs are also typically student run. While this is undeniably a great educational experience for the student leadership, it is the exceptional set of student leaders that can compete with paid staff for the long-term development and management of a competitive athletic program.
I have been told that the average varsity program has an operating budget around $150,000 per year. As I understand it, this does not include staff compensation, capital goods, or scholarships. The University of Colorado Boulder, as an example of a "sport club," receives about $5,500 per year from the school as part of the club sports program. Obviously, quite a difference in financial resources.
The emergence of varsity cycling programs could be reaching critical mass. New programs are announced each year and there is rumor of 10 new teams filing applications for 2016. USA Cycling is in the process of revamping the division structure that will eventually separate varsity and club programs. This restructuring is necessary to accommodate the new programs and especially to address the impact of the varsity program on the competitive landscape.
Varsity programs are recruiting and retaining the best high school talent. They are able to financially support larger programs with more riders. The recent national results illustrate the relative competitive advantage: in the last 5 years no club program has won a national title in any discipline (Track, Road, CX, MTB, BMX) in either division (I and II, both have varsity programs). This is approximately 45 National Championship events! CU was the first to break this stranglehold by winning the 2014 MTB National Championship.
At 2015 Road Nationals, only one Division I varsity program placed outside of the top-10 (Lindsey Wilson College). The remaining five Division I programs placed 1st, 3rd, 5th, 6th and 9th. In Division II, 7 of the top 10 schools were varsity programs. The results clearly establish the relative strength of the varsity programs, but perhaps even more telling is the perception at the events themselves. Conference competitions often see varsity programs stacking the field and smothering the competition. Varsity teams also look the part with team vans, trailers, staff support and various other trappings of a well-financed program. The psychological impact of this reality is significant in its own right.
Additionally, the varsity programs are best situated to field quality teams in all 5 cycling disciplines. They tend to dominate the National Rankings (based on performance in all 5 disciplines) because they have the resources to send teams to 5 National Championship events during the academic year.
But this is a good thing
In the long-term, the growth of the varsity cycling "movement" is a good thing. This will mean more opportunities for promising athletes to continue developing while enhancing their future prospects with an education. With increased support at the collegiate level, the depth of the field will continue to improve and will eventually represent the majority of 19-22 year old talent in the sport. Inevitably, the collegiate ranks will become important in the national development pipeline and professional teams will take collegiate performances more seriously.
Additionally, collegiate cycling will continue to be a welcoming environment to athletes who come to the sport later in life. Collegiate cycling does a good job of bringing new riders into the sport because of the established structure and guiding principle of open participation. A well-developed collegiate cycling environment will identify and direct this new talent much quicker than the USAC open amateur racing circuit.
Up next...can collegiate cycling be relevant in the larger cycling arena?
15 May 2015
Last week I wrapped up a full season as coach of the University of Colorado Boulder Cycling Team. I have coached the team in an expanding capacity over the last 3 years. 2014/15 was the first year that I managed all disciplines (with the exception of BMX) for a complete academic year. As a result I have had contact with the various disciplines, both men and women, and the various categories in which the student-athletes compete.
The University of Colorado Boulder has over 120 student-athletes compete during a typical academic year. Men and women compete in 3 different categories and in 4 disciplines (Track, MTB, CX, and Road) over approximately 20 competition weeks. There is a wide range of experience and fitness with many students trying the sport for the first time. These new cyclists trained, traveled, and competed shoulder-to-shoulder with seasoned competitors who have represented the USA at World Championship events. This is a unique environment in that the full spectrum of competitors rarely interact so closely with each other.
In addition to providing an enriching experience for students, I believe collegiate cycling can be a legitimate development pathway to the national and international professional ranks. We have a number of competitors that have represented in the USA in World Championships in the last 12 months. These athletes have a promising start to a professional career on the bike. Unfortunately, they are often forced to choose between committing to racing the collegiate calendar or the national calendar. Many athletes must even withdraw from school to engage in the level of competition they feel is necessary to advance their careers. This is unfortunate, and I think with some vision, planning, and effort, ultimately unnecessary.
Can collegiate cycling develop in such a way to keep student-athletes in school while still providing top-level competition? This has been achieved for football, basketball, baseball and other varsity sports, why not cycling?
The next several posts will address various aspects of collegiate cycling and hopefully encourage increased attention and support of the program from the various stakeholders.