Hello and welcome to the Swim Brief. I am Chris DeSantis. And you may have noticed we got one less podcast than usual this week. My son's school is off this week. And I'm going to be doing this one actually alone as well because Joel has got some pretty exciting things going on in his life. And I don't want to talk about them on here without him being present. But that's a tease for you. Hopefully, Joel will be back next week and he'll have some stuff to talk about that if you've been following this podcast for a long time, you're going to think is pretty cool. I'm pretty excited about it. But again, I don't want to get too deep into it without him here. So I'm going to try to do this one by myself. And actually, perfect for me. There was gift wrapped a couple of things floating out in the greater swimming world. One of them being an editorial and another one being a piece of news that present a really good opportunity for this podcast and some of the themes we've been discussing and some of the stuff I want to bounce off of. So the two things we're going to talk about is Minnesota's decision to sort of reorganize the titles of people on their swim coaching staff. And then I want to talk about an editorial that Braden Keith wrote about elite, he's titled Elite Female Athletes Are Jumping the Coaching Ladder, and I think that's okay. Which you can actually tell that he changed the title to it because if you look at the URL, he's walked it back from elite female athletes are jumping the coaching ladder, and I think that's a good thing. So somewhere in between, I think, titling this and actually publishing it, he decided that good thing was too far. But if you read the article, really the theme is he's making an argument for some of the recent hires that have been in Division I and them being a good thing. And uh I did uh spoiler alert for everybody listening, I I did not like the piece. Um I really disagree with a lot of what he has to say, uh, but I think you should listen because it's probably uh, especially if you're just joining the podcast, you haven't uh had the long view of this, it may not go in the direction that you think it is, my my critique of what Braden has written here. Um but I want to get to the Minnesota news first because it's a little bit lighter and I think you know it presents just an opportunity to discuss some stuff that you know we don't always um we don't always we we we we've we've gotten into, but this very specific situation I think it is actually quite unique. So um you Minnesota Swimming and Diving Um has changed Kelly Kramer, who was the uh combined head coach of the program, he's now going to be called the director of swimming and diving. And um two of his coaches, uh I'm actually as as I read this, and I I can't see whether they were associates or assistants. I think you know sometimes that distinction is not that important. There's head coaches and then there's non-head coaches. Um of course the associate thing helps in future hiring, and I think this is something that will help in future hiring for um the people as well. But um, Stacy Busack will be head women's swimming coach, and Mike Joyce will be head men's swimming coach. Um, and you know, as fate would have it, I actually saw uh Kelly Kramer when I was in Minnesota. I guess it's now um roughly, I guess it's almost two months ago, and uh he sort of hinted that uh something like this was coming down the pike. So uh I've been you know in the back of my mind wondering what's actually going to happen here. And I think the first thought that I have about this is I do think that Minnesota, and I'm this is something I track within programs. Um I have over the years, many times sort of just researched uh salaries because I want to know what competitive salaries are. I'm into that kind of statistic. I want to know how various schools are handling it. Um and I think Minnesota, in my opinion, is a place that has historically done a good job of uh both compensating the coaches that they do have relative to the cost of living in their area. Um and I think they've done a good job, you know, promoting coaches internally, um, making uh coaches associate coaches. Um and I think this is an extension of that. That, you know, this is a change that I think probably was initiated by Kelly Kramer, not with any inside knowledge on that, but um I would guess that this is something that he wants. Um and it does, it's something that you know he can offer for free, essentially. It doesn't have a necessarily a direct cash value to the people that are working for them that will help them and actually help them beyond coaching at University of Minnesota, right? Now, I mean, if Mike Joyce wants to go to another program, if he wants to be in the mix when other places are hiring, he will be able to say, I was head coach of a Division I power conference program. And I think um Stacy Busak as well, like that will be um something that you know both of them are going to be able to be able to carry forward. Um, and I think it's also a recognition, probably, of how most combined programs are run anyway. Uh something that we've discussed in this podcast is combined swimming programs at the Division I level. One of the big changes that those coaches face is that you know they move from more of a coaching role to an administrator role. Um and so having the person who's actually overseeing the entire program uh designated as the director actually makes a lot more sense than calling them the head coach because very often what there doesn't end up being a lot of time for for the person who's a combined coach of a program is coaching. Now, obviously, this varies from place to place, but I would say it's a pretty accurate generalization of how these programs work. And so, and and by the way, how it tends to work, I think, and a lot more people are thinking about making it work as they move from split programs to combined, having somebody who is directly responsible for the coaching of each team that is not necessarily the uh head coach. And I think this is probably a recognition of more of what the actual internal structure of Minnesota is. But it does beg for me the question at the end, and that is is it anything more than PR for their program? Like it does it actually make an impact on anything. If if we say, if I if we accept my hypothesis there that it's it's just a recognition of how things are actually run, I I don't know. I wouldn't expect necessarily that this means that things are going to be run differently. Um perhaps this is already, what I'm suggesting is perhaps this is already how things were running internally. Um it's it's possible that nobody's getting a raise, you know, to go from associate coach or assistant coach or uh whatever their previous titles were to head coach. So um there's not a lot of material change here. Um and I guess you know, from from where I'm sitting, does it really make an impact on anything that I think is important? Is it really gonna impact the experience of kids on Minnesota's team to have this change? Or, you know, is it just sort of like gonna make it easier for Mike Joyce to get another job, gonna make it easier for Stacey Busack to get a job? Um, and I like that piece of it, but um not really in the short term make a material difference in their lives or the lives of the student athletes on the team. And um I I just I would watch that piece of it. Um, you know, I I I think I think it's good. I don't I don't think it's bad, but I don't know how big of a needle mover this is, frankly. All right, let's get to the uh Braden Keith article. And um, you know, I have to pick my battles here, um, and I'm gonna back up and talk about Braden Keith a little bit, who is the probably the most influential person, I would say, at SwimSwam in terms of what content goes up on their site. And I have noticed actually um that over the years he has transitioned from more of a reporter and a sort of news gatherer um into developing more and more his editorial voice. I mean, if there's something that is in writing uh on Swim Swam, you can bet that Braden Keith has influenced that in some point. You know, um uh you can argue that Mel Stewart is perhaps more well known, more recognizable, um, more famous, you know, has more Q factor, whatever. Like, you know, he's he's out there, but I think actually Braden is probably the most influential in what you read. And and swimming, swim swam, you know, is the absolute undisputed uh uh giant in swimming content in terms of uh news that we read. Uh I know that whether or not I like it, um, I'm going to swim swam quite a bit. And um I'm getting a lot of information from there. I have not been to, if you if you say their chief competitor is swimming world magazine, I have not gone to Swimming World magazine in a long time. I think you know Brett Hawk with uh extending out of his podcast and Nate Scholl, who I know listens to this podcast, I I think they're making a good faith attempt to be more competitive. Um, but I don't know that it has really caught on as a significant competition to Swim Swam. So in that way, when when Braden Keith writes an editorial, like he has a tremendous amount of influence to steer the conversation um and steer people's perceptions of what is going on. And um that's why I think this article or this editorial that he writ wrote is so bad, to be honest. Um because I think that he his his biggest blind spot um in what he's doing, and he has a lot of strengths that have made SwimSwam so popular, I think specifically what he brought to it in the beginning was um a dedication to news gathering that nobody could really keep up with. And he had a number of years where Swimming, just from being a legacy um de facto place for people to get news, despite the fact that they were not putting in the same level of work that he was, they were um more popular than SwimSwam. So he has sheer force of will them into the position that they are, but he has a big blind spot. Um, and I think part of that blind spot comes from the the thing that has made him great on the news side. Um and when I say great, I mean successful in that he has really mastered the art of the content hose. Like he uh, and I know this from having been uh inside as a writer for some time, he really drives the constant posting of content on SwimSwam. You know, you may have noticed if you if some content gets up there that you like, how quickly it can move away. Um and you know, part of that I think is intentional, that um they they don't necessarily, in fact, uh very consciously are not going for quality. Um they are going for quantity, they want anything that you could possibly want to read about, they want to have that uh for you. And as a result, you know, they do end up posting a lot of stuff that is either, in my opinion, poorly researched or uh poorly contextualized, um, or lacks a sense of history. Um and as somebody who takes a lot of interest in the history of the sport and and what is happening, um, I think I think that's bad. I'm not a fan of content that you know tries to sort of shape the narrative while ignoring what's actually happened, what's actually happening. And um there's a sort of precedent for um what what the effects might be going forward. And I think this article is a good example of that. So the the central thesis of this article is it's really good that uh women with little to no experience coaching are getting hired for Division I power conference assisted coaching job. And if I look at the evidence that he uses to back that thesis up, which by the way, I disagree with the thesis, but I also disagree with the evidence that he's presented. Um number one, he he offers that it's a shorter path to them getting better jobs. And if you look at the landscape uh particularly of Division I high-level swimming, there are and there have been historically scant a few women up at that level. Um, so he actually sees this as a pathway to addressing that uh inequity. He actually thinks it's um another reason why he thinks it's good is he actually thinks this is a revolutionary change. You know, he thinks this is a paradigm shift. He thinks this is a this is a new thing that is happening. We haven't tried this yet, and obviously what we've been trying has not been working. Um, therefore, we should really give this process a chance because you know this is something that could have the potential to you know uh improve this system that most people recognize is is really problematic. And then at the end of it, he says that having a big social media following means you're valuable. And that's the last point I want to address. But I'm gonna start back at the beginning. We talk about the inequity, and and I have discussed it in writing, have discussed it on this podcast a number of times. Um, I am with him up to the point where he says, you know, that there is an inequity. I totally agree. Um I and I think it's a real problem for uh uh Division I uh sports, for Division I power conference sports, it's a problem that gets more uh acute as you go up in the levels. Um I think if you look down to the mid-major level or you look um into Division III, uh I would say it this inequity um and the sort of lack of engagement uh of of women in the profession uh is definitely a problem, but it it's it's most manifested here. Um but I don't agree that this solution is the one that is going to address that greater system. And I I guess I want to qualify before I say that. I I don't want anybody to listen to this and go, well, Chris thinks, because I'm about to argue actually that it it hurts more than it helps. Um and I think some of those arguments might lead you to believe, you know, you think like, oh, like Annie Laser got hired, Chris is saying Anthony Nestie is sexist, you know, or um um uh Amanda Beard may or may not have been hired by Arizona. Uh Chris thinks Augie Bush is sexist. I'm actually going to stay away from that argument. Um, just because I say that the hiring decisions they're making are not helping the situation. In fact, I think they're hurting the situation. Um, I think it's kind of beside the point. I think let's keep the discussion on uh where we agree, which is that this inequity exists. What are we gonna do about it? And um I don't think that anybody on any individual level you know can fix it. I don't believe that Anthony Neste in Florida, you know, can just go like, I'm gonna fix gender inequity in the SEC or the high-level NCA Division I coaching, if I just do my hiring right. Okay. Um that's uh that's a bit pie in the sky. And but I guess my point is this is nothing new. This is not a revolutionary change. Um if you look at the history, and one of the reasons why it's hard to look at the history um of this happening in the past is because very frequently hires that are made like this, you know, I would venture to guess, like of the five names that he lists, so somebody else can keep track of this: Annie Laser at Flora, Noel Paplowski at Indiana, Meliamar Gaelis, SMU, Margot Gere as head coach at Alabama, and Kelsey Dahlia at Notre Dame. I would venture to guess um that more than half of them won't be coaching at that level within five years. Um and that that would uh, in my mind, line up with the historical trend that's happened here, which is disproportionately the big-time swimming programs hire former elite female athletes to be assistant coaches, and uh they very frequently do not continue in the sport. Um, so I I I challenge the central assertion that there's anything revolutionary about what's happening here. Um and I think this has been happening historically for a long period of time. Um I even started to look at some of the examples of uh successful Division I um women. And uh, you know Carol Capitani, for existence, for example, was as I think I'm reading her bio, um, I have it pulled up here in the corner. Um she just swam at Cal Berkeley, okay, eight eight-time all-American at Cal Berkeley. Okay, so that was 32 years ago. Um, and she transitioned almost immediately into coaching at Villanova University and then went to Georgia and became an assistant coach there. Okay. Um I uh one person that uh I think has historically uh had a lot of success, Alicia Hick and Franklin, is out at University of Denver. You know, I I was like, huh, I wonder. She she transitioned directly from swimming in college to being an assistant coach at Washington State University in the Pac 12 and um went from there to Denver. Now, I think in both these instances, uh if you actually look at Washington State, historically, yeah, they're in the Pac 12. They've been run more like a mid major. So I actually think that in Both these instances, it was actually very good for both that they didn't start in a Power Five and Power Five school because I'm gonna get to that point later. Um, one of the reasons why I think most of the time this doesn't work is that um the the programs themselves are are trying to fill a quota. Okay, they um they want to they've they don't have an official policy, but they have an unofficial policy that you know if you're gonna run a combined program, um let's say, you know, now you can have eight coaches, but you know, let's say if we look at the traditional five or six coaches, they can't be six guys. You gotta have one um non-male coach on your coaching staff. Um and I think that really does a disservice to the issue because um nobody is really looking at like why aren't there better quality candidates looking for these jobs in the first place? Because when I think about all the teams that I have coached, and I've coached a lot of women in my life, and uh I have um I think a lot about like, hey, who would be a good coach, who's got, you know, the skills that it takes to transition from being an athlete to coaching. It was not the fastest women that I coached that really had that. In fact, it was far from it. Um, and I think if you look at a lot of really successful male coaches, they were not um they were not Olympians in their own time. Um, and the reason for that is it it would be extremely rare that somebody would have both skill sets. And the skill sets are actually very, very different. I think there's an assumption here that goes sort of like, well, uh be, you know, you if you were really fast at swimming, you must understand that, you know, how fast swimming is created and be able to teach it to other people. I think that's a giant logical leap. I don't agree at all. It's not that I don't think you can be a good coach if you were a 99.99999 percentile athlete. I just think it's highly unlikely. It's probably more unlikely than it is likely. So um this, in my opinion, uh basically having a hiring process that disproportionately hires people that are all the way on that end of performance, I don't think it's a way to get the most talented, most competent and most sort of career in coaching minded people in. So that's a first step of this, I think that doesn't work. I think also because of the uh quota mindset that very, very little effort is put into developing uh female coaches. Because, you know, it's kind of for a lot of these programs, they're just sort of it's an afterthought. So they just go like, well, we we we avoided looking completely sexist, um mission accomplished, you know, and uh frankly, I think it's a it's a collective action problem because you would have to, if you were running one of these programs, you'd have to say, like, this is wrong, and I want to be creative about the way that I address it. And I think one of those ways is you have to think about the long term and about developing. And I just don't think that these are decisions made for the long term. These are very much short-term decisions um made in hiring, and they're um like if you're going to hire somebody with little to no coaching experience, then in my opinion, you better have a plan for developing them. Because it's fine to hire somebody, you go like, well, this person's just a raw talent, coaching-wise. It's fine to recruit people that um haven't really done it swimming-wise if you have, if you understand how you're going to get them up to a competitive level at what you're doing. But if you have people who just haven't like it, this would be like I don't know, it would be like recruiting, you know, um to your team based on their success in a completely different sport and just being like, well, I think they could be good at swimming. Like it the skill sets are entirely different. One of the ways that I took I always visualize it is I think it's the difference between a professional eater and a chef. Okay. Um, I wouldn't hire Joey Chestnut. Uh that's the Nathan's hot dog eating champion. I wouldn't hire him to be head chef at my restaurant. He's good at eating. Okay. Athletes are consumers of coaching. They are on the receiving end of coaching. The best athletes are excellent. I've talked about this before, they're excellent synthesizers of coaching. But that doesn't mean that they know how to coach. In fact, they may have been so dedicated and so focused on synthesizing coaching into a usable form to themselves that um they really don't understand how it works whatsoever. Um, and I think that's more likely than not to happen with these with these hires. And the last piece of this is the social media piece. And um, you can call me biased. You can say, well, Chris, like you're just a bitter man because you have you know 290 followers on Instagram or whatever. But I think there is a false equivalence being drawn here and in Keith's piece as well, that somehow a large social media following makes you valuable. Social media is not value. Okay. I think we we need to separate overall the idea that you know value has a one-to-one correlation with anything else. Value isn't intangible, value is value. You cannot measure it. I know you could go like, oh, well, you know, if somebody pays me $500 for the watch that I came up with, then this watch is, you know, value is $500. I don't agree. I don't agree. Value is value. Um, most things that are bought and sold, you know, one side of that transaction is uh getting more for what they've offered than the other, right? So there's never this one-to-one correlation. Um, and I don't I don't think necessarily that social media followings um are valuable. I'd love to see somebody tell me how um or demonstrate to me that hiring somebody to be an assistant coach who has a large social media following has actually been an asset in recruiting? Um do we even know who's following these people? Like, okay, Annie Laser has 22,000 followers. How many of them are 16 to 17-year-old uh boys and girls who want to swim in the SEC? How many of them? Or how many of those kids that they're recruiting have no idea who Annie Laser is? I would venture to guess an overwhelming, like 99% of them. Still, because the people that follow her um, by my estimation, are probably a lot of adults that care about the sport of swimming, um, that are fans of the sport of swimming, or um maybe young people who are fans of the sport of swimming. But um, in general, again, the higher level athletes that I've seen are actually less predisposed to be big fans of you know a second-tier um national teamer, right? They they don't know who that is. Um most people, even up at the top level, um they just don't see it. So I really disagree. I think that um what Braden is positing here is it ignores the history and the progression of what we've actually been quote unquote trying collectively over the years, and it actually does a disservice because the issue is so much more complex. Um, there's so many more uh things that we have to rally people around. There has to be more of an orientation instead of towards addressing inequity on all fronts, versus like, oh, we'll just fix it through this one, this one hiring trick is gonna revolutionize how things are going. I'd love to be wrong. I think he's wrong. Uh you listen to this podcast for my opinions, and I'm very thankful that you do. Uh I love Magic 5 goggles. If you go to magic5.com slash swim brief, you can get a custom fit pair of goggles. Surprisingly affordable. Check the price yourself. I think with the 13% discount, if you buy clear, now I've been made fun of for wearing clear goggles, but um, you could probably get it under $50. And uh it's so wonderful to wear them. Most comfortable pair of goggles I ever had. Um, if you want to get more bite-sized content, Christy underscore coach on Instagram, CD Swim Coach on Facebook. I'm blogging again, Christycoach.com. The website has been redesigned. Check it out. Go visit, see what I'm all about. Um, thank you to everybody for listening. Thank you to Joel, even though he's not here, um, because he's here in spirit. And uh I hope to be back with you next week and announce some exciting news.