(10-23-2015 09:05 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(10-21-2015 09:43 PM)Wedge Wrote:  I agree that it's unlikely a triathlete would go straight from college to winning an Olympic medal, but I think the idea is not that, it's to get more women into the sport at a younger age so as to develop an eventual pool of Olympic-class triathletes in their 30s. Having the "carrot" of college scholarships out there has been a big incentive in other sports to developing top junior athletes.

Don't mean to be a contrarian here. (no one would ever accuse of me of that)

But I will say that I don't agree the goal or point of building up olympic sports at the college level, for women (or for men), has anything to do with the actual olympic teams.

In my opinion, it's just about participation. Getting women to participate in college varsity athletics.

I think that any woman who is showing enough skill and potential to be an olympian, regardless which event, would be training with the best club (or perhaps directly at the US training center) from the git-go.

I will confirm that you are not just being contrarian, since there isn't anything in your claim that is contrary to what Wedge pointed out. There is no "get-go" to be "from" unless there is participation. More immediate goals than "going to the Olympics" are needed to drive participation. Going to college with a partial ride from the sport is obviously not enough to be the only driver, but it helps.

And there is another dimension to this, which is that greater participation at the college level creates a larger supply of potential leaders of youth programs when they graduate, helping out participation on the supply side as well as the demand side.