dimitrig said:
I have tried to post a few times to this thread, but then deleted my posts before hitting send.
What I want to say is that these situations are complicated.
One of the articles linked above (about Lou Campanelli) states:
"College is about getting better, not getting yelled at. Talented as they may be, these are college kids; 18, 19 and 20 years old. Can you imagine how long a chemistry professor would last if he cursed at his students every day? Not another minute is how long."
This is absolutely correct.
However, the line between college and pros has blurred. Heck, as athletes are recruited and coached younger and younger even the line between children and adults has blurred.
The reality is that there are some coaches who have a very abrasive style. They are very demanding. They have high standards. They don't couch criticisms and spew unwarranted compliments to spare feelings.
I would call Bela Karolyi one of those types of coaches. For all of the horrible things he was accused of doing, he managed to coach his athletes to the highest levels and while some of them hated him there are many who stand by him even to this day.
I think Teri McKeever falls into this category of what some here have referred to as "tough coaches."
Is there room to have coaches like this in 2022? I'm not sure.
However, you can be sure that there are most likely swimmers who didn't have a problem with it. Obviously, some did.
My SO was a ballerina and if you want to talk about a sport (and yes, I'd call it a sport in the sense that ballerinas are highly trained athletes) then there is probably no more abusive environment than professional dance.
My SO hated some of her teachers, but she kept coming back? Why? She wanted to achieve at the highest levels and she couldn't get that instruction anywhere else.
Some (many) dancers quit. Some parents were upset. Like with McKeever, some dancers were criticized no matter what they did (whipping posts) and some were praised even when they weren't as good as others in some sort of twisted attempt to motivate the high achievers.
Yes, dancers were weighed, body-shamed, and verbally abused. They were accused of faking injuries. Their personal issues were sometimes outed in front of others.
Reading how McKeever treated her swimmers sounds very familiar in many ways.
All of this is not to excuse her behavior, but to explain why (some) swimmers put up with it. Those who stayed did so because they saw McKeever as their ticket to the Olympics and I know it is controversial to say this, but some weren't good enough to achieve their dream. That probably hurt them to know/find out as much as anything she said or did. That is why they transferred to other programs.
To me the most interesting aspect of this is how Missy Franklin and Natalie Coughlin both chose to swim for Dave Durden. Their decisions take on new significance given these new allegations. Certainly those swimmers were able to achieve at the highest levels and yet when they came back they opted not to train with McKeever. I'd like to know more about how they feel about McKeever.
I wonder if and how often McKeever was reprimanded for her behavior and asked to alter her coaching style at least a little bit. For someone like that it's difficult to change, especially when you've had so much success doing what you're doing.
Anyway, I wanted to throw my opinion out there, because I've certainly heard a lot of whiny parents back in the day. I tend to discount anything they have to say, because they weren't there and they don't know what the relationship is like. Some athletes will endure toxic relationships if it helps them further their goals. Some have thicker skin than others. Some are favorites. Ask twenty dancers in my SO's ballet company what they think about the ballet mistress and you will get twenty different answers ranging from affection to tolerance to outright hatred.
Has a coach gone too far when even one of his charges is depressed, has anxiety or self-esteem issues, or feels picked on or abused? In Little League, probably. At the highest levels I'm not so sure.
My opinion: quit and find another coach that suits your style. At this level these are professional swimmers and that is exactly what Missy and Natalie did. I am not really sure what the point of tearing down the program is other than furthering some sort of personal grudges (even well-deserved) against McKeever.
You just say: "Look, this program isn't for everyone."
However, with what has happened now I think Cal has to let her go. It's unfortunate it got to that point and I blame the administration for letting things fester like this because we're going to lose a really good coach.
That said, there are other coaches out there that can get the job done - even in our own program - so let's just move on.
Good post. This is essentially what I have been saying from the beginning of this thread. Old school authoritarian coaching techniques were adopted and persisted for so long because they are effective at producing effective military units, winning teams and top performers. And beautiful ballet. Or effective sales teams. Or obedient families. Or they used to be.
One example of common authoritarian techniques that McKeever is accused of is picking one swimmer each year as the target for extreme criticism and bullying. Never her best swimmer. The example keeps everyone else in line. No one wants to be in that position. Yes, that swimmer may become suicidal but the point is getting increased compliance and performance from the other, top swimmers. Many of whom may have a "great" relationship with the coach (might even be shown favoritism). Depending on their own level of narcissism, lack of empathy or family of origin they might not even see anything being "wrong."
There have always been other, positive, ways to motivate, train and inspire top performance. And about 40 years ago you saw that change begin. Abusive coaches, even Hall of Fame coaches, were fired. In professional sports, free agency meant that positive motivating coaches were the ones who could attract the best athletes. And succeed.
In college, coaches could be charming while recruiting without student athletes finding out about their true nature until they were committed, with transfers penalized. That has changed. The Internet and social media gets information out there to high school recruits. The Transfer Portal allows athletes to leave bad situations. But the biggest change is that today's young people will generally not put up with abuse, even "minor" abuse, and will call it out when they see it.
All this to say that authoritarian coaches are a really bad fit for college, but especially for a place like Cal in 2022. And Knowlton, with his background in the military and military academies does not understand that and that makes him a particularly bad fit for Cal especially at this pivotal time in the history of college sports. (His hiring of Mark Fox, a notorious "tough coach," with predictable results, shows that).
A competent AD would have addressed this before it got to this point. Cal could have addressed the issues or moved on with McKeever having some dignity and honor her accomplishments would normally warrant.
