Author’s note: This blog is the fourth & final in a series discussing how USA Curling qualifies athletes for major events and suggesting changes for the qualification processes to increase participation and heighten the level of competitiveness of U.S. curlers.
In case you’ve been living under a rock and haven’t heard yet, Team Shuster won the gold medal in men’s curling at the 2018 Winter Olympics. A HUGE congratulations to them! I admit that I doubted they would make it to the playoffs when they were hanging out at 2-4 in the round robin, but the run they had was absolutely incredible and a testament to their talent, heart, and work ethic.
Given that Team Shuster is a part of the USA Curling High
Performance Program (HPP) and they won Olympic gold, it would seem like that
medal is a huge victory for the program… but is it?
I would suggest that it is not. Further, I would suggest
that Team Shuster’s winning the gold only proves what I have been suggesting
over the last few blog posts – that the USA Curling system needs to change,
especially the HPP. Given my recent blogs about USA Curling's Championship
Qualification Process, it is clear that a new direction must be taken in order to preserve and
continue to grow the sport of curling in the United States of America.
Otherwise, there is a huge risk of losing all the new folks who Team Shuster
inspired to try curling as well as the curlers who have been around for awhile
and are fed up with the status quo.
Presently the HPP program is set up wherein the USA Curling
HPP, led by its director, Derek Brown, picks athletes who will be a part of the
program. “USCA [United States Curling Association] has developed a High
Performance Program ('HPP') to support athletes who have demonstrated the
capability to be elite international athletes with potential to win medals in
international competition.” (2015-2016
USA Curling HPP Athlete Agreement). Part of the way the athletes are chosen
is through an athlete combine, where curlers essentially show up and put their
skills on display for the HPP staff. “The Athlete Combine is one of several key
components used in determining members for the High Performance Plan. Athletes
apply to be considered for the Combine and receive invites to attend.” (Athlete
Combine, USA Curling, n.d.). Curlers are “assessed and selected on an individual
basis by HPP coaches, who may also directly recruit athletes.” (“HighPerformance Plan proposal outlined”, USA Curling, 2014).
The HPP proposal, which was
designated for 2014 and beyond, mentions the following as it relates to
self-formed teams:
Men
and Women – self formed teams
·
Access to
funding may potentially be available through either winning Nationals or
placing top 6 at World Championships, depending upon program resources
available.
·
Access to
HPP knowledge and staff resources will be offered as practical to athletes not
in the HP Program.
(USA
Curling High Performance Program 2014-15 onwards AS PROPOSED, 2014, USA
Curling). I believe this is the wrong approach to use with self-formed teams. And
Team Shuster is the perfect example of why.
As Slate recently noted,
John
Shuster was already a three-time Olympian and the most successful American
curler in history when he applied for the U.S. high performance program after
the Sochi Games.
He
didn't make the cut.
So
Shuster approached a couple of the other spurned candidates about putting
together a foursome of their own.
"He
said, 'Hey, let's form our own Team of Rejects and see what we can do,'"
U.S. second Matt Hamilton said.
And
here is what they did: They won the U.S. championship, beating those selected
instead of them, to force their way into the program that directs funding to
teams with the best chance of success. They won a bronze medal at the worlds,
another national title and then finished first in the U.S. Olympic trials to
earn a spot at the Pyeongchang Games.
("Somebody
Needs to Make a Movie About John Shuster and His Ragtag Team of Curling Rejects," Slate, 2018).
And, the StarTribune, a Minnesota paper, described how
Four
years after the fact, John Shuster could still remember every detail. “They did
the first athlete combine right here,” he said, looking around a room at the
Four Seasons Curling Club in Blaine. “I’m 15 feet away from the spot where USA
Curling said, ‘You’re not good enough.’ ”
More
than anything, Shuster said, he recalled the exact wording of the 2014 news release
announcing the roster for USA Curling’s new high-performance program. Director
Derek Brown said he picked the 10 players who gave the U.S. the best chance of
international success looking forward. That did not include Shuster, the
Chisholm native and former Duluth resident who had skipped two Olympic teams
and won a bronze medal with Pete Fenson’s foursome in 2006.
“When
I saw that quote, that’s when I decided that was not the case,” Shuster said,
with a wry grin. “And I was going to make sure that was known. By winning.”
In
late December, Shuster sat in that same room, as the skip of the U.S. team for
the Pyeongchang Olympics. Just as he vowed, he proved USA Curling made a
mistake when it rejected him. Shuster rededicated himself to being the best male
skip in America, then assembled a team of equally driven athletes who have
rolled to top-five finishes at the past three world championships.
Since
he was left off that first high-performance roster, Shuster has shed 33 pounds,
vastly improved his fitness and strength and had a second son with his wife,
Sara. By beating Heath McCormick’s team at the Olympic trials in November,
Shuster became the first American man to make four Olympic curling teams.
His
foursome — which includes Tyler George and John Landsteiner of Duluth and Matt
Hamilton of McFarland, Wis. — quickly made good on its goal of showing USA
Curling that they could compete and win internationally. They captured the U.S.
championship less than a year after forming, defeating teams that were part of
the high-performance program that turned Shuster away.
They
now belong to the program themselves, on Shuster’s terms. When they were
invited in 2015, he insisted they would join as a unit, or not at all.
("John
Shuster, in fourth Olympics, still has plenty to prove," StarTribune, 2018),
The HPP staff has the ability to change team lineups, and
has previously
done
so on more than one occasion, and such changes obviously affect team
chemistry. One of the biggest take aways
As noted in previous blogs, there is a lack of depth in
American curling, especially on the women’s side. Aside from the suggestions
already given, I would also propose the following changes:
Split the budget for the HPP program to include
45% of assets to supporting teams that are willing to travel to the
international stage. These funds, which could be awarded as grants, would go
toward airfare and other monetary needs that individuals and teams may need in
order to get to an international competition. By doing this, any folks who may
be unable to afford such a trip (especially on a semi-regular basis), but are
great curlers, will have the opportunity to prove that they are great and will
be able to show USA Curling that they deserve to be a part of the HPP.
The HPP
proposal mentioned earlier states that “[a]ccess to funding may potentially be
available through either winning Nationals or placing top 6 at World
Championships, depending upon program resources available.” I say, let’s take
out those specific qualifiers and broaden the pool of potential elite curlers.
Obviously, there needs to be some
criteria; the HPP should not fund any random team that might embarrass
themselves on the national or international stage, but requiring a team to win Nationals, or have a top 6 finish at
World Championships is wildly limiting.
A team like, Team Birr, for example
(who came in second at the 2017 Men’s National Championships ) or Team Potter
(who was second at the end of round robin play but lost to Team Roth in the
semifinals at 2017 Women’s National Championships) who has shown they can
compete with the designated HPP teams would be deserving of such funds. These
are just two examples, but I am certain there are plenty more such teams out
there in the country; they are just being passed over and/or they are not
putting themselves out there because if you can win Nationals and not go to
World Championships, what’s the point? (And, yes, I am aware that the standards were
recently relaxed, but USA Curling has indicated “the intention that the
qualifying criteria will be tightened up once again as USA Curling looks ahead
to preparing teams for future world championships and the 2022 Olympic Games” (USA
Curling relaxes the World Team Qualification Process for 2018, USA
Curling, 2018).
The next 45% of the budget would be used to
support the HPP teams and individuals. This will be evaluated annually and will
provide support to the current HPP folks similar to how the HPP presently
works.
The final 10% of the budget would be used for administrative costs of the HPP.
- - -
Part 1 of this series, Changes to USA Curling World Team Qualification Process, a Step in the Right Direction, discussed the recent changes that USA Curling made to the World Team qualification process and the disconnect between what those who play the sport and those who are responsible for governing the sport see as being necessary to compete at a high level.
- - -
This article was prepared by the author in her personal capacity. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not reflect the views of any organizations that the author is affiliated with.
