Category: D. INTERNATIONALS

“NON PARTISAN “

On By ethomasparhamIn C. COLLEGE TENNIS and INSTRUCTION, D. INTERNATIONALS, E. SPORTS COMMENTARYLeave a comment

There have been a lot of political promises lately. Many citing American citizenry.

HR 10351 is before Congress ( Key purpose below )

1. 20% Roster Cap:

Limits international student-athletes to a maximum of 20% of the total official roster for any individual varsity sport at higher education institutions.

Should this become law it will insure many, many opportunities and financial benefits to American students and families from all walks of life. Any student/athlete in any global sport will have a decidedly better chance at

scholarships, NIL monies–not mentioning the life lessons of sports particpation.

While my guess is Men’s Basketball is the sport that has highlighed this issue, College Tennis is the most affected. Men and Women. American women would have 8 to 10 roster spots and 8 to 10 scholarships. There are many teams now, women and men, whose rosters are all international and who, in turn, receive all the grants.

This may seem a minor issue but it is one way to help American Families and fulfill a lot of promises.

Duh?

On By ethomasparhamIn D. INTERNATIONALS, E. SPORTS COMMENTARYLeave a comment

H.R. 10351 – THE TEAM USA ACT

I asked Chat about International athletes in American Colleges and Universities:

  • Top-level starters: Your preliminary examination of selected teams and divisions suggested that international players could account for around 90% of starters in some groups. That remains a preliminary sample estimate, not a verified national figure.
  • Scholarship distribution: You raised the question of whether international recruits receive a disproportionate share of tennis scholarship aid. Roster counts alone cannot answer it; we need actual scholarship-dollar or financial-aid data.

*******

August 5th, 1999 From TENNIS WORLD by Beth German:

“The NCAA is also to be blamed for not keeping tennis specific numbers. It is impossible to find out how many international players take roster spots, scholarships or Graduate from college.”

********

Soccer?

More and more, it is leading to a dead end for U.S.-born athletes. In increasing numbers, they are being squeezed out of collegiate competitive sports by a combination of rising international student-athlete participation rates and shrinking roster numbers ushered in as part of last year’s settlement of a class-action lawsuit, House v. NCAA

The son’s odds of making a Division I roster have plunged since his father’s days. His plight comes into sharp focus when you look at 17th-ranked Missouri State, where the 27-man roster includes 26 international student-athletes spanning the globe from Canada, Colombia, England, Hungary and Ireland to Italy, Japan, Portugal, Scotland and Spain.

Among the country’s best programs, it’s more of the same. The top-25 teams in the NCAA rankings feature 265 international student-athletes, which represent 36.9 percent of the available roster spots. Overall, foreign-born student-athletes make up 34 percent of all Division I men’s soccer participants.

The round of 16 in Men’s NCAA Division I tennis, play today. A quick survey of the team’s starting lineups, excepting Ohio State, feature about 90% international players. Assuming the ones who are starters get the scholarsips, they also get 90% of the grants. And NIL/Portal cash.

********

“I wonder how many Athletic Directors silently came to a conclusion similar to this? 1. All sports are counted in the standings for our ‘Conference Cup’? 2. We are in a conference with mostly good tennis teams with all foreign  players.  And we give the 8 girls and 4 and 1/2 boys grants to internationals. 3. I can find a better place for that size of budget.

********

  • They mentioned that NIL opportunities have changed the equation for top American juniors. Players can now earn meaningful income while competing in college, making it less financially urgent to leave school immediately for the lower levels of professional tennis.
  • The discussion also touched on how college players now receive:
    • world-class coaching,
    • strength and conditioning,
    • sports science,
    • and frequent competition against future professionals,
      making college a stronger developmental pathway than it was a decade ago.
  • They contrasted today’s environment with previous generations, when the expectation for top juniors was often to turn professional immediately if they had the opportunity.
  • ************

THERE ARE ONLY TWO MAJOR WAYS TO RECOUP PARENTAL/FAMILY INVESTMENT: 1. PRO TENNIS (IN NC ONLY ISNER, WILKISON, AND SADRI MADE ANY LIFETIME $) AND 2. COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS. THE RISING COST OF HIGHER EDUCATION MAKES SCHOLARSHIPS MORE VALUABLE AND MORE APT TO AFFECT THE CHOICE OF SCHOOL AND SPORT TO PURSUE.

************

!!!!! This has not been properly emphasized–What matters is scholarships.  The starters get the money and they are 90% international.

**********************

Some personal comments from an old tennis coach/”sports fan”

  • College tennis players are better because the money has made college tennis a better option than the tradtional Challenger route.
  • College tennis has become the “minor leagues” of Pro Tennis.
  • 1970-NAIA tennis rosters changed to almost all foreign, almost overnight.
  • Now all divisions of college tennis rosters, save D111, are the same .
  • Scholarships are the only source of aid for American families.
  • Fear of lawsuits has been a major concern.
  • The age of Tennis and Basketball players is a major factor.

Cruel ? Our children ?

Recruiting gossip is no longer about “blue chip” or ” 5 Star “, 17/18 year American high schoolers. Recruiters have a bag of money to offer to “portals”. They are often 23 years old. Some have transferred 3-4 times. We are letting graduate students play. Some are “eligible” six or seven years after admission.

American Tennis families have suffered from this for years. Poor to rich.

Basketball has been a bedrock for mostly poor kids. Will international older players, often with backgrounds of professional play, join tennis in taking away our children’s opportunites ?

This has to be dealt with soon. And it affects many other sports than tennis and basketball.

*****************

Isn’t it about time some of our organizations screw up their courage and use their time, money and efforts to make these facts available to American parents and players.

ANOTHER IMPORTANT VOTE

On By ethomasparhamIn D. INTERNATIONALS, E. SPORTS COMMENTARYLeave a comment

LEGISLATION OVERVIEW: H.R. 10351 – THE TEAM USA ACT

Hopefully this current bill will be approved before Congress adjurns.

Why it matters

?

Why? Because for every international that recieves the scholarship, or money, or education,etc., that bumps an American. While this affects all global sports, basketball hopefuls should be most concerning. Poor kids, black ones predominately, have used basketball as a major and rare opportunity to lift themselves. No pun intended.

For every opportunity offered abroad, we often deny one of our most needy.

While this is a “sticky wicket”, the issue should be “on the agenda” in the making

of reasonable changes demanded ( NIL/PORTAL controls ).

Here are some related personal blogs :

LEGISLATION OVERVIEW: H.R. 10351 – THE TEAM USA ACT

LEGISLATION OVERVIEW: H.R. 10351 – THE TEAM USA ACT

On By ethomasparhamIn C. COLLEGE TENNIS and INSTRUCTION, D. INTERNATIONALS, E. SPORTS COMMENTARYLeave a comment

Here is a clean, plain-text version formatted for easy copying and pasting:

LEGISLATION OVERVIEW: H.R. 10351 – THE TEAM USA ACT

Bill Title: Training and Education for American Members in University Sports and Athletics Act (TEAM USA Act)

Bill Number: H.R. 10351

Introduced Date: September 2026

Key Sponsors: House Education Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Senator Jon Husted (R-OH)

SUMMARY OF KEY PROVISIONS:

1. 20% Roster Cap:

Limits international student-athletes to a maximum of 20% of the total official roster for any individual varsity sport at higher education institutions.

2. Title IV Funding Enforcement:

Ties compliance directly to federal student aid eligibility under Title IV of the Higher Education Act. Colleges or universities that violate the 20% limit on any single varsity team risk losing access to federal student assistance, including Federal Pell Grants and federal student loans.

3. Definition of International Student-Athlete:

Applies to any athlete who:

– Is not a U.S. citizen, national, or lawful permanent resident (green card holder), OR

– Receives or has ever received salary, scholarship, or financial assistance from a foreign Olympic or Paralympic committee.

4. Timeline & Implementation:

– Proposed Effective Date: July 1, 2029 (beginning with the 2029–2030 academic year).

– Grandfathering: The current text includes no waiver, phase-in period, or exemption for athletes already enrolled when the law takes effect.

MOST AFFECTED SPORTS:

While international athletes comprise ~4% to 7% of overall NCAA DI athletes, the cap would heavily impact sports with high international representation, including:

– Tennis

– Swimming & Diving

– Golf

– Track & Field / Cross Country

– Soccer

– Rowing

COLLEGE TO PRO?

On By ethomasparhamIn C. COLLEGE TENNIS and INSTRUCTION, D. INTERNATIONALS, E. SPORTS COMMENTARYLeave a comment

As the world turns !

(From—ESPN Wimbledon broadcast of the Ben Shelton–Otto Virtanen first-round match yesterday, the commentators had a brief discussion about the changing path from college tennis to the ATP Tour.

The main points they made were:

  • College tennis is no longer viewed as a detour from professional tennis. The commentators noted that more elite players are spending one or more years in college before turning pro because the level of competition is so high.
  • Ben Shelton was used as the prime example. They pointed out that Shelton played at the University of Florida under his father, Bryan Shelton, won the NCAA singles championship, and then made an exceptionally rapid transition to the ATP Tour.
  • They mentioned that NIL opportunities have changed the equation for top American juniors. Players can now earn meaningful income while competing in college, making it less financially urgent to leave school immediately for the lower levels of professional tennis.
  • The discussion also touched on how college players now receive:
    • world-class coaching,
    • strength and conditioning,
    • sports science,
    • and frequent competition against future professionals,
      making college a stronger developmental pathway than it was a decade ago.
  • They contrasted today’s environment with previous generations, when the expectation for top juniors was often to turn professional immediately if they had the opportunity.

This wasn’t presented as a formal statistic but rather as commentary on how the landscape has changed, with Shelton serving as an example of a player who successfully used college tennis as a springboard to the top of the professional game.

GUEST COMMENT

On By ethomasparhamIn C. COLLEGE TENNIS and INSTRUCTION, D. INTERNATIONALSLeave a comment

This clipped from James Haslam

Is The Foreign Student College Tennis Debate Really About Player Development?

Players recruited from outside The US dominate D1 college tennis . This might mean that American tennis is doing something wrong in developing the best players … Or it might mean that in the US, fewer families choose to see the pro tour as the ultimate goal of playing tennis to achieve a better life for their children. Instead they prioritize tennis participation as a pathway to greater health, wellness and career success. In the latter case , it might be concluded that they are doing many things right. No matter what the outlook is , the economic realities of this issue are significant. For those not convinced that the foreign student college tennis issue is primarily about who should be given the opportunity to be a “student” driven by economic allocation , here are some numbers that frame this issue :

There are about 2500 D1 Tennis student athletes in the US with about 2/3 of these athletes or 1675 being foreign students on F-1 or M-1 visas.

When the cost of conducting the program , tuition, books, housing, fees , travel , medical care are broken down and calculated, a conservative estimate is that each student each year receives about $200,000 in value, before NIL monies.

So the cost to the college system yearly we can estimate to be about $335 million dollars before NIL. This means that in aggregate , in D1 tennis alone , four year scholarships cost the system well over one billion dollars. We can further extrapolate by understanding that the median lifetime earnings of a college graduate over just a High School degree is 1.2 million dollars. So each year an astonishing future earnings of over 1 billion dollars are facilitated by the opportunities given to foreign D1 tennis players who graduate each year. Even if we see more conservative numbers we can’t escape that an enormous amount of money is being used to further the educational opportunities of foreign nationals . With team roster’s limited to 10 spots , it’s a zero sum game in which the opportunity for a player outside the US is one less opportunity for a player in the US. As a precedent , enrollment in high school is not guaranteed to non district residents. It is usually evaluated on a case by case basis and the issue is not “fairness” ,”protectionism ” ” player development ” or ” rigorous competition”. It’s the question of how to allocate finite educational resources.

T. Parham: This seems more pertinent than the suggestion that this dilemma can be cured by American teaching pros and coaches.

Statement from the Intercollegiate Tennis Association (ITA) Regarding the State of College Athletics, Recent Program Eliminations, & International Student-Athletes

On By ethomasparhamIn C. COLLEGE TENNIS and INSTRUCTION, D. INTERNATIONALS, E. SPORTS COMMENTARYLeave a comment


This is the link to the ITA  Statement

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1MWiaejUXfubelwdH2JQD4bzwSrVJ3_MxWhQq8Qa-OWM/edit?tab=t.0

Author’s comments on specific points are in RED

One topic that has received increased attention is the role of international student-athletes in college tennis. This is a complex matter and requires more nuanced public discourse.

This is not a new problem, nor is it limited to tennis.

*****************

There are presently approximately 20,000 college tennis student-athletes. It should be noted that without international student-athletes, many programs would struggle to field full rosters. Efforts to limit their participation risk undermining competitiveness, reducing institutional revenue, and ultimately threatening the viability of programs themselves. This is not a hypothetical concern; this is playing out in real time. Recent developments in Idaho, for example, underscore these broader concerns. Athletic directors and coaches across the state strongly opposed proposed legislation (ID S1357) that would have capped international student-athlete scholarships at 10%. Ultimately, the legislation did not pass, but it highlighted how policy decisions can directly threaten the viability of college tennis programs. Efforts to cap international student athlete participation in any U.S. college sport may also run afoul of existing federal and state laws and regulations, risking increased litigation and costs. 

********************

THE HEART OF THE MATTER: SCHOLARSHIPS  FOR AMERICANS

Is it illegal or unreasonable to award a percentage of scholarships to our youngsters first?

The issue has never been litigated: (  “…may run afoul” and “…risking litigation” ) 

For 50 plus years any allotment or quota that saved scholarships was dismissed by a lawsuit feared;  a threat based on “ discrimination based on national origin. “ 

*************************

Age disparities, particularly cases involving significantly older incoming international student-athletes, have drawn understandable review. The NCAA is expected to address eligibility rules in the near future, and moving forward, there must be a fair and consistent framework in which all student-athletes, both domestic and international, compete on equal footing.

The age issue is another variable that hampers our kids in no small way.  It will soon dawn on other global sports, most significantly Basketball, they are also in the crosshairs.  

******************** 

For those who care about the future of college tennis, there is also a role to play. Supporting local programs through attendance, advocacy, and financial contributions helps ensure these opportunities remain available for future generations. Sustained visibility and investment are critical to the long-term health of our sport.

These variables are directly related to American children., parents and taxpayers–the very people excluded.  

Isn’t it about time some of our organizations screw up their courage and use their time, money and efforts to make these facts available to American 

parents and players.  CHANGE THE TERMS AND RE-TRY THE ISSUE!

***************************

Mr. Rudy Washington, Editor-in-Chief The BCA Journal (BLACK COACHES ASSOCIATION)
P. O. Box 4040
Culver City, CA 90231-4040
Dear M.r Washington:
I’ve coached college tennis for 30-plus years and I have been dismayed by the preponderance of international players who have usurped many tennis scholarships from American youngsters.
There seems to be a trend toward this in basketball. Has the BCA addressed the danger to American student athletes this poses, in particular college basketball. Should there be a limit to this?
If your Journal has addressed this issue, please let me know. It seems basketball is a game that this should concern.
ETP:1h
Sincerely,
Tom Parham
Men’s Tennis Coach
March 9, 1998