For the past year, there has been a major public debate over Title IX and college athletics. Title IX supporters have extolled its virtues and passionately lobbied for Title IX to remain untouched. Others have talked with equal passion about the unintended consequences of the law, and while acknowledging the significance to women's sports, they have voiced concerns about the decline of several men's sports at the college level, notably gymnastics, swimming, track and wrestling.

A commission appointed by the Department of Education carefully studied the issue, giving both sides plenty of opportunity to identify concerns and offer solutions. As often happens with emotionally charged issues, there was much public posturing and active political lobbying brought into the mix. Though some changes were recommended, there is little doubt that Title IX is going to remain essentially intact and that it will continue to play an important role in decisions relating to the future of college athletics. The review was fair and well-run, and we should accept the decision and move on.

For some, of course, the debate and the political lobbying will continue. Despite the recent dismissal of a lawsuit filed by the College Wrestling Coaches Association, which was joined by several other groups, there are those who seem intent on continuing the fight. Meanwhile, we continue to see Olympic sports programs being dropped. St. John's University (New York) has dropped programs, and California State University, Fresno, and Ball State University are considering doing likewise. No doubt there are other programs at other schools being considered for elimination.

Those of us who work to support Olympic sports have many reasons to remain concerned. The continued loss of collegiate gymnastics, swimming, track and wrestling programs is going to negatively affect the future performance of the U.S. Olympic Team, especially our men. Those four sports may be considered minor, nonrevenue sports at the collegiate level, but in the Olympic world these are marquis sports. When talking to potential sponsors for swimming, we have at times used the analogy that what Duke basketball is to college basketball, USA Swimming is to the Olympics.

We can make all the arguments we want about what good students most swimmers are and about how these are just the kind of student-athletes that colleges and universities should be looking to support. The fact remains, however, that these arguments, while laudable, usually fall on deaf ears. We need look no further

than to recent conference realignment efforts to realize that at the NCAA Division I level, the motivation of schools and their athletics departments is most often driven by money, market share and revenue opportunities.

It is easy to complain about the current state of college athletics, but nothing is going to change until we successfully shift the debate away from Title IX and onto what should be the real role and purpose of college sports. We must engage college presidents and athletics directors, as well as trustees, elected officials and the general public in a serious discussion about what college athletics should be. NCAA President Myles Brand and college presidents seem to be stepping up their involvement, and this may be an opportune time for the USOC to establish itself as an effective influencer and to redefine its own role with college athletics.

The USOC must first acknowledge that for several of its most high-profile, medal-winning sports, college athletics plays a critical role in the athlete development pipeline. In fact, the existence of Olympic sports programs at the college level is what separates the U.S. Olympic Team from every other Olympic team in the world. The opportunity to participate in college athletics is a real motivating force for many high-school athletes. Keeping talented athletes involved between the ages of 18 and 22 is critically important because so many athletes are maturing both physically and mentally during this period of their lives. It is especially noteworthy that colleges and universities employ many of our finest coaches, and this benefits the development of our Olympic sports in unquestionable ways. The simple fact is that those schools that employ professional coaches and offer varsity competition for Olympic sports are playing a vital role in the development of Olympians.

The USOC always has acknowledged the importance of NCAA sports, and there have been some efforts to enhance the relationship. Liaison committees exist to discuss and explore issues, many NGBs have NCAA representation on their boards, and there have been grant programs to NCAA conferences and schools for the purpose of supporting Olympic sports programs. While worthwhile, these efforts are insufficient. The USOC needs to embrace a greater commitment and adopt a long-term strategy that seeks to promote the importance of supporting and expanding the existence of quality Olympic sports programs at NCAA institutions. As a starting point, the USOC could:

Designate a senior staff member who possesses the background and credibility to effectively communicate with college presidents, athletics directors and trustees. The thrust of this initiative should be to open and maintain effective lines of communication for the purpose of advancing support for Olympic sport programs, and ensuring that athletes have the broadest possible opportunities to participate and to excel.

Activate a program that assesses the standing of collegiate Olympic sports programs and identifies programs that might be endangered, or better, where opportunities exist to establish new programs.

Use the U.S. Olympian alumni group as a volunteer work force to mobilize athletics alumni groups and boosters in order to generate increased support for Olympic sports programs at individual schools.

Create and aggressively promote an awards program that recognizes the role of NCAA schools in the development of Olympic athletes.

Developing and implementing strategies around these concepts would bring real substance to the USOC role in relation to the NCAA and intercollegiate athletics. This is an opportunity to shift the USOC away from what has been a passive approach, and actively move the organization forward. This is the kind of positioning and leadership effort needed to foster important long-term support to some of America's most successful Olympic sports programs. For the "new" USOC to emerge as a purposeful organization, this is but one way to consider a new relevancy.

Chuck Wielgus is the executive director of USA Swimming.