The Olympic dreams of American surfers are on the line right now—could bureaucratic delays crush their chances at LA 2028?
Picture this: Just days after the U.S. Ski and Snowboard Association pulled out of the race to control the Olympic surf team, USA Surfing stepped up at a crucial public hearing on November 18 to plead its case before the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC). This governing body oversees sports federations in the U.S., ensuring they meet standards for inclusion in the Olympic Games. The ski group, led by former World Surf League (WSL) CEO Sophie Goldschmidt, had cited a lack of cooperation from USA Surfing and their own focus on the Winter Olympics as reasons for withdrawing their bid. And this is the part most people miss—it wasn't just a simple exit; it highlighted growing tensions in how different winter and summer sports organizations interact behind the scenes.
The certification saga has dragged on for much of 2025, starting when the ski federation jumped into the fray. With no firm deadline from the USOPC for a decision, USA Surfing is worried that the prolonged wait is narrowing their opportunity to lock in sponsorships for the 2028 Los Angeles Games. Kip Sheppard, the head of USA Surfing’s investor alliance, pointed out that this uncertainty 'causes investors to delay decisions.' President Becky Fleischauer added that the drawn-out process could make it tougher to forge essential sponsor partnerships, which are vital for funding athletes and events.
Now, USA Surfing stands as the sole applicant, but it's important to note that the USOPC isn't required to approve them. This situation echoes what happened in 2021 when USA Surfing chose to voluntarily give up its certification after investigations uncovered problems with governance and finances. For the Paris 2024 Olympics, the USOPC took direct control of the surf team themselves, managing everything from selection to preparation. Theoretically, they could do the same for LA 2028, bypassing USA Surfing altogether.
But here's where it gets controversial—does handing over surfing to a committee with no deep roots in the sport make sense, or is it a recipe for disaster?
Olympic coach and ex-WSL Championship Tour surfer Brett Simpson took the floor during the hearing to stress USA Surfing’s deep history in nurturing talent. 'Every medal U.S. surfers have earned in the Olympics so far traces back to USA Surfing’s development programs and our coaching approach,' he explained. With fresh funding on the horizon, he argued, 'We’re not rebuilding from nothing—we’re enhancing a trusted system that surfers already rely on.'
He went on to say that this trust builds over countless hours in the ocean and on the beach, not just during Olympic cycles. 'Overlooking that or giving surfing to an unrelated entity would erode that trust—and once it's gone, it might be impossible to rebuild.' For beginners wondering about the stakes, think of it like this: Olympic surfing isn't just about wave-riding; it's about a community built on expertise, where coaches and athletes develop lifelong skills, much like how a soccer academy grooms players for international play.
While USA Surfing might not boast the $61.7 million annual revenue that the ski federation's now-abandoned proposal promised, the group unveiled plans for a threefold boost in high-performance funding up to LA 2028. Their $4.1 million initiative covers 64 athletes across six surf disciplines, including a nine-event qualifying series, training retreats, advanced AI video breakdowns, sports science support, and bonuses for medal performances at International Surfing Association (ISA) competitions. This structure aims to create a more robust pathway for success, ensuring athletes have the tools to compete at the highest levels.
What do you think—should the USOPC stick with USA Surfing to honor its legacy, or is it time for a fresh approach that could bring in more resources? Is the potential for USOPC to manage surfing again a fair counterpoint, or does it undermine the sport's identity? Share your opinions in the comments below; let's discuss!
