Inside The Laylines: Reclaiming the Future of U.S. Olympic Sailing
A three-part series examining the current state of U.S. Olympic and high-performance sailing
Reclaiming the Future of U.S. Olympic Sailing
The U.S. Olympic Sailing Program stands at a true inflection point — a moment where the future of elite sailing in America hangs in the balance. At the center of the struggle is a growing power dynamic between US Sailing, the sport’s official National Governing Body, and a coalition of private interests led by the America One Foundation. What should be a unified national effort to build toward Los Angeles 2028 has instead become a fragmented landscape of competing visions, parallel structures, and dueling athlete agreements. As the saying goes, “When Rome burns, it’s not the fire that does the most damage — it’s the confusion over who’s holding the hose.”
This is the first article in a three-part series examining the current state of U.S. Olympic and high-performance sailing — a space increasingly challenged by conflicting agendas, legacy politics, and power struggles that too often leave the athletes caught in the middle.
In this opening piece, we offer a direct rebuttal to Mr. Dean Brenner — the former Olympic program chair who oversaw the worst American sailing performance in over 60 years, yet continues to claim he holds the solution to rebuilding the program he once led into decline.
The second article will take a closer look at America One: Are they the answer to restoring U.S. prominence on the Olympic stage, as we saw in the 1980s and 1990s? Or are they a self-interested force undermining US Sailing’s ability to build a sustainable, legacy-driven system? Are egos taking precedence over athletes?
The third and final article will assess the current trajectory of the U.S. Sailing Team itself: Are the right changes being made — or are the ghosts of old habits still steering the ship?
Opinion: Dean Brenner’s Revisionist History Won’t Fix U.S. Olympic Sailing
In Dean Brenner’s recent Scuttlebutt opinion piece “Filling the Void Left by US Sailing,” Mr. Brenner, who oversaw the worst U.S. Olympic sailing performance in over 60 years, attempts to rewrite history. His article also tries to establish America One Racing’s "Project Podium" as the remedy to the United States deficits in development, maintenance, and promotion of American Olympic sailors. Mr. Brenner’s argument is built on a foundation of half-truths, misleading claims, and a fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to build a modern, well-funded, athlete-centered Olympic program.
The problem with the U.S. Sailing Team has not been a lack of talent. The problem with the U.S. Sailing Team has been a failure of leadership. Mr. Brenner, who chaired the program during the lead-up to the 2012 London Olympics, a campaign that ultimately yielded no medals, must acknowledge his role in that poor outcome. While Olympic sailing is inherently challenging, accountability matters. It’s important to set the record straight.
Project Podium is Not a National Solution
Yes, Project Podium funds nine athletes, which is meaningful support for those individuals but that’s not a national strategy. It’s a boutique effort with no responsibility to the broader athlete pipeline, no coach development plan, and no obligation to equity or transparency.
Mr. Brenner writes: “Without this level of support, the 18–24-year-old athletes – who tend to make up our program – have a massive uphill battle, unless of course they come from significant wealth and can afford to fund a program themselves. Project Podium levels that part of the playing field.”
This framing implies that funding alone guarantees Olympic success which is a dangerous and persistent misnomer. Money matters, but it’s not enough. What matters is how money is used: to build coaching pipelines, create smart competition schedules, fund training infrastructure, and support long-term development.
Let’s be clear - Project Podium is not new. Despite Mr. Brenner’s claim that “the world of Olympic Sailing has continued to change dramatically,” the structure and strategy behind Project Podium is nearly identical to the approaches of the past 20 years. This isn’t a revolutionary pivot this is a reboot of a model that has already proven to be insufficient and ineffective. America One Racing is simply following the same outdated playbook, without addressing the deeper structural gaps that have held the United States back.
It’s worth remembering that some of the same individuals now involved with America One Racing were also championing Project Pinnacle — a prior effort developed with McKinsey Consulting to elevate U.S. Olympic sailing. Project Pinnacle was designed around seven strategic pillars, but in the end, only one — funding — was meaningfully achieved. The rest of the plan, which emphasized athlete development, coaching, culture, and performance systems, was never implemented. Rebranding the same playbook without learning from past failures isn’t innovation — it’s repetition.
Without a coordinated system of athletic development, even fully funded athletes can underperform. Project Podium may help those nine sailors, but it does not build a national team, nor does it fix or establish a pipeline of future competitors. Olympic success isn’t just about removing barriers it’s about building a complete system. Project Podium is not that system.
True Olympic success demands an ecosystem from youth sailing to Olympic Development to elite performance. You can’t skip the base of the pyramid and expect the top to thrive. Project Podium may help, but it’s not the model. It’s a supplement.
Project Podium Fragmentation
Unlike other national federations or elite training programs that work in alignment with their governing bodies, America One Racing is actively working against the development of a unified national program. Rather than contributing to a cohesive system, they are fragmenting the landscape — creating confusion within the sailing community, limiting access to the Olympic pipeline, and fostering an elitist, exclusive culture. This not only deters emerging talent, but also erodes the broader capacity-building needed to sustain long-term success in U.S. sailing.
A key example of this fragmentation is the requirement that America One’s nine funded athletes sign a separate athlete agreement — one that exists in parallel, and in some cases in conflict, with the standard US Sailing Athlete Agreement. This puts athletes in a difficult position, caught between two organizations with differing terms, priorities, and governance structures.
In the broader context of U.S. Olympic sport, this kind of dual-agreement setup is highly unusual. Typically, National Governing Bodies (NGBs) utilize standardized athlete agreements that clearly define rights, responsibilities, protections, and obligations. While it’s true that athletes sometimes enter additional agreements — for example, around sponsorship or marketing — those arrangements are generally complementary to the NGB’s core agreement, not contradictory.
What’s unfolding with America One is something else entirely. Requiring athletes to navigate conflicting agreements — each with its own conditions and restrictions — is not just administratively burdensome. It risks limiting their ability to participate fully in national team programs and undermines trust in the overall system. At a time when collaboration and alignment are desperately needed, this creates unnecessary tension and forces athletes to choose sides.
This situation underscores a larger point: our athletes deserve clarity, not conflict. And our Olympic sailing program deserves unity, not division. The future of U.S. sailing must be built on cooperation, professionalism, and systems that serve all athletes — not just a privileged few.
US Sailing is Rebuilding the Right Way
It’s been a long and bumpy road for US Sailing since the disappointing results of the 2012 Olympic program — a program led by Mr. Brenner. The toxic culture and management style that defined that era continued to linger through the 2024 cycle and was reflected in the USOPC report titled - USOPC Review and Assessment of USSA
But since 2023, US Sailing has been making quiet but significant progress. They’ve hired Olympic-experienced staff, rebuilt the Olympic Development Program (ODP), strengthened coaching infrastructure, and expanded athlete support services. This isn’t a return to the past — it’s a modern, data-informed approach to performance management.
Today’s leadership understands that lasting results come from more than funding alone. They require time, culture change, and strategic consistency. The 2024 Olympics showed meaningful signs of forward momentum. And with the 2028 Games in Los Angeles on the horizon, we have a chance — not to revisit failed models, but to fully realize a new and sustainable path for American Olympic sailing.
Let’s Talk About Results
Mr. Brenner cites fundraising and sponsor engagement from his tenure, but the Olympic Games are the scoreboard. In 2012, the U.S. won zero medals. That’s the result. That’s the legacy. No amount of spin can change that.
A healthy program isn’t measured in press releases or donor dinners. It’s measured on the water.
No, Other NGBs Don’t "Partition Off" Their Olympic Efforts
USA Swimming. USA Cycling. USA Track & Field. USA Ski & Snowboard. None of them have fully separated Olympic programs. They operate with internal high-performance divisions under professional oversight, inside their national governing bodies. That’s how it works. That’s how it should work.
What Mr. Brenner is proposing sounds more like privatization, a model with no public oversight, no national coordination, and no path forward for anyone outside the inner circle. That’s not how modern Olympic systems function.
The Real Reason Partners Left
Mr. Brenner suggests that organizations like America One and Oakcliff stopped supporting US Sailing because of mistrust. In reality, their departure was about control. These groups wanted authority over the Olympic program that a national governing body — accountable to athletes, the USOPC, and the broader sailing community — could not rightly cede.
Paul Cayard, America One principal, made that clear in a phone call just months before stepping down as the CEO of the US Sailing Olympic program: “It’s really hard [managing the Olympic program], and it would be just easier to give the sailors the money.” That wasn’t a statement of strategic vision — it was an admission of how difficult it is to build a real system that supports all athletes, complies with Olympic standards, and operates transparently. When faced with those responsibilities, they walked away — not because of “mistrust,” but because they didn’t want the constraints that come with doing the job right.
Nor were America One or other foundations equipped to provide it. These are shell organizations that pale in comparison to a true National Governing Body. They lack the infrastructure, governance, safeguards, and accountability required to oversee a fair and inclusive Olympic program.
US Sailing has an obligation to fairness, process, and all athletes — not just those with connections or personal backing.
What 2028 Requires
The Los Angeles Olympics are a chance to define the next generation of American sailing. We can build a high-performance culture that is inclusive, accountable, and results-driven — one that balances private support with national integrity.
We don’t need a return to the failures of 2012. We need a modern system. Project Podium can be part of that future. But it is not the future on its own.
Conclusion
If U.S. Olympic sailing is going to move forward, major donors must look inward — specifically at the America One Foundation — and ask whether the people clinging to outdated, toxic leadership models are truly serving the athletes’ best interests. It’s time to set egos aside and come to the table with a shared commitment to building a lasting legacy and a successful, sustainable program.
We were on the right path with the promise of Project Pinnacle — a well-conceived, professionally designed roadmap for development and high performance. Had Paul Cayard stepped aside from the CEO role and focused his considerable talents on fundraising, it’s very possible the U.S. Sailing Team would have returned from Paris 2024 with a second medal and continued momentum. Instead, his departure from US Sailing appeared less about mission and more about creating a landing zone for America One — positioning it as the beneficiary of his contentious exit.
Upcoming in the second installment: America One: Power, Control, and the Question of Legacy
The U.S. Olympic Sailing landscape has shifted dramatically in recent years, and at the heart of that change is the America One Foundation, an organization once dormant, now revived and rebranded as a private powerhouse operating parallel to the national team. But is this resurgence truly about athlete development and Olympic excellence — or is it a calculated move to consolidate control, reframe the narrative, and create a fundraising vehicle for a select few?
About the author: John Bertrand is a lifelong sailor, an expert in high performance programing, and publishes the newsletter "Inside The Laylines." Opinions expressed are their own.
Thoughtful and well written, John. I hope someone is paying attention.
Peter
Deleted.