The Cost of Inertia in Canadian Sport

This may ruffle feathers, but the truth often does.

Close to $267 million is spent annually on administrative costs for our largest participation sport. This figure comes from a detailed breakdown of expenditures across local, provincial and? national levels, factoring in everything from AGMs to financial audits. And that’s before we even account for private academies, which would push the number significantly higher. This is not speculation. It is the result of diligent research, corroborated by multiple stakeholders within the sport.

For those who insist that “Canadian sport is not a business” or that “there’s no money in Canadian sport,” we respectfully disagree.

Like many institutions, sport governance in Canada has remained largely unchanged for decades. Meanwhile, the private sector continues to roll up and consolidate, driving efficiencies and delivering value. Sport, on the other hand, has done the opposite—doubling down on inefficiencies while relying on government funding and charitable support to sustain outdated models.

A quick analysis suggests that at least $47M of that $267M per year could be reinvested in/on the game by reducing redundancies and treating sport with the operational discipline it deserves. *Yes, jurisdictional variations and policies must be addressed, but the inefficiencies are real—and so are the opportunities. One sport leader is not sitting idly by and is challenging the status quo.?There’s much work to do but he is working with select individuals to put together a plan for the future of his sport in this country.

This past Saturday, we had the opportunity to share insights with the Future of Sport in Canada Commission. Rather than simply criticizing (which I have a tendency to do), we aimed to inspire. Our six key messages were:

1. Re-establish the Pipeline: Schools represent our greatest opportunity to develop physically literate populations—some will follow elite pathways, but most will simply benefit from a lifelong love of movement and well-being.
2. Democratize Coach Development: Learning should be decentralized, democratized and? elevated—especially at the grassroots level—so that coaching is seen as a noble and accessible pursuit rather than a bureaucratic hurdle.
3. Source New Leadership: True leadership means putting the needs of the consumer above self-interest, just as we expect from the athletes we coach. It also requires the emotional intelligence to know when to step aside.
4. Reform the Governance Model: A modernized structure that prioritizes efficiency and delivers real value to players, parents, coaches, officials, administrators and? volunteers is not just necessary—it’s long overdue.
5. Embrace Change: Change happens when we combine accountable, high-caliber leadership with proven science and evidence-based decision-making. It’s not about rhetoric; it’s about measurable progress.
6. Implement Transparency & Accountability: People do what is inspected, not simply what is expected. A system built on trust must also be built on clear oversight, measurable standards and a culture that values follow-through. Without true accountability, sport will remain stuck in cycles of inefficiency and inaction.

Moving from Talk to Action: Of course, change looks great on paper. But getting the turkeys to vote for Thanksgiving (a figure of speech, not an indictment) is where things get difficult. That’s why we focused on starting small, establishing the proof of concept, telling the right stories and scaling.

Because whether we rip the band-aid off today or continue rehashing the same conversations for another decade, we will ultimately arrive at the same point: Healing.

And until we choose to master these (and more) foundational recommendations, challenges like DEI, bullying and? Safe Sport will continue to struggle for meaningful traction. These issues are not standalone—they are symptoms of a system in obvious need of structural change.

A fragmented, inefficient and? self-preserving model will never create the environment needed for real progress in these critical areas. The only question is how much longer we’re willing to wait.