Anyone pay more than $6000 per year for your teen to participate in an expensive sport?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

Don’t fall off your high horse there! It doesn’t have to be either/or.

With very limited resources it does have to be either/or. $2000 is a great deal of money to me even if it's not to you. $6000 impossible. Some of us are not as blessed as you must be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

Why do you think sports can't do that?

My DS was always live and let live. Not very motivated. But he loved playing guitar, and would spend hours on it. It taught him how to persevere through complications, set backs, and frustrations. He was able to apply that to things besides the guitar. Maybe we shouldn't have supported him in learning the guitar when he was barely making the grade in math, but our theory is that since we can afford to support our children in their interests, it makes sense to do so. It's possible he just needed maturity to start applying himself to his academics, but it's also possible that the guitar taught him in a way that meant something to him how well hard work can pay off, and so he's been able to apply that to other areas.

I have friends with children who had a similar experience, but with their sport. A friend's older son is looking at potentially getting into a very good school with the boost his athletics are giving him, but his coaches have also been very clear to the kids that their grades and their test scores have to be within the ball park as well. His motivation was to be able to play his sport at a high level, which has giving him the incentive he needed to put the effort into his academics. It's paying off very well for this young man. Who knows if he would have built his intellectual horsepower without the experience and motivation of his sport?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

Don’t fall off your high horse there! It doesn’t have to be either/or.

With very limited resources it does have to be either/or. $2000 is a great deal of money to me even if it's not to you. $6000 impossible. Some of us are not as blessed as you must be.

It really varies by family. We don't have an high HHI but we make $6K work between sports, camps and private lessons (may spend more but we don't count) as we live under our means in a small house, older cars and don't have a lot of fancy things. I know other who have nice cars, nice vacations and amazing houses where $6K would be impossible in less they were willing to change their lifestyle. If money is truly an issue, many places do have financial aide, so money cannot always be an excuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

And whenever we go to reunions, the admissions office rep says it too! It is super competitive now with international students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

No worries, today he'd still have the (((legacy))) credentials he had back then.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

No worries, today he'd still have the (((legacy))) credentials he had back then.

Of course he will and legacy admissions have held steady at 1 out of 3. Much easier than the less than 5% admitted from general admissions.

But you did not mention that he had legacy status in your original post where you implied being good in the sciences and being a middling athlete was enough to get into Harvard: Certainly a bit disingenuous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

He was off the charts smart but this may sound nuts but Harvard loved his essay which I never saw until they made note of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

Why can't it be both? Why does it have to be one or another? You sound like my parents and the real reason wasn't the money but it was they didn't want to make the sacrifices to drive us to activities daily and put in the effort. They bitterly criticize us for letting our child do it. No reason he couldn't have done tennis and science camps. My sister did no science camps or sports and is still a doctor and went to an ivy for undergrad and medical school.

Don't discount the sacrifices, because it's not a huge sacrifice to you. DH and I both work full time. While we could afford travel sports etc., It would mean we and the kids would have little to no free time. I wouldn't be a happy or good parent in that scenario. If I saw Olympic level talent in my child, maybe, but for just getting exercise and enjoying sports, it's not necessary. We do rec sports each season, musical instrument lessons, and various summer camps. Not that I begrudge or judge those who do spend that time. But you shouldn't judge those who aren't up for the time commitment.

You don't need to do travel sports. Yes, its a huge sacrifice, but that is the choice you make when you have kids. If you don't want to make the sacrifice, don't have kids. This is really about you and your happiness and free time, not the kids. Some kids enjoy being very busy, mine do. I do not but I do it for them. My parents were like you and I am very distant to them now as they are always about their needs and happiness and ironically complained how we had no interests when we did, it was just them not willing to sacrifice some of theirs to take the time to do it. When you have kids, you give up your time for them.

Wow - have you sought counseling? It might help with your anger toward your parents.

Haha, shouldn't have kids because we aren't up for the sacrifice of travel sports. LOLOL. I would probably be up for the time commitment if my child showed that level of interest and commitment, but I'm not leading that charge. You really should get counseling. For your anger at your parents, but also futurw anger at your kids who may not recognize your "sacrifice".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

No worries, today he'd still have the (((legacy))) credentials he had back then.

Of course he will and legacy admissions have held steady at 1 out of 3. Much easier than the less than 5% admitted from general admissions.

But you did not mention that he had legacy status in your original post where you implied being good in the sciences and being a middling athlete was enough to get into Harvard: Certainly a bit disingenuous.

He didn't have legacy status (I wish!) but he was and is really smart. It was his essay that made the difference which amazed us given he didn't share it with us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

No worries, today he'd still have the (((legacy))) credentials he had back then.

Of course he will and legacy admissions have held steady at 1 out of 3. Much easier than the less than 5% admitted from general admissions.

But you did not mention that he had legacy status in your original post where you implied being good in the sciences and being a middling athlete was enough to get into Harvard: Certainly a bit disingenuous.

He didn't have legacy status (I wish!) but he was and is really smart. It was his essay that made the difference which amazed us given he didn't share it with us.

Neither did I but that does not mean I’ll get in now... 20+ yrs ago, admissions rate was around 10%. Now it is less than 5%.

I know several kids who are currently attending Ivies or equivalent like MIT and got into multiple ones: what they all have in common is that they were outstanding academically and nationally ranked in the top 50 in their sport for their age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

No worries, today he'd still have the (((legacy))) credentials he had back then.

Of course he will and legacy admissions have held steady at 1 out of 3. Much easier than the less than 5% admitted from general admissions.

But you did not mention that he had legacy status in your original post where you implied being good in the sciences and being a middling athlete was enough to get into Harvard: Certainly a bit disingenuous.

He didn't have legacy status (I wish!) but he was and is really smart. It was his essay that made the difference which amazed us given he didn't share it with us.

Neither did I but that does not mean I’ll get in now... 20+ yrs ago, admissions rate was around 10%. Now it is less than 5%.

I know several kids who are currently attending Ivies or equivalent like MIT and got into multiple ones: what they all have in common is that they were outstanding academically and nationally ranked in the top 50 in their sport for their age.

The point of sports and music and other extra curricular activities is not to impress colleges but to instill something positive in your kids and a skill they can enjoy for the rest of their lives.

Plenty of people went to Ivy's and Top 5 medical schools. My sibling did. My spouse makes more than she does and went to a no name college. If its money you are after in less you are a specialist in medicine its not a high paying job anymore nor that impressive.

[Anonymous]

But then do you have to play that sport on the college team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, but I'd rather spend the $6000 on building their intellectual horsepower. My kids were all good athletes but size and speed were not in their gene pool. My son was a varsity tennis player (good but not great) but he really got into science so he went to a couple of science camps. He went to Harvard and he is now a doctor. It's unlikely that tennis would have gotten him to the same place.

So he is a doctor now, this was what? 20 yrs ago. To get into Harvard now, he’ll have to be an outstanding athlete AND outstanding in the sciences or whatever. My friends and I like to joke that we would not have gotten into our respective ivies if we applied now.

No worries, today he'd still have the (((legacy))) credentials he had back then.

Of course he will and legacy admissions have held steady at 1 out of 3. Much easier than the less than 5% admitted from general admissions.

But you did not mention that he had legacy status in your original post where you implied being good in the sciences and being a middling athlete was enough to get into Harvard: Certainly a bit disingenuous.

No one becomes that good at a sport, music or whatever unless they love it. Doubtful these kids work so hard to impress colleges ... but talent doesn’t hurt in admissions.

He didn't have legacy status (I wish!) but he was and is really smart. It was his essay that made the difference which amazed us given he didn't share it with us.

Neither did I but that does not mean I’ll get in now... 20+ yrs ago, admissions rate was around 10%. Now it is less than 5%.

I know several kids who are currently attending Ivies or equivalent like MIT and got into multiple ones: what they all have in common is that they were outstanding academically and nationally ranked in the top 50 in their sport for their age.

The point of sports and music and other extra curricular activities is not to impress colleges but to instill something positive in your kids and a skill they can enjoy for the rest of their lives.

Plenty of people went to Ivy's and Top 5 medical schools. My sibling did. My spouse makes more than she does and went to a no name college. If its money you are after in less you are a specialist in medicine its not a high paying job anymore nor that impressive.

[Anonymous]

No one becomes that good at a sport, music or whatever without loving it. These kids aren’t doing it to impress colleges. ... but talent doesn’t hurt in admissions.