Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious which countries in which youth don’t play sports?
Anonymous wrote:Genuinely curious which countries in which youth don’t play sports?
Anonymous wrote:there’s also a lot of dumb jocksAnonymous wrote:Unless you are an URM, being a college athletic recruit is a much surer bet to a top college than pretty much anything else. So I think that is some of the appeal. My son excels at music, his best friend excels at tennis. They both practice hours a day, win competitions. Both get good grades, but only my son's friend has a shot of getting recruited to an Ivy. No one recruits for oboe players.
Also I do think sports help kids with confidence, leadership, ability to work as a team. That stuff is generally more important to more people's careers than being academically brilliant. And I say that as a former (and current) nerd.
Anonymous wrote:I can answer this one:
Large high schools. And few athletic opportunities for anyone who does not make high school teams.
My kids are involved in sports, and I can’t think of many parents who are expecting scholarships, or for their kids to play in college at all.
Most parents want their kids to have a shot at playing a sport in high school, however…and many or most of those require years of travel experience prior to high school- soccer, lacrosse, baseball, softball, volleyball for sure. Football and basketball don’t- but tend to require a certain size or physique (eliminating many kids). Sports like golf, tennis, swim usually require years of advanced training also.
It doesn’t leave many options for the rest. Just cross country or track and field.
It isn’t about college scholarships for most- it is more about making high school teams.
Why do people want their kids to play on high school teams? To have focus, a social group, productive way to spend free time, something to put on college apps. Obviously there are other extracurricular avenues- but sports are a big one for sure.
If there were more high school teams (A & B teams etc) or recreational/intramural /non school league options I think you’d see some of the crazy youth sports focus dwindle.
there’s also a lot of dumb jocksAnonymous wrote:Unless you are an URM, being a college athletic recruit is a much surer bet to a top college than pretty much anything else. So I think that is some of the appeal. My son excels at music, his best friend excels at tennis. They both practice hours a day, win competitions. Both get good grades, but only my son's friend has a shot of getting recruited to an Ivy. No one recruits for oboe players.
Also I do think sports help kids with confidence, leadership, ability to work as a team. That stuff is generally more important to more people's careers than being academically brilliant. And I say that as a former (and current) nerd.
Anonymous wrote:I can answer this one:
Large high schools. And few athletic opportunities for anyone who does not make high school teams.
My kids are involved in sports, and I can’t think of many parents who are expecting scholarships, or for their kids to play in college at all.
Most parents want their kids to have a shot at playing a sport in high school, however…and many or most of those require years of travel experience prior to high school- soccer, lacrosse, baseball, softball, volleyball for sure. Football and basketball don’t- but tend to require a certain size or physique (eliminating many kids). Sports like golf, tennis, swim usually require years of advanced training also.
It doesn’t leave many options for the rest. Just cross country or track and field.
It isn’t about college scholarships for most- it is more about making high school teams.
Why do people want their kids to play on high school teams? To have focus, a social group, productive way to spend free time, something to put on college apps. Obviously there are other extracurricular avenues- but sports are a big one for sure.
If there were more high school teams (A & B teams etc) or recreational/intramural /non school league options I think you’d see some of the crazy youth sports focus dwindle.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Immigrant mom nerd again:
The other thing is that the schools know these kids have very supportive and wealthy parents if they are in travel sports.
It’s is very very very time consuming to do these sports and it takes a ton of money (hotels every weekend for games sometimes) and a ton of time management from the parents and the kids. Do not assume these kids are “dumb athletes” - they probably would do as well as your kid in school if they weren’t at practice 3 hours a day.
So it’s not just that your kid got passed over because they weren’t sporty. It’s because if they are in travel sports (which kinda needs to happen to even get onto high school teams now) they are wealthy, very involved parents. It might not appear that way, but my experience we are talking 7 figures in secret.
NP. The bolded is making the point it's tdying to debunk.
If my kid spends 3 hours a day deep diving into a brainy academic topic (well, when not if), they grow smarter than yours, every time. Sprinkle on top some rec level sports and they are well-rounded and healthy.
OP is absolutely right that it's an American cultural quirk.
Anonymous wrote:NP. The answer is straightforward. In college, athletes do better financially on average after graduation and they donate more. Academically, especially at competitive schools, they aren’t as good on average as the very top academic students but they aren’t far behind and hold their own academically, while also playing their sport at a very high level. Essentially, they launch successfully out of college at a higher rate than the rest of the student population and so bring more money back.
High schools recognize this so the competitive ones recruit athletes.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:NP. The answer is straightforward. In college, athletes do better financially on average after graduation and they donate more. Academically, especially at competitive schools, they aren’t as good on average as the very top academic students but they aren’t far behind and hold their own academically, while also playing their sport at a very high level. Essentially, they launch successfully out of college at a higher rate than the rest of the student population and so bring more money back.
High schools recognize this so the competitive ones recruit athletes.
Can you please post some sources for this? i’ve read many articles stating the exact opposite. Only 2% of college athletes go pro and many have difficulty transitioning post-grad to life outside of sports.
For women
https://www.thestreet.com/csuiteadvisors/stories/c-suite-contributor-lisa-strasman-women-in-sports-better-leaders