We have this debate a lot around here, especially when it comes to the pay-to-play aspect of some sports and how it can lend itself to an “arms race” of sorts for others (gear etc.). We’ve really tried to balance the benefit of sports, and there are many, with some of the less desirable parts. Benefits: learning how to fail or lose gracefully, learning how to do really, really hard things (my kids are primarily endurance athletes, with one kid passionate about soccer), learning how to be a good teammate, even on the tough days, learning how to work with and learn from many different people from many different places, and most importantly, learning how to trust the process and that sometimes hard work will not always reveal the result you expected but can still make for a valuable outcome. The not so great: parents who are overly competitive and forget that they’re still kids and, of course, cost.
For some kids, sports are what will keep them out of big time trouble, especially in places where there are few other options for ECs. Some kids happen to land in a sport that is filled with kids who are academically-minded and driven, and that helps them stay focused in school - because their peers and teammates are too. Our experience with club vs. rec sports is that the quality of coaching and the commitment of the participants is highly variable between the two. If you have a kid that is really dedicated to doing their sport at a higher/junior elite level, the rec or high school programs just do not have the ability, and often the coaching skill, to meet that need. I agree that it shouldn’t be an either/or for academic teams vs. sports teams, but school budgets will put money where there is demand. And if there is demand in a community for basketball, that’s what the voters will approve in a budget. In our community, AP classes were on the chopping block a few years ago because parents (yes, parents!) didn’t want to budget for them since only a handful of kids took them. Academic clubs hang on by a thread. School athletics though? Can’t touch that because they are, in theory if not in practice, accessible to all, and offer a down-on-its-luck community a huge amount of pride.
Do you mean in the admissions process? I mean, in S25’s experience (so sample size of 1), he was vying for exactly 1 supported slot through admissions in one of his sports in the ED1 round. He had passed the pre-read, has great stats, and was good enough in his sport to have remained in the mix for a possible ED2 slot, but partially for athletic reasons and partially financial ones (we were chasing merit if we could), he took his recruiting in a different direction. For the school he eventually picked as his top choice, he was told they do not offer admissions support for athletes. And in D3, there is no special pot of money for athletes. He was not good enough for the D1 programs that were of academic interest for him. I can’t speak to what happens for athletes once they’re on the ground at a school, but I can say the recruiting process is not for the faint of heart by any means. It’s a ton of work and a lot of hard conversations/disappointment.
Yes, he does music on the side as well (no school program for 2 years). And he trains for his sports year round. He was able to manage a very part-time job in the summer. I, too, was worried he would be a one-trick pony, but he was able to demonstrate in his essays how his commitment to his sport impacted many different areas of his life and shaped his outlook on community. He made the most of the opportunities he had on offer, and I think that’s what mattered.