Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dumb Jock Syndrome

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Dumb Jock Syndrome

    Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    Yes. I agree that roster management was poor. That said, MAPLE is just another league without great importance. Its purpose, although in essence no different than other leagues, is to allow game time. Given the participation in EDP, MAPLE was even less significant and therefore allowed 'roster manipulation'. Since we do not participate in the NEP, I cannot compare.
    Valeo now has all their boys teams U11-U14 in EDP's first division. While I don't know how much value there is at the youngest ages, I can say for sure that the older divisions are very competitive with top teams participating.
    It is the end-game that is important and it remains to be seen what each of these leagues does to win that game. The end-game being, for our family, college soccer and placement. Whether or not the EDP adds to this is not known but certainly there are claims to such.
    This is where a club (that many hate) like the Blazers has been successful by attending tournaments to which many many college coaches visit. With regard to Boys tournaments and the NEFC kick off classic, the Scorpion Bowl, any Stars tournament, or the Needham Memorial Tournament, the attendance of coaches outside of the New England Area is lacking.

    I suspect that the participation with the EDP leagues has some requirement to attend EDP tournaments. So be it. It doesn't prevent participation with local tournaments, however, if I had to choose which tournament to attend, I would prefer to have my son play in a competitive tournament where there were many college coaches attending........for the end-game of course.

    As a legitimate discussion -- do you envision your son going into college for a degree that requires a graduate degree or more? i.e. PT, Dr, Pharmacist, etc.

    If you do, what impact do you think will soccer have on his grades?

    Also do you think soccer will be the sweetner on the application or do you think it is the hindrance on his HS grades?

    BTW -- nice post


    There was a study a long time ago that showed that elite gymnasts had the highest grade point averages amongst any other group including race, sport, SES. The theory was that the gymnast developed their brains differently and had higher capacity. At the time, youth soccer was not that big. I wonder though if other sports including soccer have this impact on elite athlete brain development. Maybe for soccer athletes they have increased O2 in their brains or they just have something to do afterschool. Or they've learned how to work hard early in life. I would bet that the elite athletes in general will have better grades.

    There is no data to suggest that 'elite athletes in general have better grades'. Although there might specific sports in which a different athlete is attracted to, I doubt that the top US basketball or even football players have better grades than the top gymnasts...

    To address the general point, however, as to future goals and how sports impact on them, I have this to add regarding the pros of playing college sports:
    1. Social skill development
    2. Learn how to win
    3. Learn how to lose
    4. Learn how to deal with a huge array of personalities
    5. Stay physically fit
    6. A chance to feel good about participating

    7. Perhaps as or more important than any other....the opportunity to learn how to prioritize, how to become more efficient, how to work hard or harder.....

    There are many life's skills that are learned/acquired by participating in a high school or college sport.....or any other club for that matter.

    Lots of data actually:
    http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.p...load/4052/2755

    #2
    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post

    A. Yes. I agree that roster management was poor. That said, MAPLE is just another league without great importance. Its purpose, although in essence no different than other leagues, is to allow game time. Given the participation in EDP, MAPLE was even less significant and therefore allowed 'roster manipulation'. Since we do not participate in the NEP, I cannot compare.
    Valeo now has all their boys teams U11-U14 in EDP's first division. While I don't know how much value there is at the youngest ages, I can say for sure that the older divisions are very competitive with top teams participating.
    It is the end-game that is important and it remains to be seen what each of these leagues does to win that game. The end-game being, for our family, college soccer and placement. Whether or not the EDP adds to this is not known but certainly there are claims to such.
    This is where a club (that many hate) like the Blazers has been successful by attending tournaments to which many many college coaches visit. With regard to Boys tournaments and the NEFC kick off classic, the Scorpion Bowl, any Stars tournament, or the Needham Memorial Tournament, the attendance of coaches outside of the New England Area is lacking.

    I suspect that the participation with the EDP leagues has some requirement to attend EDP tournaments. So be it. It doesn't prevent participation with local tournaments, however, if I had to choose which tournament to attend, I would prefer to have my son play in a competitive tournament where there were many college coaches attending........for the end-game of course.

    B. As a legitimate discussion -- do you envision your son going into college for a degree that requires a graduate degree or more? i.e. PT, Dr, Pharmacist, etc.

    If you do, what impact do you think will soccer have on his grades?

    Also do you think soccer will be the sweetner on the application or do you think it is the hindrance on his HS grades?

    BTW -- nice post


    C. There was a study a long time ago that showed that elite gymnasts had the highest grade point averages amongst any other group including race, sport, SES. The theory was that the gymnast developed their brains differently and had higher capacity. At the time, youth soccer was not that big. I wonder though if other sports including soccer have this impact on elite athlete brain development. Maybe for soccer athletes they have increased O2 in their brains or they just have something to do afterschool. Or they've learned how to work hard early in life. I would bet that the elite athletes in general will have better grades.

    D. There is no data to suggest that 'elite athletes in general have better grades'. Although there might specific sports in which a different athlete is attracted to, I doubt that the top US basketball or even football players have better grades than the top gymnasts...

    To address the general point, however, as to future goals and how sports impact on them, I have this to add regarding the pros of playing college sports:
    1. Social skill development
    2. Learn how to win
    3. Learn how to lose
    4. Learn how to deal with a huge array of personalities
    5. Stay physically fit
    6. A chance to feel good about participating

    7. Perhaps as or more important than any other....the opportunity to learn how to prioritize, how to become more efficient, how to work hard or harder.....

    There are many life's skills that are learned/acquired by participating in a high school or college sport.....or any other club for that matter.

    E. Lots of data actually:
    http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.p...load/4052/2755



    I copied several posts from another thread as I wondered if it deserved its own. I personally posted A and D.

    Poster E left this reference:
    http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.p...load/4052/2755[/QUOTE]

    The referenced article is a great one to read. The poster stated that there is 'lots of data', however, I don't know whether or not he/she was supporting that elite athletes are better or not better.....or, what I prefer to consider is that the answer is not really known. The referenced article certainly does NOT answer the question.

    The article's authors selected 313 Elite Athletes (EA) in Australia across different sports and across different studies. It was clearly stated that these selected few students received quite a handful of resources to improve their education including tutors and time managers (section 3.1). I don't know that these were given to non EA students. We also have no idea what the Pre study school entry academic levels of these students were. This is not a randomized study by any means.

    The paper can conclude that these selected students were not necessarily 'Dumb Jocks' compared to the non EA students. However, it is not clear that, even with these added resources that they are so much better. 58% of the EA received grades above the median.
    Table 1 compares the results of these few students to the much larger cohort. In three of the six areas of study did EA excel over non EA, however, by median scores, not by very much.

    Without going through all the details of the report, there are several important distinctions to be made:
    1. The paper may only state that when students are afforded resources, they do better.
    2. This is a select group of students i.e. non randomized and non-blinded. We don't even known whether the two groups are even comparable regarding other demographics and variables. This would have allowed one to discern whether or playing a sport could actually improve academic performance.
    3. The authors, in their background and discussion demonstrate that these results (if there are actually results) may not be applicable to other areas of the their own country and much less so another such as the united states.
    4. The authors do suggest NOT APPLY TO 'HEAVILY COMMERCIALIZED SPORTS (AMERICAN BASKETBALL AND FOOTBALL)...."THE GRADUATION RATES FOR ELITE STUDENT ATHLETES, ESPECIALLY THOSE IN HIGH PROFILE, REVENUE GENERATING SPORTS....REMAIN LOW"


    Although I don't doubt that american athletes can also be great students, and I do strongly feel that playing sports is a great thing on many different levels, I would not go so far as to conclude that, in this country, that EA are necessarily better or worse students. With all that sports have to offer, it is still necessarily to support that student as was stated in the article with academic resources as needed.
    There is still no data that, in any way, state that American college football, basketball, ?hockey or baseball players, where future revenues may apply, are not DUMB JOCKS as many have thought.

    I don't know where to begin with soccer, lacrosse, track/field, gymnasts, golf, or tennis players. Certainly, socially, these students may be very different across the board. For example I feel that tennis, gold, and ? gymnasts tend to come from more privileged families with greater resources. It would not surprise me to read that these students do better. Lacrosse, has, traditionally (certainly changing now) been heavily weighed toward private schools and might also have similar appearances as the country club tennis and golf families.....but that is changing rapidly.

    Soccer.....????

    Comment


      #3
      Depends whether you see soccer as a vocation. In other parts of the world youth sports are basically free because the big profits come from the buying and selling players and the gate receipts and marketing dollars are just the gravy. Don't need pay to play. Vastly different in this country since it is illegal to trade humans like that. Changes the whole dynamic and puts a very different emphasis on the educational link. One plays soccer in this country to earn an education where as overseas the soccer is the education. Over there a young man can earn a half decent living playing soccer and then either moves into coaching or the business side of the game.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        I copied several posts from another thread as I wondered if it deserved its own. I personally posted A and D.

        Poster E left this reference:
        http://www.sciedu.ca/journal/index.p...load/4052/2755
        The referenced article is a great one to read. The poster stated that there is 'lots of data', however, I don't know whether or not he/she was supporting that elite athletes are better or not better.....or, what I prefer to consider is that the answer is not really known. The referenced article certainly does NOT answer the question.

        The article's authors selected 313 Elite Athletes (EA) in Australia across different sports and across different studies. It was clearly stated that these selected few students received quite a handful of resources to improve their education including tutors and time managers (section 3.1). I don't know that these were given to non EA students. We also have no idea what the Pre study school entry academic levels of these students were. This is not a randomized study by any means.

        The paper can conclude that these selected students were not necessarily 'Dumb Jocks' compared to the non EA students. However, it is not clear that, even with these added resources that they are so much better. 58% of the EA received grades above the median.
        Table 1 compares the results of these few students to the much larger cohort. In three of the six areas of study did EA excel over non EA, however, by median scores, not by very much.

        Without going through all the details of the report, there are several important distinctions to be made:
        1. The paper may only state that when students are afforded resources, they do better.
        2. This is a select group of students i.e. non randomized and non-blinded. We don't even known whether the two groups are even comparable regarding other demographics and variables. This would have allowed one to discern whether or playing a sport could actually improve academic performance.
        3. The authors, in their background and discussion demonstrate that these results (if there are actually results) may not be applicable to other areas of the their own country and much less so another such as the united states.
        4. The authors do suggest NOT APPLY TO 'HEAVILY COMMERCIALIZED SPORTS (AMERICAN BASKETBALL AND FOOTBALL)...."THE GRADUATION RATES FOR ELITE STUDENT ATHLETES, ESPECIALLY THOSE IN HIGH PROFILE, REVENUE GENERATING SPORTS....REMAIN LOW"


        Although I don't doubt that american athletes can also be great students, and I do strongly feel that playing sports is a great thing on many different levels, I would not go so far as to conclude that, in this country, that EA are necessarily better or worse students. With all that sports have to offer, it is still necessarily to support that student as was stated in the article with academic resources as needed.
        There is still no data that, in any way, state that American college football, basketball, ?hockey or baseball players, where future revenues may apply, are not DUMB JOCKS as many have thought.

        I don't know where to begin with soccer, lacrosse, track/field, gymnasts, golf, or tennis players. Certainly, socially, these students may be very different across the board. For example I feel that tennis, gold, and ? gymnasts tend to come from more privileged families with greater resources. It would not surprise me to read that these students do better. Lacrosse, has, traditionally (certainly changing now) been heavily weighed toward private schools and might also have similar appearances as the country club tennis and golf families.....but that is changing rapidly.

        Soccer.....????[/QUOTE]


        Low rent private coaching for Golf and Tennis runs more than the average mortgage payment per month.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          Depends whether you see soccer as a vocation. In other parts of the world youth sports are basically free because the big profits come from the buying and selling players and the gate receipts and marketing dollars are just the gravy. Don't need pay to play. Vastly different in this country since it is illegal to trade humans like that. Changes the whole dynamic and puts a very different emphasis on the educational link. One plays soccer in this country to earn an education where as overseas the soccer is the education. Over there a young man can earn a half decent living playing soccer and then either moves into coaching or the business side of the game.

          Over where? The article and this thread are describing and discussing players attending schools and the appropriateness of the 'dumb jock' label. In fact, one statement was that athletes are potentially superior students. The players are kids in school presumably to get an education. Although the article might conclude the possibility, it does not prove it to be so since the methods are too superficial.

          Comment


            #6
            Welcome to the world of sports. No one cares what your GPA is as long as you can play.

            Comment

            Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
            Auto-Saved
            x
            Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
            x
            Working...
            X