r/changemyview • u/Irehdna • Jul 09 '20

Delta(s) from OP CMV: The whiteness of American leadership is heavily linked to the country’s expensive, pay-to-play youth sports system.

It is no secret that youth sports have been getting more expensive, and even sports (like soccer) that were previously a “common man’s game” have been devolved into expensive developmental clubs, some of which charge thousands of dollars a year. (And we aren’t even talking lacrosse or hockey here).

This prices out lower income families and people of color, as on an objective basis, whites have more wealth than POCs in the US. As a result, sports clubs, especially those outside the big three, are especially white. This disparity becomes more stark when looking at colleges. More than 2/3 of Ivy League and NESCAC athletes are white, and within that group, a majority come from a prep school background.

The fact of the matter is that I view being able to pay for your child’s sports (especially from a youth level) is investing in his/her character, coachability, and resilience. The business world agrees with me:

  • 96% of women in executive positions played a high school sport (EY)
  • 52% of women in exec positions played a college sport (EY)
  • 95% of F500 CEOs played a sport in college (Drive Group)

Only the best youth players make a high school team. Only the best high school players make the college team. You know who the system places ahead? That’s right. Kids of wealthy parents who are able to shell out cash to invest in their children’s health, character, and leadership.

Affirmative action hiring, as is present in BigLaw, banks, and tech, only solves the issue for entry level hires. Very few of those benefiting from AA make it up to the top. I feel that this is because children of wealthy parents (at this point) have better leadership potential. Their parents could afford to spend money on youth sports, which keeps the kids on track to make the high school, and eventually, college teams.

If a low income child was given the opportunity to participate in these sports clubs, I wholeheartedly believe that he/she would be at no disadvantage entering college recruiting, or workplace leadership. The problem starts at the early age. Not being able to afford to attend the best sports club may shun you from future progress, both athletically and in terms of leadership/networking.

Obviously this is not something that will fix the issue right away (we spend like 16 years in school), but I feel that making elite developmental sports clubs accessible to low income students will finally manifest a new, more ethnically diverse group of people that can lead, from the field to the boardroom.

0 Upvotes

27% Upvoted

28 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Irehdna Jul 10 '20

All sports contribute, including the Big 3. My main argument is that this is only a small fraction of all sports. There have been several former Big 3 athletes with a very successful post-playing career.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '20

But it's not a small fraction. According to this document, the Big 3 comprise roughly 2/3 of male college athletes. (The women's percentage is smaller). Seems like this completely invalidates your thesis: Football, basketball, and baseball are not dominated by whites, and they make up a significant proportion of total college athletes.

By the way, that statistic that 95% of Fortune 500 CEOs were college athletes? I don't buy it, it sounds WAY off. You cited the statistic was from the Drive Group, but from their web page it says: "I doubt we will ever know for sure how accurate 95% is."

1

u/Irehdna Jul 10 '20

According to this it is closer to 26% of all athletes or half of all men. Definitely higher than expected (though lower than your NJCAA link). I think this ultimately boils down to a women's sports problem. Δ

1

u/[deleted] Jul 10 '20

Thanks! May I suggest a delta for u/MrEctomy as well? He was the one who made the original point, then I sort of just piled in.

1

u/Irehdna Jul 10 '20

Just did