Rates of youth participation in organized sports dropping...Why?

[bison13]

I coach HS basketball and baseball in MD at a school with state championship teams in both as well as football, soccer and wrestling. Our school obviously has lots of gifted athletes. 15 years ago when I started the AD said dont make final cuts until football and soccer were done, we would always get 2-3 very good players off of each team and have a dozen or more tryout after their seasons were done. Then in the spring 2-3 good players for baseball off of the wrestling and bb teams with many trying out. Now I am lucky to get more than 2 guys from football to even tryout and no soccer guys. No basketball players play baseball any more and maybe a wrestler or two. Its all specialization here now. 7 on 7s all summer, AAU hoops, club soccer, showcase baseball, same with lax and wrestling. So its either one sport all year or video games or drugs or whatever. We cant even get a good marching band anymore. Kids are lazy and the parents allow them to do nothing.

One kid I had made varsity football, basketball and baseball as a freshman, got cut as a sophomore from football because he missed the first day of tryouts, got mad, went to soccer tryouts the same day and not only made the team but started at center midfield for 3 years on a state champ team. Unfortunately there just arent kids who want to do that anymore or parents who can handle it.

 

[Howie'81]

Yep, we disagree.

That's all well and good to disagree, but it's meaningless without a reason. People can be taught to hit if they have the athletic ability. There is zero, nada, zilch, doubt about this.

 

[Columbus_Lion]

I believe its because these sports are too structured and its costs the parents $$$$$$. Kids are told where they have to be and when. Kids have no creativity these days. People, especially kids, hate being told they have to do something. As soon as there is resistance, parents won't pay $ for kid to play a sport, as it is a waste of money.

In the 60s, 70s and 80s kid talked to their friends to meet at the park and this will be the sport. Amazing how many showed up, without cell phone communication.

 

[Howie'81]

I believe its because these sports are too structured and its costs the parents $$$$$$. Kids are told where they have to be and when. Kids have no creativity these days. People, especially kids, hate being told they have to do something. As soon as there is resistance, parents won't pay $ for kid to play a sport, as it is a waste of money.

In the 60s, 70s and 80s kid talked to their friends to meet at the park and this will be the sport. Amazing how many showed up, without cell phone communication.

You are correct, sir.

 

[RochLion]

One of the theories of my wife and I is that the different generations react to the way they were brought up. Kids that were raised in the 60s and 70s by baby boomer parents who (generally) didn't put as much effort and attention into their kids' activities produced a generation who really focused on getting their kids into organized sports and trying to see they reach their full potential. Is the recent drop in youth sports participation a reaction to that by young parents who resented the constant drive to practices all the time? Or is it a function of shrinking middle class disposable income?

I don't think it has anything to do with shrinking middle class income. At least where I live I still see people spending ad nauseam with total disregard toward retirement and college educations. I know with many of our high school sports teams your encouraged by the team boosters to by $30 headbands or $70 sweatshirts. Cripes just ask me for a cash donation.

 

[jjsocrates]

Root Cause: High taxes at all levels of government. This forces both parents to work.

If both parents are working, wouldn't their combined salaries be HIGHER, thereby pushing them into a higher tax bracket and forcing them to pay more in total taxes and to see that additional income taxed at a higher marginal rate?

This is the first time I've heard this theory that high taxes forces people to take more jobs so that they'll be able to pay even more taxes.

 

[Judge Smails]

If both parents are working, wouldn't their combined salaries be HIGHER, thereby pushing them into a higher tax bracket and forcing them to pay more in total taxes and to see that additional income taxed at a higher marginal rate?

This is the first time I've heard this theory that high taxes forces people to take more jobs so that they'll be able to pay even more taxes.

He's got a square peg and he tries to put it in every round hole he sees.

 

[kgilbert78]

He's got a square peg and he tries to put it in every round hole he sees.

"Officer Material!" (from an old "Jetson's" show).

 

[AWS1022]

Kids haven't changed, parents have. If you put three or four kids in a backyard with nothing, they will create some type of game just like we did. Kids still want to hang out with their friends if given the opportunity. Parents don't let them out of the house without scheduled play dates so they sit in the house and play video games.

Sports have changed too, but again kids haven't. I have two kids and both played sports. My son excelled, my daughter didn't and she hung it up and did other things. She knew she wasn't very good so it wasn't all that fun. I coached my son in basketball and baseball, did the travel thing and spent many hours dedicated to these two sports. He now plays D-1 baseball so part of me says it was all worth it. But we sacrificed a lot of family time and time for him to just be a kid, so part of me thinks it wasn't worth it. But it was his choice and that's what he wanted to do. I never did it with the intention of him playing in college and if he quit right now I would be fine with it. Unfortunately you can't get those days back again and I feel we missed out on a lot. He gained a lot from sports but he lost a lot too.

 

[phillybillyreprise]

Money including the elimination of sports from recreation leagues and high school because of budget restraints. Followed by different sports like skateboarding and lacrosse. The disappeance of the three sport athlete. Finally video games, cell phones and computers.

 

[PSU Mike]

That's all well and good to disagree, but it's meaningless without a reason. People can be taught to hit if they have the athletic ability. There is zero, nada, zilch, doubt about this.

Really? That doesn't do a good job explaining why MLB has the lowest average athletic level among the major sports, and the highest upside in pay. Why aren't all best athletes playing MLB if they all can be taught to hit so well?

 

[Op2]

That's all well and good to disagree, but it's meaningless without a reason. People can be taught to hit if they have the athletic ability. There is zero, nada, zilch, doubt about this.

I don't agree with that. IMO being able to hit the ball, coming at different speeds and different trajectories, is a skill that some people are just naturally better at than others. Jon Kruk was hardly an "athlete" but he could hit well. Michael Jordan OTOH devoted some years to baseball and simply wasn't very good. Of course he started late, but even if he started early I think it's possible that he simply didn't enough natural skill at hitting a baseball to ever make the majors no matter when he started or how hard he tried.

Russell Wilson is a good NFL QB. But while he played some college and minor league baseball, he simply wasn't nearly as good at baseball as he is at football even though he's a very good athlete overall.

 

[Howie'81]

Really? That doesn't do a good job explaining why MLB has the lowest average athletic level among the major sports, and the highest upside in pay. Why aren't all best athletes playing MLB if they all can be taught to hit so well?

Silly argument. For many years the best athletes DID play major league baseball in this country. The NFL was still fledgling as was the NBA. Many athletes are choosing other sports today besides baseball. This has been talked about for many years in baseball circles, how many athletes, especially black athletes, have chosen football and basketball over baseball. Think Bo Jackson and Deion Sanders. Both great athletes who could play at a high level in baseball as well as football. Try again.

 

[Howie'81]

I don't agree with that. IMO being able to hit the ball, coming at different speeds and different trajectories, is a skill that some people are just naturally better at than others. Jon Kruk was hardly an "athlete" but he could hit well. Michael Jordan OTOH devoted some years to baseball and simply wasn't very good. Of course he started late, but even if he started early I think it's possible that he simply didn't enough natural skill at hitting a baseball to ever make the majors no matter when he started or how hard he tried.

Russell Wilson is a good NFL QB. But while he played some college and minor league baseball, he simply wasn't nearly as good at baseball as he is at football even though he's a very good athlete overall.

Ugggh. Do you realize how many people are good enough to play even minor league baseball? Very few. The fact that Jordan did it, and it wasn't even his first sport speaks volumes. And I also don't buy your assertion that Jon Kruk wasn't an athlete. He may have not stayed in shape, but I'm sure he was in the top few percentile athletically. I'll name a number of athletes that played both sports. Elway, Jackson, Winfield, Sanders, Ainge, Dozier (to name a Penn State guy), and many more. Also, I'm sure the majority of major league ball players played other sports in high school and sometimes college too. This isn't even debatable it's so prevalent.

 

[PSU Mike]

Ugggh. Do you realize how many people are good enough to play even minor league baseball? Very few. The fact that Jordan did it, and it wasn't even his first sport speaks volumes. And I also don't buy your assertion that Jon Kruk wasn't an athlete. He may have not stayed in shape, but I'm sure he was in the top few percentile athletically. I'll name a number of athletes that played both sports. Elway, Jackson, Winfield, Sanders, Ainge, Dozier (to name a Penn State guy), and many more. Also, I'm sure the majority of major league ball players played other sports in high school and sometimes college too. This isn't even debatable it's so prevalent.

You keep relying on the "it's obvious and not open to debate" angle for a reason.

 

[Howie'81]

You keep relying on the "it's obvious and not open to debate" angle for a reason.

Well, because it's obvious. Look, are you saying you can't teach a guy to hit? That's baloney. You can teach someone to hit. Otherwise there wouldn't be hitting instructors. If your argument is that you can't teach a guy to be a prolific, major league caliber hitter, I'd respond by saying that the better his eyesight, the better his reflexes, the better his quickness and reaction time, the further he'll advance as a hitter. But if you take a decent athlete, you can teach him to hit at least at a moderately competitive level. Does he have to practice? Yeah, but that's true for anything and any sport. All that said, I did provide examples in my other posts to illustrate my point, so don't try to make it sound like I simply said "it's obvious and not open to debate." I gave you more than that, but you ignored it.

 

[flameshockey26]

I think part of it is the intensity of the programs. Many parents think that when their child starts playing a sport they will turn pro and need to be at it all the time. My wife coaches gymnastics and every kid in their thinks they are going to the Olympics and are there 8 - 12 hours a day 5 days week and that's the offseason. That's why so many gymnasts are home-schooled so they can be the gym longer. My wife was home-schooled and had school in the morning then at the gym from 1 to 10. It turns into a full time job with no pay (no I a not suggesting they get paid). The dedication that is needed to participate anymore is over whelming. A co-worker of mine just signed his daughter up for travel softball which travels on weekends 42 weekends a year. You can't participate in a sport anymore just for fun. It is a big commitment and I am guessing lots of kids want free time to go do different things and not just be playing one sport. Maybe there are some programs out there that are as intense but from what I hear from people is the time commitment for parents is a big deal.

 

[Op2]

Ugggh. Do you realize how many people are good enough to play even minor league baseball? Very few. The fact that Jordan did it, and it wasn't even his first sport speaks volumes. And I also don't buy your assertion that Jon Kruk wasn't an athlete. He may have not stayed in shape, but I'm sure he was in the top few percentile athletically. I'll name a number of athletes that played both sports. Elway, Jackson, Winfield, Sanders, Ainge, Dozier (to name a Penn State guy), and many more. Also, I'm sure the majority of major league ball players played other sports in high school and sometimes college too. This isn't even debatable it's so prevalent.

I agree that Kruk was an athlete in the sense the he could hit a baseball. But that's my point, namely that there are athletic skills some guys have and other guys don't. Despite having so many basketball skills, Michael Jordan did not have baseball skills. If his name wasn't Michael Jordan he may not have played minor league baseball at all. The minor league team that signed him didn't do so because he was a great prospect but because he was a great drawing card.

And Kruk was the reverse skill-wise. Kruk played MLB but could he have even played college basketball?

Yes, good athletes will generally be good at different sports but I'm talking about good enough to be at the top. You can't just take a good athlete and make him good at any sport. An otherwise good athlete simply may not have the skills to be at the top in baseball (or football or basketball or whatever). Bo Jackson was good at the top level of two sports. Deion Jackson was good at one and good enough to be an average player at the other. That's it the last few decades.

The reason Danny Ainge even had a basketball career at all is because he failed at baseball. He was a lot better at baseball than you or I but in terms of being a major league player, he stank.

Elway and Winfield were good at other sports but we don't know if they would have made it at the top level in the sport they didn't choose. Lots of guys are good at lower levels but by definition they all can't be good at the top.

 

[Op2]

Ugggh. Do you realize how many people are good enough to play even minor league baseball? Very few. The fact that Jordan did it, and it wasn't even his first sport speaks volumes. And I also don't buy your assertion that Jon Kruk wasn't an athlete. He may have not stayed in shape, but I'm sure he was in the top few percentile athletically. I'll name a number of athletes that played both sports. Elway, Jackson, Winfield, Sanders, Ainge, Dozier (to name a Penn State guy), and many more. Also, I'm sure the majority of major league ball players played other sports in high school and sometimes college too. This isn't even debatable it's so prevalent.

Also, let me comment on your last line. "This isn't even debatable it's so prevalent." If it's was so prevalent then you wouldn't be able to name a handful of guys, you'd be able to name thousands. You named Dozier to name a Penn State guy. Consider the other 100 guys that were on the football team with him the year PSU won the national title. How many of them were also great basketball or baseball players? Probably few.

Now if you say how many of them were good at baseball or basketball in high school then it's probably a fair amount because within a high school all it takes to be a good player is to be better than the other kids at your school and being a good athlete helps with that. But that's just the advantage of having good athletic talent in general. It doesn't mean you can be good at baseball amongst good baseball players and good at football amongst good football players and good at basketball amongst good basketball players.

 

[Howie'81]

I agree that Kruk was an athlete in the sense the he could hit a baseball. But that's my point, namely that there are athletic skills some guys have and other guys don't. Despite having so many basketball skills, Michael Jordan did not have baseball skills. If his name wasn't Michael Jordan he may not have played minor league baseball at all. The minor league team that signed him didn't do so because he was a great prospect but because he was a great drawing card.

And Kruk was the reverse skill-wise. Kruk played MLB but could he have even played college basketball?

Yes, good athletes will generally be good at different sports but I'm talking about good enough to be at the top. You can't just take a good athlete and make him good at any sport. An otherwise good athlete simply may not have the skills to be at the top in baseball (or football or basketball or whatever). Bo Jackson was good at the top level of two sports. Deion Jackson was good at one and good enough to be an average player at the other. That's it the last few decades.

The reason Danny Ainge even had a basketball career at all is because he failed at baseball. He was a lot better at baseball than you or I but in terms of being a major league player, he stank.

Elway and Winfield were good at other sports but we don't know if they would have made it at the top level in the sport they didn't choose. Lots of guys are good at lower levels but by definition they all can't be good at the top.

Sigh. My original point that you or someone disputed was that you can teach a guy to hit if he is a decent athlete. You most certainly can. Will he get to the show? Depends on things I've mentioned in other posts. Think back to your high school days. If you're a bit older like me, you'll remember that many of the best guys on the baseball team were also some of the best guys on the football and/or basketball teams.

 

[Howie'81]

Also, let me comment on your last line. "This isn't even debatable it's so prevalent." If it's was so prevalent then you wouldn't be able to name a handful of guys, you'd be able to name thousands. You named Dozier to name a Penn State guy. Consider the other 100 guys that were on the football team with him the year PSU won the national title. How many of them were also great basketball or baseball players? Probably few.

Now if you say how many of them were good at baseball or basketball in high school then it's probably a fair amount because within a high school all it takes to be a good player is to be better than the other kids at your school and being a good athlete helps with that. But that's just the advantage of having good athletic talent in general. It doesn't mean you can be good at baseball amongst good baseball players and good at football amongst good football players and good at basketball amongst good basketball players.

C'mon now. By the time these guys get to the bigs, they've selected a sport. The fact that I can name guys off the top of my head that played both sports at an elite level, i.e. in the big league of their sports, makes a strong point. Good athletes generally can do multiple sports pretty well. And by the way, there have been numerous Penn State football players that played other sports at the college level.

 

[tgar]

I coached a few kids back in the day that could have been pretty good if they stuck with it ( guys and girls ) but their hearts were not totally into it. It was much harder on the parents than the kids.

Later at the shore ( a couple of years later ) I had the opportunity to play in many pick up soccer games and softball games and all those kids that dropped out of organized sports were more than happy to join in the games and even get competitive. We went to the beach with a large group and the games would include adults and teenagers.

It was fun. People bragged, danced, shimmied, etc. there were no coaches, no uniforms, no clock, no travel, just bottles of water, Gatorade, etc. and people from 14 to 55 running up and down the field having a great time.

Most of those kids that quit organized sports turned out OK and I will fondly remember those afternoons.

 

[bison13]

If hitting a baseball is so easy if you are an athlete then why is it said that hitting a round ball at 90+ mph with a round bat is the hardest thing to do in pro sports? Hitting and pitching and speed can be 'taught' but not nearly at the rate you think. Why is going 3 for 10 considered hall of fame worthy?

 

[Mace54]

I'm a father of two high school boys who have played football, basketball, and baseball through grade school. By the time they both hit 8th grade they were essentially down to one sport. The demand by coaches to participate in year-round training for their sport turned them off. As a parent, I support my boys' decisions. I will not force them into any sport. One son is down to golf as his game and he has become very good at it. The other plays basketball, but he does not attend the summer sessions. So, his playing time will be affected, but he could care less.
Another reason why younger kids are not participating in pee wee and little leagues.......X-Box and Playstation. They stay in their rooms gaming. It's a different time and I don't get it.

 

[Norm Petersin]

Video games and the AYSO mentality, everyone gets to play. Parents think their little Johnny is an all star, and convince the kid of that. It's a cold, cruel world out there, and life isn't dair at times.

 

[psu7113]

One of the theories of my wife and I is that the different generations react to the way they were brought up. Kids that were raised in the 60s and 70s by baby boomer parents who (generally) didn't put as much effort and attention into their kids' activities produced a generation who really focused on getting their kids into organized sports and trying to see they reach their full potential. Is the recent drop in youth sports participation a reaction to that by young parents who resented the constant drive to practices all the time? Or is it a function of shrinking middle class disposable income?

[/QUOTE

One of the theories of my wife and I is that the different generations react to the way they were brought up. Kids that were raised in the 60s and 70s by baby boomer parents who (generally) didn't put as much effort and attention into their kids' activities produced a generation who really focused on getting their kids into organized sports and trying to see they reach their full potential. Is the recent drop in youth sports participation a reaction to that by young parents who resented the constant drive to practices all the time? Or is it a function of shrinking middle class disposable income?

The answer is simple, time. We now live in an era where almost all families are dual-income with both parents working full-time jobs. My parents were boomers and my mother stayed home and shuttled my sister and I to all manner of sports and other activities. Contrary to the belief of many in the media and the academic world, parenting is a full-time job. Parents today are forced (especially if they racked up school loans) to juggle work and parenting in way that has and will continue to have all kinds of negative impacts. My wife and I are fortunate in that we have relatively flexible work situations and grandparents nearby who are able to help when needed. We also only have one child who is currently involved in sports. It will be even more challenging when our daughter is old enough for such activities.

 

[smaturin]

A couple of things:

1. Economics. The time spread here happens to incorporate the biggest economic downturn in our country since the early 70s. During that time period pretty much every school instituted pay to play requirements. Ours are cheap -- $150 for the year gets you into every sport. A neighboring district charges $150 per sport, $500 max per family. That's on top of regular team stuff as pay to play dollars just go to the general fund. Lots of families cannot afford the cost even if subsidized. That's on the individual basis - but schools and school districts have also been cutting -- mostly JV and freshmen teams. Where a school might have previously run 3 teams they cut to 2. Middle school sports have disappeared entirely in many districts.

1(a) -- Growth in (uncounted) community based leagues not associated with state and national organizations. The cost of participating and the requirements for compliance with organizational rules has lead to a growth in community based recreation leagues particularly servicing elementary and middle school age kids.

2. Individual Activities/Sports. Big growth in individual sports for kids such as swimming, biking, and snowboarding in the winter as well as continued participation in other X-sports like skateboarding.

3. Decline in youth football is for pretty obvious reasons. Likely that will be a continuing trend. I would expect to see lacrosse and soccer to pick up some of those numbers.

4. Growth in other physical activities -- I should have added on the girls side dance and competitive cheer are already big and growing.

Finally -- odd to use 2012 numbers. SFIA comes out with their report on an annual basis. I am not willing to buy it but I would have thought the WSJ would have popped the $100 for the most recent numbers.

 

[smaturin]

On the question of picking up a sport later -- it depends on the school and the availability for participation in club/travel sports in that area. By way of example, a big school servicing a large rural area may have opportunities for kids to play club sports other than maybe basketball, baseball and softball. A kid then might be able to make a high school soccer team. On the other hand, we live in a suburban area and my kid's high school soccer team just played a pre-season warm-up tournament put on by a nearby 600 student private school. The tournament was basically rigged so my kid's team and the private school team would meet in the finals which they did. Game was 0-0 and kid's team won in the shootout. Every kid on the two teams had grown up playing club/travel soccer since they were 8 or 9. You can't make the high school team unless you do.

That's the same with pretty much every "cut sport" at the schools in our area, e.g. Basketball, Softball, Baseball, Volleyball, Golf, Tennis, etc. . . (Swimming is not a cut sport, but unless you swim club -- no way you will be good enough to swim for points.)

 

[Roxine]

Well, considering they only show the raw numbers, why hasn't anybody considered the most obvious explanation? Demographics. Perhaps there are simply FEWER KIDS aged 6-18 today than 4 years ago. For one thing, parents are having fewer children than average, and parents are also waiting longer to have children.

It would be pretty foolish to draw conclusions if there was also a similar drop in the total population of 6-18 year old kids in the last 4 years as there was in the participation population in sports. Perhaps a better metric would be the PERCENTAGE of 6-18 year olds who participate in sports.

Also, consider that the rate of participation is probably QUITE different among 6-12 year olds than it is among 12-18 year olds. As kids get older, they DO have other activities that they gravitate towards - heck the rise of lacrosse and ice hockey here shows that maybe kids are opting OUT of baseball, soccer, football and trying some alternate activities (NOT INVOLVING SCREENS). Perhaps 12-18 year olds are more likely to get part-time jobs, or to focus more on academic activities.

(Video Games have pretty much been around since 1975)

Data to support your first point:

U.S. fertility first dropped to less than replacement level fertility in 1972,11 and by 2002 had dropped to a record low.19 (Replacement level fertility is 2.1 children per woman because of infant mortality - see terms). During most of the 1970s and 1980s women gave birth to fewer than 2 children on average, a rate insufficient to replace the population. http://www.susps.org/overview/birthrates.html

 

[Fox Chapel Lion II]

C'mon now. By the time these guys get to the bigs, they've selected a sport. The fact that I can name guys off the top of my head that played both sports at an elite level, i.e. in the big league of their sports, makes a strong point. Good athletes generally can do multiple sports pretty well. And by the way, there have been numerous Penn State football players that played other sports at the college level.

Derek Bochna also played baseball at Penn State. Left fielder and cleanup hitter. Let's not even start with the football players who also wrestled.

 

[tgar]

One last thing, and I have enjoyed reading everyone's posts in this thread.

I always encouraged my kids to pursue activities they can enjoy and participate in for the rest of their lives. Someone previously mentioned his son was down to golf, great choice.

My kids road and mountain bike, snowboard, hike and are really amazing fly fishermen which is a passion we all enjoy. My oldest also surfs. We have friends whose children have been into scuba diving since a very young age.

organized sports are great but most drop out or end playing at a very young age. Encourage your kids to pursue other activities as well, ones they can enjoy for a lifetime.

 

[stf110]

Video games? Really? Since nobody else has pointed it out, I will. Video games were invented decades before the cited trend, and not just the video games in the arcade that cost 25 cents per play.

I am lead to agree with you. I think the issue, and others have brought it up, is specialization.

You don't see as many kids lettering in 3-4 sports anymore, because they don't play 3-4 sports anymore. Whichever one they or their parents or coaches deem them "best" in circa 8th grade or so they focus on and drop the others.

 

[kgilbert78]

Derek Bochna also played baseball at Penn State. Left fielder and cleanup hitter. Let's not even start with the football players who also wrestled.

OJ McDuffie too, as I recall.

 

[LTFox14]

Varsity baseball starting in 8th grade no way. Not going to happen anymore. Too much of a skill sport. Soccer you would have to be a really good athlete and even then it would be hard because remember most high school players are at least good athletes so even if this new kid is better how much better are they gonna be? Not enough to make up the years of skill training and soccer IQ that has been attained.
Not to mention kids are able to absorb more at younger age. It is easier for them to learn the younger they are. So starting late the learning curve will be more difficult. As for numbers being down, I would bet the % that play at least 1 sport is higher. The multi sports players are where I would bet the numbers are down. On top of that the side sports are most likely up.
Our school district is likely going to bag their 9th grade football team because not enough players. yet we had 40 plus kids try out for the golf team. Primarily because kids do not want to put the time in to practice to sit on the bench anymore. If they are going to be a backup then they will go to another sport and try that.