Monday, September 30, 2013
Are small college athletics worth it?
Interest in small college athletics has waxed and waned, depending on the school, sport, and number of wins.Students are working year-round not for spending money or because Dad wants them to learn a work ethic with a summer job. They’re working to lessen the load of debt that will be tied to their feet when they leave the commencement stage. And does having “three-year letter winner at Division III university” on a resume have any impact when that former student is looking for a job five years later? Is all of it worth not only the time commitment but the injuries that might bother your for the rest of your life?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What evidence do you have that college athletics wax and wane? What data do you have about injuries?
ReplyDeleteCertainly, athletics used to be part of the "old boys network" and you would get a job because of your participation in athletics or fraternity. Even today, the Rhodes Scholarship (won by President Clinton) looks for students who have participated in athletics in college.
Now that you are in college, you are expected to back up your opinions with facts and data.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/Resources/Latest+News/2011/November/College+sports+participation+rates+continue+upward+trend This has the data that I used, and I was using the data of all division and using their trends. Assuming small colleges are similar because they make up a decent amount of NCAA athletics.
ReplyDelete"In all divisions, the men’s sports (including combined men’s and women’s sports) with the greatest net losses since 1988-89 have been wrestling (-104), tennis (-69), rifle (-47), gymnastics (-37), skiing (-26), fencing (-25) and water polo (-20). Sports with the largest net gains since 1988-89 are indoor track and field (130), lacrosse (115) and cross country (110). Lacrosse and cross country experienced one-year net gains of 18 in 2010-11 alone."