I agree with williamson's suggestion about "collegiate sports are a way out for poor and working-class students" to an extent. The only reason why I wouldn't agree with his suggestion is because not everyone is in the same position or the same situation. For the ones who are actually struggling with money and trying to find ways to survive than yes it is a way out for them. However, there are athletes who are financially set and don't have to worry about money because their parent's pay for their education if not the school. And these are the one's who are just playing for the love of the game or because it's just something to do to pass the school time. Another reason I wouldn't agree is because not everyone who is poor can play sports or if they can there is no actual guarantee that they are good enough to get in college off of their skills and even if they do get in that doesn't mean that they are good enough to stay on the team and most college coaches probably don't care about the situation of that player.
The bar has been lowered a lot since the past to the present. It's not as true today as it was in the past. Now-a-days it seems as if colleges will take any athlete just because of a certain skill they have and they don't care if they posses any other skills or if they are what's good for the team. Also it would seem as if the generations get smarter as they get younger, which means that they would actually be financially set already and wouldn't have to depend on collegiate sports to survive. There are 19-year-old that have better credit than a lot of adults.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment