Is pay to play the only way?
Let’s first get something out of the way. Our current youth sports system in the United States is not working properly. I don’t want to say it’s broken, but it isn’t working for a large portion of our youth. The pay to play model that permeates basketball, soccer, volleyball, football and other sports doesn’t allow for most youth to sustainably access it, plain and simple. We’ve turned our youth sports system into a business, one that some could argue focuses more on the financial aspect than on the personal and athletic development of the athletes themselves. I recently attended the United Soccer Coaches Conference and a couple of things jumped out to me.
Many coaches talked about the business side of the sport, with many speaking to the challenge of families paying the necessary dues to participate.
There was a conspicuous absence of community based programs present. The majority of the conference was focused on youth clubs, high school coaches, and college teams.
I didn’t hear a ton of discussion on alternatives to the current youth development model- though interest by some parties seemed to be present.
With these things in mind, it got me thinking about why there weren’t more conversations about this model and why it’s not working. I don’t want it to seem like conversations weren’t had about how we can adapt the model, find alternatives or get rid of it altogether, because there were; but in my opinion, it wasn’t enough.
Is there room for a version of the pay to play model? Yes. Is there also room for more robust alternatives? Yes.
What is the pay to play model? Essentially, in order to participate on a team or join a club, families must pay a fee. These clubs then host practices, join leagues, and play in tournaments; year round in many cases. Youth sports is now more than a $17 billion industry in the United States, which makes it about the same size as the National Football League. In 2017, according to the Aspen Institute, the percentage of kids participating in these youth sports leagues declined to about 37%, which is a terribly low number and one that tells us very clearly that we are not reaching youth in the right ways. When you dive into the numbers further, we see that for wealthy families, participation is actually increasing. This tells us that youth sports is mainly accessible for those that can afford it, which is not the majority of the population. It’s a bigger conversation then simply youth sports participation, it’s a conversation about the inequality that exist in our communities.
There are a few things that I think we can all agree on:
Playing sports is a great way for youth to develop healthy habits.
Sport teaches us life lessons that go beyond just the technical and tactical side of the sport.
Exercise is vitally important for our youth.
If we can agree that sports are beneficial, then why are we allowing a system to be used that only allows some youth to access it? We simply cannot take the stance that sports are for the wealthy and those that can’t afford it must find some type of alternative. We know that kids play sports because they want to have fun and they enjoy playing with their friends. When we create an unequal system that only allows some to access it, we often put those top two reasons for participation in jeopardy by breaking up the community into the wealthy who play sports and the poor who don’t. That can’t continue. Sports are often a way that youth learn to socialize, learn to communicate, and learn to work together with others. An Atlantic article from 2018 discusses the dangers of this inequality.
The article discusses the idea that wealthy parents, without ill intentions or desire to harm others, are helping to widen the inequality that exists in the community through the money they spend on their kids schooling, athletics, and employment. We can’t fault any parent for wanting the best for their kids and it’s a difficult discussion to have with parents on how to spend their money, but we have to start thinking about the greater good of the community as a whole and athletics provide us with a wonderful opportunity to bring people together and help create dialogue on important issues; if we would simply stop utilizing a system that helps widen the inequality and social barriers that exist in many of our communities. Our youth sports system is leaving kids and their parents behind and we can’t allow for it to continue.
It’s not just our youth sports system that is the problem. Parents place kids in sports because it’s one way that we are told they can get into college. Our university system encourages families to invest a lot of money into sports because they may have the opportunity to play in school and get an education. In theory this would be fine, except for the fact that the youth system has moved towards one where club and traveling teams are where many elite athletes are coming from and getting those University opportunities; but those club and travel teams, as we’ve discussed, aren’t equally accessible; creating a cycle that we won’t be able to get out of without changes being made to our entire system.
People will argue that many people still make it to college and professional leagues without coming from wealthy families and we often hear these stories. They are always great to hear, but the problem is that while there are some amazing stories, we are still leaving behind a large portion of our youth and for every one who does make it through, 10,000 didn’t (this is hyperbole, not an actual figure). We can’t allow for a system that doesn’t create opportunities for everyone. “Socialism” is a hot button topic in the world, but in youth sports, we have to be much more egalitarian and create a system that allows everyone to have the same opportunity. The Atlantic article gave us one such example that has proven to work well at engaging all youth in athletics (text taken from the Atlantic article).
Norway: The national lottery, which is run by a government-owned company called Norsk Tipping, spends most of its profit on national sports and funnels hundreds of millions of dollars to youth athletic clubs every year. Parents don’t need to shell out thousands to make sure their kids get to play. And play is an operative word: Norwegian leagues value participation over competition so much that clubs with athletes below the age of 13 cannot even publish game scores. Remarkably, teams that release their scores online can face expulsion from the Norwegian confederation of sports.
If Norway can do it, why can’t the U.S. youth sports system do some version of this? The answer is we can, but will we? With $17 billion reasons not to, it’s hard to have faith, but the conversations have to happen to discuss the viability of alternative options to supplement the pay to play version of our current model. No child should be left behind or lack the opportunity to play sports simply because the cost is prohibitive. The benefits of athletic participation are far too high for us to ignore the facts and continue on with the status quo that benefits only a portion of our community. Encouraging free play is one way we can start getting kids more active and that’s something we are going to talk about in future posts.
It’s now 2020 and it’s time for us to realize that we are not doing nearly enough and I, for one, am going to do all I can to help create dialogue, connect people who can make changes, and engage the community in positive conversation.
What ideas do you all have?