Death of Three Sport Athlete

[buckley503]

@superjohn, I hear ya. Believe me out here in the burbs it can get pretty ridiculous. The funny thing is the dads that I know that played college sports are for the most part the easiest going on their kids. They know despite all the coaching the kids receive the desire has to come from the individual and every kid is not going to have the same mental makeup.

As a former baseball player at Uconn who realized that there will always be someone better and more committed and know a club baseball coach (only because my son's tuition is my "pay"), you are 100 % correct on the parents who get it and don't get. You can tell pretty quickly who has it and who doesn't but as you say it all comes down to skill, desire, and commitment by the players regardless of the opinions and misguided expectations of a lot of parents.

 

[CL82]

Not exactly undervalued, it's by far the most popular sport in the world.

Yup. 'Underappreciated in the US' would have been a better phrase.

Agree. The point the I was trying to make is that soccer players are well conditioned athletes with good skills that translate well to other sports, including football.

 

[Excalibur]

I would like to add a few comments to this discussion based on my own experience with my youngest son. I will start out by saying something that I KNOW will get a really negative response. If your kid is an exceptional student, but not an exceptional athlete, consider guiding them away from sports entirely. By exceptional student, I mean a kid that will be well within the top half of applicants that get accepted to Ivy and Ivy-level schools. By exceptional athlete I mean a kid that can get recruited to play their top sport at an Ivy or a top academic D3 school like Chicago or Williams.

Here is why. This push to get kids to "specialize" does not apply only to sports. There is a term in current day college admissions called "pointed applicants". It means an applicant that was exceptional and totally "passionate" about something. A recruited athlete is a pointed applicant. A kid that is on the national Science Olympiad or Math Olympiad team is pointed. A nationally ranked ballroom dancer is pointed. You get the point. The top schools are starting to admit that they no longer want well rounded applicants. A kid that is a three sport athlete and is good at all of them but not able to be recruited for any of them is not interesting to colleges. They already have their athletes in the form of their recruited athletes. The schools say that they want well rounded classes, not well rounded applicants. So if your "passion" was sports but you aren't a recruited athlete, you wasted your time from the standpoint of getting into a top school. If your kid wants to play three sports but could be recruited if they "specialized", well, you have a decision to make. Let the kid do what he/she wants or encourage the kid to do what they need to do to get their foot in the door of an elite college. If your kid has no chance at being at least a recruited D3 athlete, but wants to play sports, you have a decision to make. Tell them to dump sports and do something that will get them into a top school or let them do what they want.

This goes for everything a kid does in high school. Gone are the days when schools liked well rounded kids. Now they want well rounded classes full of kids that "specialized" or "focused" in one thing each. Really, what they want is a bunch of kids whose big accomplishments are impressive enough to put into their incoming class profile. Admissions offices are full of virtue signaling narcissists now. The better the school, the worse it is. There are thousands of kids who are the best player on their high school basketball or soccer or baseball or football teams. There are thousands of kids that are team captains. There are thousands of kids that are valedictorians. There are thousands of kids that score at or above a 1550 on their SAT. There are thousands of kids that are student council or class presidents. There are thousands of kids that volunteer hundreds of hours in their communities. Back in the day, a kid that was all of those things was the golden unicorn of applicants. Not many kids are ALL of those things. But, now, they are not interesting. Now you need to have played your instrument at Carnegie Hall or you need to have done published cancer research or you need to have started a million dollar business and so on. If you have done something they can brag about, you can have weaknesses in other areas. Recruited athletes and kids with other "hooks" I haven't even touched on yet can have major weaknesses in other areas.

Advising your children is way more complex than I ever anticipated. The advice you give depends on where they fall academically. It depends on where they fall athletically. It depends on where they fall artistically. It depends on whether or not they can be nationally ranked at SOMETHING. It depends on their level of maturity and self discipline. It depends on their competitiveness. It depends on your family finances. It depends on your family's logistical hurdles. And, oh yeah, it depends on what will make them happy. That last one was what drove a lot of our advice to our kids. Frankly, it is becoming rare and I am not sure it was the right thing to do.

An interesting take, and something to think about. However, I do expect the higher education bubble to eventually burst in this country, to the point where it will be a buyer's (i.e. student's) market. Also, there is a big difference between what will successfully get you into college and what will make you successful when you get out of college.

 

[UConnJim]

Sometimes the parents need to step in. The parents of my son's baseball team wanted their kids to play multiple sports, but the elite teams wanted almost full year commitment or winter practices conflicted with hockey, basketball, ski racing. So, the parents hired a coach and we formed our own AAU team. Practice schedules were set up to avoid other sport conflicts and kids were allowed to miss practices for other sports. Kids and parents are happy. And, we have people asking to join our team because they like the philosophy. As an added bonus, the cost is about 1/3 of a traditional AAU baseball team because there is a lot of profit margin in youth sports and we run it to break even.

 

[Chuck]

For those disenchanted by this discussion, I will add that the travel team that I coach for my 12 year old daughter (7th grade) plays at a pretty competitive level (A flight of north NJ league, but Upstater's team would destroy us). 12 out of our 14 girls play at least one other travel sport (our town is very small so rec is very weak). At least a handful play two other sports including being the star players on those teams (basketball, lacrosse, softball). Even my daughter's best friend who plays at a level like Upstater's daughter also plays basketball with the blessing of her intense coach. My son's soccer team (also 12) is similar with 12 out of 15 playing multiple sports.

So if the parent and/or kid (hopefully the kid is on board) want to specialize, there is no shortage of options, but while they may have to give up the highest level of competition in a sport (which only the best-of-the-best should care about), there are definitely options to still be a muti-sport athlete.

@Paesano's post is equally scary. I've had that argument with friends also. I personally think it's similar to the the driven athlete. If your kid is smart AND loves school, then it's a great thing to reinforce, but if they are crying about all of the work you are pushing on them, it's not right in the long run. Right now I'm happy where my kids are academically, athletically, life in general. They are relatively happy 12 year olds, which isn't always easy. But I know it all gets more serious in a couple years (high school).

 

[QDOG5]

I can speak to this. My son (turning 11 shortly) is a very good soccer player, and could be great if he wanted to play year round. He doesn't. He wants to play basketball (he's decent but small) and baseball (not very good). He's also started running -- 5ks for now but asking about longer races. He understands the consequences but will not cave to pressure and thus will not play on the premier club in our town given their futsal and training requirements during the winter. So he plays at the competitive travel level, where he is the dominant presence and learns valuable lessons about leadership, and still gets to play other sports that he enjoys. He says he'll eventually want to concentrate more on soccer, and I've explained that it will likely be harder to break into the premier level the longer he waits. He gets it, and doesn't care. As far as I'm concerned, if it comes to that, it's the club's loss.

Specialization probably makes sense for about 5% of kids that are truly exceptional at a sport from a young age and that clearly love that one sport. But it's tough to field enough teams with only that 5%, so the people running the teams appeal to parents' egos, and it works.

Good on ya. Your letting your child make his athletic decisions. I would disagree with your assertion that it will be harder for him to join a premier level team later on. If he is talented enough an elite level team will take him. It's cutthroat at the upper levels and the talent pool shallower. The elite teams recruit by winning leagues and tourneys and putting trophies on their website. My friends daughter was an incredible soccer player but ran track in high school too. She stayed with her soccer club that was just a level below the premier teams despite those teams telling her it would hurt her recruiting. She ended up getting multiple D1 soccer offers and played four years at Marquette. If your a excellent athlete teams will find you (Ja Morant excepted). My advice would be to let your son make the decision when he wants to concentrate on one sport.

 

[the Q]

A friend just posted this on Facebook today:

Perfect timing


Christian McCaffrey Says Playing Multiple Sports Is the Best Thing He's Ever Done

 

[upstater]

For those disenchanted by this discussion, I will add that the travel team that I coach for my 12 year old daughter (7th grade) plays at a pretty competitive level (A flight of north NJ league, but Upstater's team would destroy us). 12 out of our 14 girls play at least one other travel sport (our town is very small so rec is very weak). At least a handful play two other sports including being the star players on those teams (basketball, lacrosse, softball). Even my daughter's best friend who plays at a level like Upstater's daughter also plays basketball with the blessing of her intense coach. My son's soccer team (also 12) is similar with 12 out of 15 playing multiple sports.

So if the parent and/or kid (hopefully the kid is on board) want to specialize, there is no shortage of options, but while they may have to give up the highest level of competition in a sport (which only the best-of-the-best should care about), there are definitely options to still be a muti-sport athlete.

@Paesano's post is equally scary. I've had that argument with friends also. I personally think it's similar to the the driven athlete. If your kid is smart AND loves school, then it's a great thing to reinforce, but if they are crying about all of the work you are pushing on them, it's not right in the long run. Right now I'm happy where my kids are academically, athletically, life in general. They are relatively happy 12 year olds, which isn't always easy. But I know it all gets more serious in a couple years (high school).

Your team beat teams that could beat ours, so... you must be a good coach with talented girls.

As for Paesano's post, I would only add as an educator that the most important thing is for your child to truly enjoy learning.

So many obstacles will prevent this from happening. For many exceptional students, they don't enjoy learning. School is a grind. They are good grinders. They get the grades. In AP classes, they have to grind. They get to college, and they have difficulty flipping that switch. With the emphasis on testing and the Common Core, I wonder what's it all for? If you don't want your tuition money wasted, then think about the ways to have your child actually enjoy what they are doing.

 

[Paesano]

An interesting take, and something to think about. However, I do expect the higher education bubble to eventually burst in this country, to the point where it will be a buyer's (i.e. student's) market. Also, there is a big difference between what will successfully get you into college and what will make you successful when you get out of college.

I agree. Where my self doubt creeps in is when I consider the opportunity cost. If a kid loves sports and is at least a decent athlete, well, that has value. And, of course, learning about team work and being physically fit have value. The question I ask myself now is, what was sacrificed for these things? I have a nasty tendency to evaluate every decision I make and this one is no different. Should I have been a tiger parent? It certainly worked for most of them. I don't know. Parenting is a tough gig and no one has all the answers.

 

[Paesano]

Your team beat teams that could beat ours, so... you must be a good coach with talented girls.

As for Paesano's post, I would only add as an educator that the most important thing is for your child to truly enjoy learning.

So many obstacles will prevent this from happening. For many exceptional students, they don't enjoy learning. School is a grind. They are good grinders. They get the grades. In AP classes, they have to grind. They get to college, and they have difficulty flipping that switch. With the emphasis on testing and the Common Core, I wonder what's it all for? If you don't want your tuition money wasted, then think about the ways to have your child actually enjoy what they are doing.

I get what you are saying but what does it mean "to truly enjoy learning"? Every meaningful goal, academically, includes having to take classes you don't enjoy. Getting into top colleges requires a high GPA and doing all the right extracurriculars. That means sacrifice and stress. And that doesn't change when it comes to getting into med school or a good law school or a top PhD program. If you refuse to take classes you don't enjoy and/or you don't do well in them, doors close. Same thing for doing the right extracurriculars. But, if the kid does "the right things", you risk it not being fun and enjoyable anymore.

To me, it is still clear as mud. We all do our best when advising our kids but none of us really know what is best for them.

 

[the Q]

I would like to add a few comments to this discussion based on my own experience with my youngest son. I will start out by saying something that I KNOW will get a really negative response. If your kid is an exceptional student, but not an exceptional athlete, consider guiding them away from sports entirely. By exceptional student, I mean a kid that will be well within the top half of applicants that get accepted to Ivy and Ivy-level schools. By exceptional athlete I mean a kid that can get recruited to play their top sport at an Ivy or a top academic D3 school like Chicago or Williams.

Here is why. This push to get kids to "specialize" does not apply only to sports. There is a term in current day college admissions called "pointed applicants". It means an applicant that was exceptional and totally "passionate" about something. A recruited athlete is a pointed applicant. A kid that is on the national Science Olympiad or Math Olympiad team is pointed. A nationally ranked ballroom dancer is pointed. You get the point. The top schools are starting to admit that they no longer want well rounded applicants. A kid that is a three sport athlete and is good at all of them but not able to be recruited for any of them is not interesting to colleges. They already have their athletes in the form of their recruited athletes. The schools say that they want well rounded classes, not well rounded applicants. So if your "passion" was sports but you aren't a recruited athlete, you wasted your time from the standpoint of getting into a top school. If your kid wants to play three sports but could be recruited if they "specialized", well, you have a decision to make. Let the kid do what he/she wants or encourage the kid to do what they need to do to get their foot in the door of an elite college. If your kid has no chance at being at least a recruited D3 athlete, but wants to play sports, you have a decision to make. Tell them to dump sports and do something that will get them into a top school or let them do what they want.

This goes for everything a kid does in high school. Gone are the days when schools liked well rounded kids. Now they want well rounded classes full of kids that "specialized" or "focused" in one thing each. Really, what they want is a bunch of kids whose big accomplishments are impressive enough to put into their incoming class profile. Admissions offices are full of virtue signaling narcissists now. The better the school, the worse it is. There are thousands of kids who are the best player on their high school basketball or soccer or baseball or football teams. There are thousands of kids that are team captains. There are thousands of kids that are valedictorians. There are thousands of kids that score at or above a 1550 on their SAT. There are thousands of kids that are student council or class presidents. There are thousands of kids that volunteer hundreds of hours in their communities. Back in the day, a kid that was all of those things was the golden unicorn of applicants. Not many kids are ALL of those things. But, now, they are not interesting. Now you need to have played your instrument at Carnegie Hall or you need to have done published cancer research or you need to have started a million dollar business and so on. If you have done something they can brag about, you can have weaknesses in other areas. Recruited athletes and kids with other "hooks" I haven't even touched on yet can have major weaknesses in other areas.

Advising your children is way more complex than I ever anticipated. The advice you give depends on where they fall academically. It depends on where they fall athletically. It depends on where they fall artistically. It depends on whether or not they can be nationally ranked at SOMETHING. It depends on their level of maturity and self discipline. It depends on their competitiveness. It depends on your family finances. It depends on your family's logistical hurdles. And, oh yeah, it depends on what will make them happy. That last one was what drove a lot of our advice to our kids. Frankly, it is becoming rare and I am not sure it was the right thing to do.

I don’t disagree, but still, how many kids can do any of these?

It’s a lot less than you think, otherwise they wouldnt be special

 

[upstater]

I get what you are saying but what does it mean "to truly enjoy learning"? Every meaningful goal, academically, includes having to take classes you don't enjoy. Getting into top colleges requires a high GPA and doing all the right extracurriculars. That means sacrifice and stress. And that doesn't change when it comes to getting into med school or a good law school or a top PhD program. If you refuse to take classes you don't enjoy and/or you don't do well in them, doors close. Same thing for doing the right extracurriculars. But, if the kid does "the right things", you risk it not being fun and enjoyable anymore.

To me, it is still clear as mud. We all do our best when advising our kids but none of us really know what is best for them.

It's plainly obvious to me which kids truly enjoy what they are doing in their majors, or even taking some classes outside them. Our educational system is often organized to make students hate their classes. Even at a younger age, kids can tell the difference. My daughter sees a stark difference between her current school and her previous one.

 

[Fishy]

Our 15-year old daughter is on a USA Swimming team. It's an operation - there are three full-time paid coaches and four or five other part-time coaches. Practice is six days a week, two hours a day. According to team guidelines, swimmers at my daughter's level are expected to attend practice six days a week.

There are two seasons in swimming - short course and long course. Short course runs from late August through the last week of March. Then, there is a one-week break and long course begins and runs until the end of July. It is an 11-month season.

And somewhere in the middle of all that, both boys and girls have a 12-week high school season where they are racing for two programs and practicing with one or the other. There's always friction between the two programs - the coaches all know each other and they are in competition for their swimmers.

It really is more about the adults than it is about the kids. The coaches want more swimmers swimming more days and more meets and paying more fees. Some of the parents have allowed the team culture to become their social lives. Their kids come to every practice because that's when the parents get to hang with their friends.

I am sure a lot of sports are the same, but a good number of swim parents get upset with their kid's progress and they burn a bridge with their current team and move to a new one. And then they do it again and again. We have one parent on our team who drives their two kids 90 minutes to and from practice every day because she alienated every swim program closer to her house.

As parents, it's our job to make sure it doesn't get to be too much for our kid. (She's been in other sports, but actively disliked them - she isn't aggressive by nature and she hated every sport that involved a ball. And she violently dislikes running, which breaks my heart, but whatever.) She tells us if she's tired or if she has too much homework and we'll skip that practice. She generally goes four days a week. Once in a while she'll go five days, but it's much more likely that she goes three. We skip some meets if the travel looks to be more trouble than it's worth - she can't hit school on Monday morning more tired than she was when it ended Friday afternoon.

And then we bail out before the end of long course. The long course championships are at the end of July - she prefers going to her grandparents house at the Cape the second school ends in June, so she skips them. Her friends are stuck spending the first five weeks of their summer vacation getting up at 6 am for swim practice - that strikes us as nuts.

 

[intlzncster]

Our 15-year old daughter is on a USA Swimming team. It's an operation - there are three full-time paid coaches and four or five other part-time coaches. Practice is six days a week, two hours a day. According to team guidelines, swimmers at my daughter's level are expected to attend practice six days a week.

There are two seasons in swimming - short course and long course. Short course runs from late August through the last week of March. Then, there is a one-week break and long course begins and runs until the end of July. It is an 11-month season.

And somewhere in the middle of all that, both boys and girls have a 12-week high school season where they are racing for two programs and practicing with one or the other. There's always friction between the two programs - the coaches all know each other and they are in competition for their swimmers.

It really is more about the adults than it is about the kids. The coaches want more swimmers swimming more days and more meets and paying more fees. Some of the parents have allowed the team culture to become their social lives. Their kids come to every practice because that's when the parents get to hang with their friends.

I am sure a lot of sports are the same, but a good number of swim parents get upset with their kid's progress and they burn a bridge with their current team and move to a new one. And then they do it again and again. We have one parent on our team who drives their two kids 90 minutes to and from practice every day because she alienated every swim program closer to her house.

Absolutely not a shot at you or your daughter, but this whole setup is psychotic.

And this is coming from a sports (doing) nut.

 

[Fishy]

It all depends on the sport. We get this talk often about premature specialization. But my answer is, what if your kid plays one sport and is also into a bunch of other things (not sports)? You can't do everything. She's not going to play more than one sport just for the physical benefits when she could be doing other things she loves. The multisport push assumes athletes will only do athletic extracurriculars and not other things.

About soccer--our club season begins right after school soccer (November) and goes until late June. She has 2 months off, then begins school soccer. Overall that's 10 months a year.

That is kind of how I look it with our daughter.

She doesn't like sports outside of swimming. She doesn't need to be shoehorned into another structured environment.

But she does need time to be a 15-year old.

 

[Fishy]

Absolutely not a shot at you or your daughter, but this whole setup is psychotic.

And this is coming from a sports (doing) nut.

It is.

You absolutely have to manage it because it is trying to manage you.

The saving grace is that the nature of swimming tends to weed kids out who aren't strong-willed. The practices are very hard and the kids are in constant competition even with their teammates. The kids who stick with it tend to be the kids who won't mind telling their parents when enough is enough.

 

[Fishy]

You know how doctors predict how tall your kid is going to be? They look at the size of the parents.

Do you have kids because that is absolutely not how they do it.

 

[superjohn]

Do you have kids because that is absolutely not how they do it.

You missed the point. The point is what the doctor is telling you is mostly nonsense, my dad was a doctor. They can keep tabs on if you're growing normally but telling a kid how tall he's going to be is basically an educated guess based off of the parents.

 

[Excalibur]

That is kind of how I look it with our daughter.

She doesn't like sports outside of swimming. She doesn't need to be shoehorned into another structured environment.

But she does need time to be a 15-year old.

15 is one thing. 9-10 is quite another. And that's when the pressure begins.

 

[Fishy]

You missed the point. The point is what the doctor is telling you is mostly nonsense, my dad was a doctor. They can keep tabs on if you're growing normally but telling a kid how tall he's going to be is basically an educated guess based off of the parents.

Perhaps that's what your dad did, but as a parent who has actually seen what they do to determine how tall your kid is going to be, you're not correct.

 

[superjohn]

Perhaps that's what your dad did, but as a parent who has actually seen what they do to determine how tall your kid is going to be, you're not correct.

Lol, okay believe what you want to believe. My dad wasn't a pediatrician so he didn't have to play along with gullible parents like yourself but I'm telling you the truth. Height of the parents is abolutely the best predictor of height, if your pediatrician is telling you differently you should probably get a new one.

 

[Towney007]

7% of high school athletes play college sports. Less than 2% play D1.

So.

Probably advisable you figure something else for your kid to do with their rest of their life. Not that playing at a high level can't happen or that he wouldn't enjoy it. But it's just not likely to happen.

And pro sports shouldn't be on anyone's radar until they show up at your door - and I mean by your door - your actual door.

 

[Chuck]

It is.

You absolutely have to manage it because it is trying to manage you.

The saving grace is that the nature of swimming tends to weed kids out who aren't strong-willed. The practices are very hard and the kids are in constant competition even with their teammates. The kids who stick with it tend to be the kids who won't mind telling their parents when enough is enough.

I, like most Americans, watch swimming every four years during the Olympics. I noticed the recent announcement that Missy Franklin retired at the age of 23. It seems like a sport that takes tremendous ability and sacrifice, but typically spits you out at an early age and with limited financial benefit for most. According to the web (which I always trust), Missy is worth about $3mm. That's awesome for a 23 year old. She also got a free Cal education, which is equally awesome. But I think of her as being one of the best women swimmers ever for her prime.

I've always found it intersecting what sport a top athlete chooses (or is it the sport that chooses the athlete). Women, on the whole, don't make a lot of money in sports, but look at the men's side. Would the best lacrosse player, or a great swimmer that's not Michael Phelps, be able to play a different sport professionally and make more money for a longer period of time? And the luck of some athletes that excel at a sport that happens to be more profitable than others. If Naismith hadn't invented basketball, Lebron James would still be the best at some sport, but would some of the lanky basketball players?

 

[the Q]

7% of high school athletes play college sports. Less than 2% play D1.

So.

Probably advisable you figure something else for your kid to do with their rest of their life. Not that playing at a high level can't happen or that he wouldn't enjoy it. But it's just not likely to happen.

And pro sports shouldn't be on anyone's radar until they show up at your door - and I mean by your door - your actual door.

I agree.

I think sports are the best way for kids to learn life lessons. So in one sense, I think all kids would benefit from playing some kind of sport. Just the lessons on discipline, time management, and dealing with set backs/losses can only help when you reach adulthood.

But that doesn’t mean parents should be mortgaging everyone’s futures on them making it. The money thrown around for all these travel teams is insane

 

[Paesano]

It's plainly obvious to me which kids truly enjoy what they are doing in their majors, or even taking some classes outside them. Our educational system is often organized to make students hate their classes. Even at a younger age, kids can tell the difference. My daughter sees a stark difference between her current school and her previous one.

Sure but they don't just need to take classes in their major. You have situations where kids are taking required classes that they will probably never use in their prospective careers. My son is Psych and Pre-med. He loves his psych classes. He hated general chemistry but that is required for pre-med. There won't be much need for general chem in his career as a doctor (if he ends up there) but he has to do well in it because it is required and his GPA matters. Same for physics. He likes that a bit more. Same for biology but that is more relevant and he likes it. And then you have calculus. I doubt he will ever use that but he actually does like it. So, some classes are required even if they have limited relevance and the kids have to do well in them, even if they don't like those classes. In those cases, you have a limited love for learning the subject matter AND you have the stress of needing to maintain a high GPA which, let's face it, isn't much fun either.

I guess the point is, getting to do something you love, long term, often involves not always loving what you are doing short term.

 

[Paesano]

I don’t disagree, but still, how many kids can do any of these?

It’s a lot less than you think, otherwise they wouldnt be special

You are correct. I was just throwing this out there in case it could help any parents in the same boat. Admissions at top schools is insane and upside down these days and only getting worse.

 

[dennismenace]

There have been some great athletes who excelled in many sports. Gene Conley for one who played MLB and NBA. I wasn't a big Dave Winfield fan when the Yankees had him but he was quite an athlete. Just wished someone that intelligent would have learned to hit to all fields. He kept trying to pull those low and outside pitches. Here is a little article on him as a college athlete.

Drafted by four teams in three sports

 

[intlzncster]

7% of high school athletes play college sports. Less than 2% play D1.
So.
Probably advisable you figure something else for your kid to do with their rest of their life. Not that playing at a high level can't happen or that he wouldn't enjoy it. But it's just not likely to happen.

There's a lot of really good things that come out of a kid playing sports competitively. Not just for the hell of it. Teaches you all kinds of important life lessons, about competitiveness, team work, comradery, sportsmanship (class and empathy), how to lose, how to win, etc.

You don't really learn those lessons just messing around with team sports for the hell of it.

Not to mention all the physical benefits and hopefully lifelong health/fitness habits.

And pro sports shouldn't be on anyone's radar until they show up at your door - and I mean by your door - your actual door.

Perhaps. But with that mindset, no one would be professionals. It's the kids who are so driven that's all they do since they're like 5 years old that have a shot to make it. Those kids with some kind of innate talent are the ones who make it. Their needs to be (a lot more) losers to separate the wheat from the chaff.

 

[Fishy]

Lol, okay believe what you want to believe. My dad wasn't a pediatrician so he didn't have to play along with gullible parents like yourself but I'm telling you the truth. Height of the parents is abolutely the best predictor of height, if your pediatrician is telling you differently you should probably get a new one.

Since you don't have kids and really have no frame of reference or hint of experience, you should be aware that unless you want to start playing with endocrinologists, doctors are not able to sell you growth packs to raise or lower your child's height. It's not an instance where "gullible" comes into play - this is not a used car lot.

They don't actually care how tall your kid will be other than making sure the kid isn't experiencing some sort of issue. And they don't wing it by eyeballing mom and dad.

What they do is take periodic x-rays of the kid's hand and then look at the growth plates. With that, they get the bone age and they're able to tell roughly how much growing a kid has left in them. By doing that, our doctor was able to tell us that our daughter would land at about 5'2". She's now 15, done growing and she is...5'2".

Spoilers - she's shorter than her mom and a foot shorter than her dad.

 

[Fishy]

I, like most Americans, watch swimming every four years during the Olympics. I noticed the recent announcement that Missy Franklin retired at the age of 23. It seems like a sport that takes tremendous ability and sacrifice, but typically spits you out at an early age and with limited financial benefit for most. According to the web (which I always trust), Missy is worth about $3mm. That's awesome for a 23 year old. She also got a free Cal education, which is equally awesome. But I think of her as being one of the best women swimmers ever for her prime.

I've always found it intersecting what sport a top athlete chooses (or is it the sport that chooses the athlete). Women, on the whole, don't make a lot of money in sports, but look at the men's side. Would the best lacrosse player, or a great swimmer that's not Michael Phelps, be able to play a different sport professionally and make more money for a longer period of time? And the luck of some athletes that excel at a sport that happens to be more profitable than others. If Naismith hadn't invented basketball, Lebron James would still be the best at some sport, but would some of the lanky basketball players?

She actually could have made significantly more money, but she opted for college instead of turning pro. Unfortunately, she probably started to decline after that - she got injured, her results suffered, etc.

It can be a really hard sport for girls. Their bodies just change so much and can have a huge effect on their swimming - there are girls on our team that were final heat swimmers a few years ago and now they're going home after the morning session of trials and finals meets. It's hard to watch - they're still working just as hard, but their bodies are not cooperating.

Boys, on the other hand, become monsters as soon as they start growing. At the earlier ages, some of the girls cuts for championship meets are actually faster than boys cuts - once they hit the 15 and over open class, though, the boys are way, way ahead.