Glitz and Glamor of HS Sports

[Cory]

Everything you've mentioned about high school football that you dislike is par for the course here in California, as well as Texas and Florida.

I don't really see a problem with it. Then again, I'm a football fan.

[Jeremiah Johnson]

I guess I'm a little old school but I'm a huge football fan, too. I haven't missed a game in a long time. All of the local stations here have segments for high school football. No big deal. It's news and channel 6, NBC affiliate, has a really great segment that I enjoy watching called "The Highlight Zone," but it's more about the fans than the football and that's probably why I like it the most.

I talked to my girlfriend lastnight about this and she is the manager for the football team. She told me before about the coach winning the tunnel and I thought, "Awesome," then she told me how they were trying to get fireworks and the smoke and I got really annoyed because the money should be put in better places. Then I saw the endzone painted Friday night and thought the money was being wasted. And THEN, they are going to paint more than just the endzones for the homecoming game. I hope this attracts more people but I highly doubt it will. The best way to get people to attend your games is to perform well.

Maybe I've thought about this all the wrong way but I compared this situation to the other schools in their conference and the schools that had to drop away from the conference because of lowering student populations, and the other schools' fields are in utter dismay while Sherrard has a brand new (I can't remember the $$) sports complex.

[skimoose]

Originally Posted by Budda648

This was the most disturbing thing I saw that was added. It outlined the better players standing on the rocks. They were the outstanding stars from last year's season that returned for their senior season. I thought it was overglorifying those players.

That's the problem with the entire American sports scene, at a much too early age athletes with drive and talent are deified. Society too readily treats these athletes as if they are special, and above the status of mere mortals. They are given preferential treatment, and all too often their indiscretions are overlooked or covered up because it "would ruin a promising career". That's why these same athletes become self-absorbed, irresponsible, egomaniacs as professionals. Athletes who refuse to sign an autograph for a child unless they get paid for it, weren't always that way, they were made that way by the way society treats them.

It's also the reason why Dean started FIRST. America needs to put as least as much effort and enthusiasm into science and technology as it does sports, because in the end, its science and technology that made this country great and will keep it a world leader in the future, not sports.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not against sports, and I'm not some geek whose jealous of athletes. I ran competitive cross country and track in high school and played on a couple of adult softball leagues, but my true love is snowboarding. Back in prehistory (1984 & 85) I had the opportunity to race downhill and slalom in the US Open of Snowboarding, and I still recreational race snowboards to this day. I love competition, that's why I joined FIRST!

The point in this thread isn't whether sports are good or bad, but rather hasn't society taken support of sports to a ridiculous level? How many FIRST teams can claim they receive the same level of booster support as their local high school football programs?

I love football, too. Go Vikes!

[Donut]

Originally Posted by skimoose

The point in this thread isn't whether sports are good or bad, but rather hasn't society taken support of sports to a ridiculous level? How many FIRST teams can claim they receive the same level of booster support as their local high school football programs?

One thing we may need to think about in considering this point, is time. Most football programs have been around since their school's inception, and I'm guessing there are some football teams out there that can date back more than 70 years. The oldest FIRST teams still top out at only 16 years, and unlike football teams the majority go to a single competition for 3 days that most of the school is not going to want to drive down to. To see the football team in action, you need but come to the same place you're going every day for school (or to drop your son/daughter off at).

Once (and if) FIRST gets to the level of teams that high school football has, and they can have many local competitions (local as in less than 30 minutes from most teams), it wouldn't surprise me if FIRST teams do start to get that kind of backing.

Of course we'll see how right that statement is in about 35 years, won't we?

[Andrew Blair]

Originally Posted by Donut

One thing we may need to think about in considering this point, is time. Most football programs have been around since their school's inception, and I'm guessing there are some football teams out there that can date back more than 70 years.

Good point. We started in 1921, so ours is 85 years running. Before the 1920's schools were all about baseball. I bet football felt the same way.

[JaneYoung]

In the AISD district in Austin we don't have individual football stadiums with each school. We have centralized stadiums north, south, and central that the AISD schools play in. We have practice/play fields (keyword - fields) at our school for the football, lacrosse, soccer teams.

I think there is always that 'elite' aspect of competition that teams deal with and how each team handles it no matter the competition or level of competition, defines that team. There is an 'i' in elite, there is not an 'i' in team. Keeping things in perspective and balance is something districts have to contend with as well as the schools and the team. We have incredible marching bands in the Austin area that participate in the football half times and they also have competitions they participate in. People go to the games to see the bands as much as they do the game.