In the article, "The Case Against High-School Sports" by Amanda Ripley describes High School sports as distractions and they are ruining High School education for the students in the school. The general theme and idea of her argument against High School sports being a distraction is wrong; High School Sports are an outlet for students and give you something to look forward to, they motivate people to work hard on and off the field, and they bring money into your community.
Being a student-athlete in High School, your sport gives you something to look forward to during the day. Everyone has those days where they are just not themselves. Whether you are tired or your head is just not in it, sports give you something to look forward to. It is a way of knowing that soon enough you will be something you love to do. Sports are also an outlet for students who are having a bad day. The reason that there are not a large amount of fighting in schools is because the students who are angry enough to fight let their angry off on the field. Even students who don't play have something to look forward. At the games students can hangout with their friends while they cheer on their friends that are on the field. High School sports are not only a great thing for students who play, but it i also a social event for students who do not play a sport. The author says that there is nothing good about high school sports. This statement is wrong because sports in high school allow students to let of steam and it gives kids something to look forward to at the end of their long, boring school day.
High School sports also help students to be motivated on and off the field. There are rules and regulations that require students to not fail a certain number of classes or they can not play on they specific team. This requires students to work hard to keep good grades or else they can't play. It also motivates students to be good teammates and work hard on the field to win. Athletes want to be on a winning team. You have to work hard to win and sports help you motivate in order to work hard to win. "Football" states Roy Henderson, "cannot be defended in the high school unless it is subordinated, controlled, and made to contribute something definite in the cause of education"(78). Football brings about an unorthodox way of learning. Players have to learn plays in order to win and they need to pass their classes in order to play. They use the way they learn plays and put it into learning the content from their classes. This results in athletes passing their classes and winning games.
Finally, football games bring in money for the town and school which can be used to help the school systems in that town. Football games are very popular Friday night events. The stands hold hundreds of students and parents. Naturally, it will cost you money to get into the games. With hundreds of people at the game; this results in a lot of money for the school. This is a great thing for the education in the schools because a percentage of the money from the football games goes to the school. "Athletics succeeded in distracting not just students", says author Amanda Ripley," but entire communities. As athletic fields became the cultural centers of towns across America, educators became coaches and parents became boosters"(74). The unity of the communities results in towns getting financial aid towards the education in the school systems.
The general topic of the article, " The Case Against High-School Sports", by Amanda Ripley is wrong. High School Sports give students something to look forward to and are an outlet for students, motivate students on and off the field, and bring money into the community.
Ripley, Amanda. "The Case Against High-School Sports." Atlantic Oct. 2013: 72-78. Print.