Expanding the Sport Specialization vs. Multi-Sport Debate
One of the most debated topics in youth sports is the argument for or against sport specialization. Sport specialization is when a youth athlete trains and competes in one sport year round. Specialization is a relatively new concept in youth sports.
When I played youth sports in the 90s, playing only one sport was almost unheard of. Back then, multi-sport was the norm. Every kid played either 2 or 3 sports, or didn’t play sports at all. I played football in the fall, wrestled in the winter, and ran track in the spring. This was a common combination where I grew up in New Jersey.
Somewhere between when I came of age around 2000 and when my oldest son started playing sports around 2010, this changed. It appears to me that the multi-sport athlete is practically on the way to extinction.
The Sport Specialization Argument
On one hand, those for sports specialization argue that the level of competition for college scholarships is higher than ever. If a youth athlete has any aspirations for college athletics, then year round training is necessary.
What’s more, if the competition is training while your kid is off doing another sport, then your kid is going to fall behind. Furthermore, if they fall behind, then they won’t even have an opportunity to play in the future because they will lose their spot on the team.
So the thinking is that the choice is between specializing or not playing at all.
The Multi-Sport Argument
On the other hand, those who argue for the multi-sport model think more about the health of the youth athletes and less about the competition. By playing multiple sports, a young person is less likely to be the victim of overuse injuries.
In addition, the thinking is that the mental health of multi-sport athletes is better due to less pressure. This also leads to a reduced chance that a kid burns out or quits sports completely.
When it comes to falling behind the competition, advocates of the multi-sport model insist that cross-training through other sports is the real competitive advantage.
The Overlooked Third Option to Specialization and Multi-Sport
I believe making youth sports a binary argument between kids who specialize and kids who play multiple sports is limiting. I believe parents must become open minded to a third option. An option that doesn’t involve sports at all.
Too many children these days are being told that they are either an artist or an athlete. A sports jock or a computer nerd. A book worm or a gym rat. There is no reason that all 12 months of the year need to be devoted to one thing or another.
Artist, computer nerds, and book worms need to exercise just as much as athletes. In like manner, athletes need as much academic and creative stimulation as artist, computer nerds, and book worms.
I think there is an opportunity for athletes who specialize to continue to cross-train in a true “off-season” while they’re “in-season” is something non-sports related. Why can’t a football player take a daily computer class during the winter or spring months. Or a wrestler take acting classes or drumming classes in the fall. This could easily be done in addition to maintaining a balanced exercise and conditioning routine.
The fact of the matter is that young athletes have other interest outside of sports. Parents may be doing their kids an injustice by limiting their options between multiple sports or specialization. Athletic careers are by nature temporary. Therefore, helping sport kids explore passions outside of sports is as important (if not more) as maximizing their chance to compete at the next level.