[QUOTE=BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed]
You honestly don’t see a difference between raising money (selling lightbulbs or chocolate or crack-- ok, maybe not that last one) for a chess team (suburbs or not) and a basketball team?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t see a difference. Perhaps you could tell us what it is.
The difference is that chess is an intellectual pursuit, and basketball is an athletic one. I am not denying that athletics have their place and teach the people who do them important lessons. That said, I would be happier if schools focused first on student’s minds rather than their bodies. I guess you feel differently, RickJay.
[QUOTE=BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed]
The difference is that chess is an intellectual pursuit, and basketball is an athletic one. I am not denying that athletics have their place and teach the people who do them important lessons. That said, I would be happier if schools focused first on student’s minds rather than their bodies. I guess you feel differently, RickJay.
[/QUOTE]
But you didn’t say anything about it being related to a school. And even then, assuming it is, isn’t the fact that the kid is raising money for a basketball team an indication that the school might be concentrating on academic pursuits? You usually ask students to raise money for EXTRACURRICULAR stuff, not the curricular material.
And of course I feel differently, because I think the implication that a board game is somehow better for people, in or out of school, than a sport, is preposterous. Given the increasing prevalence of kids with enormous fat asses waddling around, it seems to me more encouragement of athletic activity might be a good idea.
Well there are more people who make a living playing basketball than there are people who make a living playing chess, and more people get college scholarships for basketball vs. chess as well. 
[QUOTE=RickJay]
But you didn’t say anything about it being related to a school. And even then, assuming it is, isn’t the fact that the kid is raising money for a basketball team an indication that the school might be concentrating on academic pursuits? You usually ask students to raise money for EXTRACURRICULAR stuff, not the curricular material.
And of course I feel differently, because I think the implication that a board game is somehow better for people, in or out of school, than a sport, is preposterous. Given the increasing prevalence of kids with enormous fat asses waddling around, it seems to me more encouragement of athletic activity might be a good idea.
[/QUOTE]
You’re right, I didn’t notice that it was out of a school setting. That being the case, I think that they are equally worthy of funding. But in your hypothetical, how is the fact that the kid is raising money for basketball an indication that the school focuses on academic pursuits? Because they spend all the money on chess boards instead? Sports are always going to need more funding than something like chess or the math team or whatever. Basketball hoops simply cost more than chess boards.
And calling chess “a board game” is a little disingenuous. I’m not advocating that a school direct funds to the fucking Candy Land Society. Nor am I denying that America has fat kids who need to learn that exercise is important. My point is that I see a deficiency in both academics and exercise in the country, and schools more readily fund sports and hand out scholarships to athletes than to intellectuals. I’d just be happy if there was more of a balance than what I see now.
And Wee Bairn, I hope that what people pay for isn’t the standard of what we should pursue in our lives. At least not in all aspects of our lives. 
[QUOTE=BellRungBookShut-CandleSnuffed]
My point is that I see a deficiency in both academics and exercise in the country, and schools more readily fund sports and hand out scholarships to athletes than to intellectuals.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t believe that. Schools certainly don’t spend more money, on the whole, on athletics than they do on academics; the vast majority of school funding is spent on teachers, classroom facilities, and books and such.
As for scholarships, I don’t buy that side of it either. I think I’d need to see some evidence, to be honest. Athletic scholarships may get the press, but I sincerely doubt they represent more scholarships overall than academic ones.
I’d be willing to go on record as saying that a chess club has more merit than a basketball club, due to the fact that our society has a much healthier and more realistic view of what chess is: it’s a game. Sure, more people go on to make a living by playing basketball than by playing chess, but that number is dwarfed by the number of people who end up screwed because they think they’re going to make a living at basketball, but don’t. Is there anyone in the history of the world who squandered his chance at an education because his life plan was to become a chess star?
[QUOTE=ntucker]
Is there anyone in the history of the world who squandered his chance at an education because his life plan was to become a chess star?
[/QUOTE]
Well, yes, actually. Since you asked.
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
Well, yes, actually. Since you asked.
[/QUOTE]
Ok, that’s one. Perhaps I should ask if there was anyone who squandered their education to become a chess star and didn’t succeed. Please note: if such a person exists, my point still stands: it’s a lot more common with basketball.
[QUOTE=RickJay]
I don’t believe that. Schools certainly don’t spend more money, on the whole, on athletics than they do on academics; the vast majority of school funding is spent on teachers, classroom facilities, and books and such.
As for scholarships, I don’t buy that side of it either. I think I’d need to see some evidence, to be honest. Athletic scholarships may get the press, but I sincerely doubt they represent more scholarships overall than academic ones.
[/QUOTE]
I wasn’t saying that schools spend more money overall on sports. I was talking about extracurriculars in particular. I guess basketball is one of the cheaper indoor sports to fund. And in regard to scholarships, I don’t have evidence either, but would be willing to give even money on the fact that academic scholarships fund less of the total cost that sports ones do. And even leaving that aside, I think the real problem IS the fact that sports scholarships get press. We as a society are encouraging athletics in general over academic achievements. It’s no wonder kids pick up on that and decide that school isn’t so important.
And yes, I realize that last statement is a broad generalization, and no, I don’t have cites for it. I’m not talking about Sally Fancydress from the suburbs, I’m talking about my own experience with low-income area schools (yeah, anecdotes != evidence), and the perceptions I saw in schools there.
And just to make this clear: I do think sports are really important. Granted, I think a lot of them aren’t so useful in achieving exercise and mental discipline goals, and the sports culture can impart negative lessons. However, I think that every kid should have to do some kind of athletic activity, because we are physical beings and we have a lot to learn about ourselves through physicality.
It’s just my perception, and I may well be wrong on this count, that society in the general sense cares more about sports than it does about school. Look at our president for chrissake. I think this filters down to the kids, who are arguably the most impressionable subset of society.
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Pussy. If it’d been me, my horror would have been such that I’d’ve run immediately into the Walmart, found the powertools section and began grinding drill bits into my eye sockets in hopes of clogging my tear ducts before my waterfalls of tears caused dehydration.
(this is why I miss VCO3)
[/QUOTE]
Don’t forget, you’d need a hammer-drill to get through that skull of yours. I don’t think Walmart sells those.