States have been reluctant, historically, to establish rules and impose mandates on youth sports organizations. But in recent years, some have begun providing substantial public resources and setting up guardrails for young children involved in organized athletics outside of schools. The absence of federal regulation, social upheavals let loose during the pandemic, and persistence of the problems with the American “system” of youth sports—low participation rates in poor communities, an epidemic of overuse injuries in others, and a lack of systematic training or oversight of coaches—have spurred the changes in state behavior.
Three models for organizing local sports
A handful of cities and counties have begun to pay closer attention to how sports in their areas are organized and made available to youth. While not regulating youth sports, some local governments are working to coordinate and rationalize the way sports are offered to children and adolescents in their areas. Others are providing funds to neighborhood youth sports groups. Governments in three communities stand out for their leadership in improving youth sports: Fairfax County, Virginia; Montgomery County, Maryland; and the city of Philadelphia.
The long-awaited Commission report on sports governance is here. What does it say, and what comes next?
Three years after it was authorized, the final report of the group seated by Congress to study the organizations at the center of the Olympic and Paralympic Movement in the United States is now out. The 13-member group took a home run swing. It hit a broken-bat double. Broken bat, because not everything connects. A double, because it sets up a chance to score.
The value of sport system design
The Aspen Institute studied the governance models and ecosystem results in 11 peer countries, with a focus on youth sport participation rates and elite performance – the grassroots and treetops. The countries studied vary in population, geography, culture and forms of government, but all have found success in either youth sports or elite sports, or both.
Olympic and Paralympic commission hears reform ideas
Rewarding National Governing Bodies that best support grassroots sports and tying financial incentives to coach training were among the ideas heard Sept. 6 by an independent commission studying entities that shape the sport ecosystem for 11 million Americans.
The Commission on the State of U.S. Olympics & Paralympics (CSUSOP) was established by Congress in 2020 to study recent reforms after the Larry Nassar sex-abuse scandals and make recommendations for policy changes in governance and oversight of the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee (USOPC) and its affiliated NGBs. After funding delays, the commission began its work in early 2023 and will deliver a final report to Congress and the public in the spring of 2024.
How Norway won all that Olympic gold (again)
Norway has the population of Minnesota. But that that didn’t stop the tiny Scandinavian country from topping the medal standings at the recently completed Beijing Olympics, just as it did in 2018 at the PyeongChang Games. Indeed, this time, its athletes won a record 16 gold medals across six disciplines. The performance burnished Norway’s reputation as having the best sport system in the world, both in elite performance and making a meaningful contribution to communities and its democracy. We invited three architects of Norway’s sport system to share their insights.
Ohio joins New York in allocating cut of sports betting proceeds to youth sports
Following a 2018 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that opened the door for states to legalize sports betting, many have taken the opportunity to do just that. Sports betting is now legal in more than 30 states, 18 of which boast online sports betting, generating new tax revenue for state budgets across the country.
How to bet on the future of youth sports
One of the things we try to do at the Aspen Institute is pump big ideas into the bloodstream, and see what takes. Three years ago, we introduced one not yet ready for playing time, at least in the United States: Use proceeds from legalized sports betting to fund community-based recreation. Take from the treetops — enhanced interest in the results of professional and college sports — to replenish the grassroots and address widening gaps in our sport ecosystem for youth.
Time to rebuild youth sports in America
Over the past generation, youth sports in America has become increasingly privatized and exclusionary. Families with resources often move children into club programs costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year, chasing college athletic scholarships and preferential admission to universities. What we currently lack is equitable youth sports programming that serves children at scale.
The year of sports reform is here
This year, college sports is headed for a rethink, with Congress, states and the Supreme Court all considering efforts to secure the economic rights of athletes, as well as health protections. A federal commission is being formed to develop recommendations on the modern role of the U.S. Olympic movement. The expansion of legalized sports betting and the rise of streaming media will further change consumers’ relationship with the games they watch.
Then there’s the pandemic – the unforeseen disruptor that still has months to play itself out. School-based sports have been especially impacted, with many seasons cancelled or delayed. The grim upside? The loss of activity has heightened awareness of the physical, mental, social, and emotional benefits of playing sports. We’re left to ask: If sports are so great, how do we give every student an opportunity to play when they return in full?
What will youth sports restrictions look like in 2021?
As the coronavirus pandemic continues to spread, many parents are trying to navigate on their own what this means for their child playing sports. Project Play is here to help. While some questions are best answered by public health experts based on local conditions, there are guidelines and best practices that are very useful. We will periodically answer youth sports parents’ questions in this Project Play Parent Mailbag.
NGB Council chair: It’s time for USOPC, NGBs to require youth coach training
How likely is Congress to support a youth sports industry bailout?
More than 400 youth sports organizations supported a letter sent this week to Congress seeking $8.5 billion in relief for anticipated losses from the coronavirus pandemic. Now comes the harder challenge: Finding sponsors in Congress and crafting a viable bill within a fragmented youth sports ecosystem.
Youth sports organizations propose $8.5 billion COVID-19 federal relief fund
How the stimulus bill could help youth sports
NCAA official: Right age for tackle football depends on physical and skill development
Sports & Society Program
Safety concerns have contributed to declines in youth and high school football participation. Today, 63 percent of parents support age restrictions for tackle football, with the majority of moms (63 percent) and dads (58 percent) in favor of setting a starting age, according to a new study by the Seattle Children’s Research Institute.
Last fall, the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program launched Healthy Sport Index – a new tool to help parents, children, and other stakeholders assess the benefits and risks of the 10 most popular high school boys and girls sports. The Healthy Sport Index draws on the best available data and expert analysis to evaluate sports, while recognizing that different kids have different needs, and that each sport offers different benefits and risks.
Not surprisingly, football has the highest injury rate among boys sports and fared low in physical activity at practices. But it also finished first in a survey of high school athletes that measured personal and social skills, cognitive skills, goal setting skills, initiative skills, health skills, and negative experiences. This suggests that football – despite the public’s real concerns about potential longterm brain damage – still provides a social context that is highly important for some athletes.
On April 18, the Aspen Institute will moderate discussions with football experts to explore best practices for high school football health. The discussions are part of the NCAA-sponsored Derek Sheely Conference, honoring the former Frostburg State University football player who died from a traumatic brain injury sustained at practice in 2011. Register here for the free conference. Watch the livestream either live or taped here.
Brian Hainline
In advance of the conference, Sports & Society Program Editorial Director Jon Solomon spoke with NCAA Chief Medical Officer Brian Hainline about the state of football health at all levels. Hainline is also chairman of the Football Development Model Council for USA Football. Below are excerpts from the conversation.
Jon Solomon: When you see high school football players show up on college campuses, what are the predominant health issues you’re finding that universities inherit?
Hainline: One is just overuse injuries, which are common and not specific to football. High school athletes are training year-round and I think there’s just not a deep appreciation for overreach and that there has to be recovery. Another is that some athletes come in and already have in many ways reached their peak of passion, if you will. They’re sort of on that slippery slope of burnout for just having given their all and they’re not ready for the next level.
Solomon: Given these issues, what needs to be done at the high school and youth levels for preventive purposes?
Hainline: It’s something so many of us have been involved in. I don’t think there’s a simple answer. But I wish there was really a whole-hearted investment in the American Development Model (ADM), I like the term, longterm athlete development, because you really have to have a longterm perspective in this. The fundamental shift is getting away from early specialization. Another fundamental shift is there’s plenty of time to get where you need to go and you’re in it for the journey and not for the short-term.
Coaches in this country don’t have a sophisticated sport science background. I’m not saying it’s perfect in other countries, but in other countries to be a coach, you have to be credentialed or certified and it requires a lot of training. Looking at it from another point of view, we’re one of the few countries that doesn’t have a minister of sport. We leave it all to the grassroots level, but there’s not an overarching view in providing all of that. The Amateur Sports Act was supposed to solve all of that with the United States Olympic Committee holding that place, but that never worked out. There was no funding, so every national governing body is left to its own and they’re money-conscious. It’s a complicated issue. It’s societal.
Solomon: You’re now chairing the USA Football council that will oversee implementation of the Football Development Model (FDM). What are the goals for this model and what do you personally hope to see come out of this?
Hainline: The premise is that football is an aggressive, rugged, contact sport. So, from that point of view, it’s in the same category as sports such as ice hockey or soccer or wrestling or men’s lacrosse. These are sports where the body engages with other bodies in a contact or possible collision matter. So, given that and given that the premise of sport is that you want the good to outweigh the risks – and the risks are there for all sports – how do you learn to properly engage your body in the sport of football? What they [the FDM discussions] will not be is, well, is everything flag football or not flag football? Because flag football, when done improperly, carries great risks as well. You have kids diving for flags or this and that.
What’s the best way to engage your body? I don’t have a predetermined answer on what it will be. I think in the ideal world it would be if you’re engaging your body properly, number one, there should be minimal risk of diving or falling or spearing. You have to be lining up your body across somebody else’s body in a manner that makes sense. Number two, the head is not part of what is being lined up. It really is there to think. From that point of view, you’re really trying to minimize any sort of head impact, which is inevitable in every contact collision sport but it can be brought to a minimum.
But I think the challenge for football is how you learn to engage your body properly based on science and emerging consensus.
And finally, the goal is to develop a strong base that is for everyone and then to have athletes that are differential. So, for some people, they just want to play flag football for life, or for others they want to play football for life but it’s more of a modified 7 on 7, and for others, they may be in a developmental pathway where they’re going to play American football at an elite level. It all has all the hallmarks of any ADM. But I think the challenge for football is how you learn to engage your body properly based on science and emerging consensus.
Solomon: This sounds a little different than ice hockey’s ADM, where USA Hockey doesn’t allow checking for kids ages 12 and under. U.S. Soccer banned heading for children ages 10 and under and limits heading in practice for kids ages 11-13. It sounds like youth football will still have a pathway for tackle and a pathway for flag. Am I hearing that correctly?
Hainline: I don’t know. That’s a really open question. For example, if there is a pathway for tackling, does that resemble what we think of as tackling at, say, the NFL or collegiate level? And I suspect that will not be the case. I’m going into this with my own thoughts, but I think it’s more important to learn how to line up with someone and the idea of bringing them down is less important.
Solomon: What are your thoughts on what the right age is for kids to start tackling? (Note: The Sports & Society Program wrote a white paper in 2018 that recommended youth football organizations shift to a standard of flag football before age 14, while also beginning to teach fundamental blocking, tackling, and hitting skills in practice only starting at age 12.)
Hainline: I would compare it to wrestling because it’s is a form of organized tackling, if you will, one-on-one. And it’s not about age so much. Really, it’s about your level of physical development, both from a pubertal point of view and also from a skill development point of view. You don’t have certain types of wrestling techniques in prepubertal kids who aren’t developmentally ready for that.
I think we have to shift the language of what development really means.
I personally think this is where it’s going to get tricky – just assigning a simple age cutoff for tackling in football. When I was 12, I was a scrawny, little kid who could run pretty fast, but then when I realized that there were other 12-year-olds who looked like they were 16, it was a different world and I no longer wanted to compete against those kids. I think we have to shift the language of what development really means. I think that can be done ultimately, but it’s going to take a huge buy-in at a societal level.
Solomon: It was interesting to see Pop Warner recently choosing to eliminate the three-point stance. What did you think of that change? Could we see a day where that might come to high school, college, or the pros?
Hainline: I think it was a very important move. Because when you’re in a three-point stance, the only thing you see ahead of you is someone’s helmet. When you’re talking about youth and the ability to engage, moving from a three-point stance is much more difficult than moving from an upright position where you see everything. So, I applaud Pop Warner for that.
I do suspect that it’s something that’s going to gain momentum. I don’t know to what degree. I think part of that is going to be led by the science, too, because a three-point stance at the Pop Warner level vs. one at the NFL level, I think we need to understand the science of what that means as well.
Solomon: I’m interested in your perspective on the amount of full-contact hitting that should occur at practices. On one hand, some people say dramatically reducing full contact can help reduce concussions or other injuries – at least for skill position players – because you’re not tackling to the ground. Others say they’re not convinced that eliminating tackling reduces the collisions that may lead to long-term brain injuries as long as the offensive linemen, defensive linemen, and linebackers are still unavoidably colliding at the line of scrimmage during drills. What are your thoughts on where science is headed on this question, such as the NCAA’s ongoing CARE Consortium with the Department of Defense that is studying concussions and repetitive head impacts?
Hainline: One of the reasons I’m really thankful that Dartmouth University coach Buddy Teevens is on the [USA Football ADM] council is that he has a lot of insight into that. He didn’t eliminate contact, but he did curtail it and eliminated live tackling. He has a lot of insight. He’s going to bring that to the council.
This is the second year where we’re starting to get much better data about what happens during practice at the line of scrimmage. It’s still not completely analyzed but I think that’s going to drive some of our decision-making, too. I’m really data-driven. I think we have to learn to engage if we’re going to play the sport of football. But I also think we can learn to engage without unnecessary repetitive head impact exposures. That’s the balancing act. I think the data we’re getting on the CARE study will really shed some light on that. We just don’t have enough right now. That being said, in a consensus manner, the NCAA did reduce practice contact in a considerable manner, so much so that the Ivy League had to adjust to our rules because it was more stringent. But I don’t think that’s the end of the discussion.
Solomon: There continue to be questions about the role of strength and conditioning coaches in college football, including the lack of certification standards by the industry. More college players die in off-season conditioning than the combined number from games and practices. We saw it recently when University of Maryland football player Jordan McNair died after a workout and without proper care by the athletic trainers. How does this culture change so offseason workouts shift from performance-based to medical-based?
Hainline: There is going to be an inter-association consensus statement coming out soon and the essence of it is we’re really focusing on what we call transition periods, and we identify those. That’s not just summer to fall. It’s after the winter break, it’s after any sort of injury where you’re off, so you have to acclimatize after every transition period. The work/rest ratio is key and the workouts need to be within the construct of the broad sports medicine framework. And then we’re going to have a checklist for every emergency action plan.
Solomon: I think we too often see football workouts that are built around performance or punitive actions based on the success of the team. Why is it important for strength coaches to practice real exercise science?
Hainline: The strength and conditioning profession grew very, very fast and I think it was seen as a simplistic way to make people tougher. I think that growth occurred more rapidly than sport science-based performance. Performance has as much to do with good health as it does getting stronger. It has as much to do with recovery as anything else.
Jon Solomon is editorial director of the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program. Follow him on Twitter at @JonSolomonAspen. Learn more about youth sports at www.ProjectPlay.us.
Story originally published here.
Reimagining the public value of sports betting
Andre Fountain
In May, the Supreme Court overturned a 25-year old federal law, the Professional Amateur Sports Protection Act (PASPA), that prohibited sports betting in every state except for Nevada. With the legalization of sports betting, states are moving swiftly to explore the opportunity to enter the lucrative industry. Since May, four more states – Delaware, New Jersey, Mississippi, and West Virginia – have introduced this form of gambling. As more states enter the market, an essential question to consider: How can sports betting serve the public interest?
The Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program took on this question to discuss possible solutions by convening experts from gambling, law, politics, professional sports, and health and fitness for our “Future of Sports Betting” conversation on Sept. 14, as part of our Future of Sports conversation series.
During the two-hour discussion at the Fairmont Hotel in Washington, DC the six panelists and two moderators helped to identify a path forward on ways sports betting can reimagine its public value for the good of society. Read coverage by USBETS here, an op-ed by Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program Executive Director Tom Farrey here, and research on other countries’ experience with sports betting here.
Below are highlights from the conversation.
MLB Shares its Position
Now that sports betting can be legalized in all US states, this will have massive effects on professional sports. As a creator of the sporting events that influence gambling, pro sports leagues want a cut of the action through a small “integrity fee” from gambling revenues.
“[The sports betting] industry, is 100 percent entirely reliant on the sports leagues to create the events on which the bet takes,” said Morgan Sword, Major League Baseball senior vice president. “So, we think it’s reasonable that the league that is spending all this money to create the events on which the bets are happening, receive some small compensation from the casino that’s offering the bet.”
Morgan Sword, Keith Whyte, Laila Mintas, and James Kilsby
Sword added that other countries have similar models where the sports leagues are receiving compensation. From MLB’s perspective, “it’s good policy,” Sword said.
Right now, out of the five states that offer sports betting, none pay royalties to the leagues. Despite the 0-for-5 start, Sword remains hopeful that an integrity fee will be granted in other states.
“There’s legitimate arguments on both sides … whether or not legalized sports betting is a good thing, in aggregate, for the country,” Sword said. “It no longer matters what our position is on that, because it’s here. So rather than hand-wringing around whether we are for it or against it, we decided that we would do everything we could to study the countries around the world that offer sports betting and [find out] the absolute best way to do this.”
Central Sports Betting Portal
To ensure the integrity of the games, gaming and sports law attorney Daniel Wallach said there is a need for an integrated integrity sports platform. The platform would be a central portal for information sharing on bets by all of the gambling states.
Such a platform would track possible “match-fixing” and in real-time that would help lead to arrests. Ohio state Senator Bill Coley, president of the National Council of Legislators from Gaming States (NCLGS), agreed in theory about the suggestion, but doesn’t foresee this type of platform being mandated on the federal level. He argued that states could work together to create a portal.
Funding Youth Sports Through Sports Betting
Tom Cove, CEO of the Sports & Fitness Industry Association, made the case that the revenue from sports betting should go towards youth sports and physical fitness. Data show that household income is a major factor in whether children are physically active and play sports.
“We have a public policy imperative and there’s a public policy solution here, and there are many historical and particularly current analogies that suggest that we could take resources from this need,” Cove said. “There is a logical and moral relationship between sports betting and youth sports.”
Norway and China have models of using sports betting and lottery revenue to fund youth sports. In the United States, Colorado uses its lottery revenue to be distributed in three ways – 50 percent goes to the Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund, 40 percent goes to the Conservation Trust Fund, and 10 percent to Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Cove encourages states to develop funding priorities around sports betting and use Norway, China, and Colorado as models.
Aiding Gambling Disorders
Keith Whyte, executive director of the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG), brought a unique perspective to the discussion by focusing on finding solutions to help bettors with gambling problems and prevent new bettors from creating bad habits. Still, Whyte mentioned that NCPG is neutral on legalized gambling and hopes to work with all stakeholders – professional sports leagues, states, and bettors.
Nevada only started receiving public funding in 2005 for problem gambling programs, Whyte said. All those years prior, “the gambling capital in America did not put a single cent of public money into problem gambling programs,” he said. “Most of the states that have legalized so far have followed suit. So, we’ve got a fundamental baseline problem here.”
Like Sword, Whyte is dissatisfied with the pace of legalization to adopt some of the methods that the NCPG is advocating for, but he remains hopeful that some of the populous states will build a strong framework soon.
Mobile Gambling Is the Future
The future of sports betting is in mobile and online, and the casinos ought to get ready. “Online is king,” said Wallach, a gaming and sports law attorney. Wallach said that to maximize revenues, casinos for sports betting must have a mobile and online presence.
Daniel Wallach and Tom Farrey
Right now, New Jersey is leading the market with eight online sportsbooks, and the state expects more to become available. The other states that offer sports betting are following the brick-and-mortar method.
The experience that New Jersey has with online casino gaming over the past five years is helping the state stay ahead of the pack. And the true value of the mobile and online sports betting presence will be its impact after one month of the NFL season.
Professional sports leagues like MLB and the NBA support mobile and online betting too. Sword thinks that such a platform will be good to control and monitor the books since a “paper trail” would now be in an electronic format.
“When you walk into a sportsbook and you make a bet at a window, we have no information about who you are, what other bets you’ve made,” Sword said. “And, when you’ve been making a bet on a mobile phone, we know a lot more than that. And, our ability to combine information, across bettors, across casinos, across states is dramatically improved.”
Dr. Laila Mintas, deputy president of Sportradar US, said it’s very important to have a mobile presence because, “people want to place a bet no matter where they are and whenever they want to do it.” In the UK, around 70 percent of betting is done on mobile. If the US lacks mobile options for bettors, they will continue to wager offshore, Mintas said.
Collective Action Among Key Stakeholders
The NCPG has been in talks with MLB and other pro sports leagues about a possible partnership to combat compulsive gambling. “This could be like the United Way [commercials],” Whyte said. “There could be major league stars saying, ‘Hey, bet with your head, but not over it.’”
Another collaborative effort could be between the leagues and the sports betting operators on the different types of sports betting to include.
“Smaller bets that happen during the course of the game … the first pitch of the game [being] a ball or a strike – that is problematic for us, because it’s very easy for an individual player to manipulate the outcome of that bet and very hard for us to detect,” Sword said.
A sports betting operator offered bets on this year’s Home Run Derby, which was won by Washington Nationals outfielder Bryce Harper over the Chicago Cubs’ Kyle Schwarber. There were some questions on whether Harper’s batting practice pitcher threw some pitches too quickly – and against Home Run Derby rules – in order to catch up and win the contest.
Those who placed a bet on Schwarber became furious and blamed the MLB on social media. “If anyone asked us, we would tell you don’t offer bets on the home run derby,” Sword said. “It’s an exhibition event that’s meant for people to enjoy and have fun.”
Biggest Winners and Losers as Sports Betting Expands
Five years from now, who will be the biggest winners and losers as sports betting expands? Predictions varied across panelists, with the leagues perhaps seen as the biggest winners should sports betting be structured well. Cove, meanwhile, focused on the revenue it could produce for defined public purposes, such as building healthy kids and communities through community sports and recreation.
“States that institute programs to deliver back for the generations in perpetuity, focused on a social good, particularly for physical activity and health of kids [will be a winner],” Cove said.
You can read a full transcript of the event here.
Find the original story published here.
What's next for youth sports?
Let’s start with the end in mind. Ten years from now, the US will host the Summer Olympics in Los Angeles, and two years prior our nation will have hosted the men’s World Cup. By then, sports betting likely will have been legalized in most of the country, generating at minimum $5 billion a year in revenue for states — and perhaps the federal government if it gets involved — to distribute. If the trends of today continue, the sports industry could be twice the size, in revenue if not cultural influence.
Barring major missteps, it’s fair to assume the top of our sports pyramid will be categorized as somewhere between robust and very robust.
The bottom? That’s entirely TBD, depending on how much stakeholders commit to building healthy communities through sports, starting with quality experiences for all children regardless of ZIP code or ability.
There is a great story to be told. But it will take vision, leadership, and systems-level adjustments in the provision of sport opportunities.
The next year will be critical in designing that future, with new chiefs setting new courses at key governing bodies (US Olympic Committee, US Soccer Federation), leagues such as the NBA taking more control of their youth pipelines, the introduction of sports betting in more states, and industry-aligning grassroots efforts via Project Play 2020.
Here are five questions that the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program plans to keep in mind as we help stakeholders identify opportunities:
What are we as a nation trying to achieve here?
There are lots of reasons Americans are drawn to sports. The desire to be entertained. To witness the limits of human physical expression. To have something to talk about with the in-law who annoys you or your neighbor on the other side of political divide. Common cause, even if it’s around something as superficial as a favorite team, has value.
But what people want even more is to live in vibrant communities that foster the well-being of their families. The most desirable communities are active communities with ample bike paths, recreation spaces, and sport activities (both organized and unstructured) for kids through seniors.
Developing more policies and partnerships that place health and inclusion — the core values of Project Play — at the center of our sport system will be essential in aligning the interests of stakeholders and addressing myriad other issues, including the health care crisis.
Who gets defined as an athlete?
One of the key developments of the past year was the National Federation of State High School Associations embracing e-sports. Other traditional sport entities are investing in competitive video gaming as well, and as they chase the dollars, the public will be asked to expand the notion of an athlete to include those whose body movements are largely limited to a few fingers. The argument has been proffered: That’s a couple more fingers than are used in riflery.
That is true, though there are hazards in adjusting our common cultural understanding of sport as activity that involves physical activity. We know that good things happen when bodies are in motion. By the week it seems, the research grows about the physiological, mental, academic, social, and emotional benefits of being active and/or playing sports.
More essential is expanding our scope of the athletes served by key institutions. The US Olympic Committee (USOC) is a critical player. In 1978, the Amateur Sports Act placed the USOC in charge of developing our sport system for athletes at all levels, including youth. Since the 1990s, and increasingly over the past decade, energies have shifted more toward the tippy-top of our sport system in an effort to turn Olympic hopefuls into Olympic stars.
There is a great story to be told. But it will take vision, leadership, and systems-level adjustments in the provision of sport opportunities.
That extreme focus on medals laid the groundwork for the abuses that emerged in USA Gymnastics and which have caused deep soul-searching at the USOC and the sport-specific national governing bodies it oversees. Moving forward, there will be a push to redefine Team USA as inclusive of any athlete playing on any surface anywhere; new USOC CEO Sarah Hirshland has signaled as much in early comments, though what that means practically is to be determined.
What’s the role of schools?
This year B. David Ridpath, a professor of sport business at Ohio University, published Alternative Models of Sports Development in America, in which he examined the model for school sports in the US that has been in place for more than a century. He compared it to the model favored in Europe, in which clubs provide most of the sport development opportunities for youth and schools are focused more exclusively on academics, plus some physical education.
The influence of club sports has grown in the US with some even prohibiting athletes from playing for school sports teams. Ironically, it’s driven by the chase for college athletic scholarships. As that trend marches forward, it presents a nice opportunity to reimagine the role of sports in schools. Given the body of research showing the cognitive and other benefits of physical activity, what school-based models best serve the broadest array of students? How can schools partner with community organizations to share resources? Do we need to rethink the role of the P.E. teacher, from provider of sport experiences to connector to local sport options?
School sport is a treasured American institution. But there’s room for innovation, and we will encourage conversation that inspires solutions.
What’s the role of the federal government?
The United States is one of the few nations in the world without a sports ministry or similarly situated body that can guide, coordinate or facilitate sport development. Some argue this is a good thing, skeptical that the federal government, especially amid the partisan warfare of today, can get anything done that is smart or sustainable.
President Trump is diving in anyway, asking his renamed President’s Council on Sports, Fitness, & Nutrition to develop a national strategy on youth sports. Progress to date has been slow; his nominees to the council, from Bill Belichick to Lou Ferrigno, still were awaiting confirmation as of early September, more than 17 months after Trump took office. The council remains buried within the Department of Health and Human Services, with a small budget and staff. Efforts to raise money from the private sector to support Trump’s agenda are underway.
Time will tell if the marketplace responds, or if Trump can get more done by focusing on the levers that the White House controls. Federal agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention could be tasked to gather better data on sport participation so states can create their own “state of play” reports that will mobilize leaders. Grant criteria across federal agencies could be adjusted to align with youth sports needs. Proposed legislation, infrastructure bills or otherwise, could be reviewed with an eye toward the impact that the language may have on community sports.
How do we pay for it all?
This is a major question — but with a major opportunity before us. That would be legalized sports betting, which the Supreme Court opened the door to in May by ruling that the federal government could no longer prohibit states from authorizing (and taxing) such activity. New Jersey was the first mover, but no less than two dozen states are now taking steps to allow gambling on sports events. Within five years, that market could generate between $3.1 billion and $5.2 billion per year in annual revenue, according to one projection.
In Norway, revenues from sports betting are used to fund community sports and recreation. In 2016, $330 million was pumped back into communities for new projects, from facilities to equipment purchases. The support has played no small part in making Norway one of the most active and healthy nations in the world, with more than its fair share of elite athletes emerging at the top of the pyramid. At the 2018 Winter Games, Norway finished atop the medal count — not bad for a nation of 5.2 million people.
Further inspiration comes from Colorado, which has used lottery revenues to fund recreation projects. There, 24 cents of every dollar spent on the lottery goes back to the state, which since 1992 has generated $3.1 billion to build 900 miles of trails and 1,000 parks, skate parks, pools, and ballfields. The funds have improved facilities at some underfunded schools and preserved more than 700 miles of rivers. Small wonder Colorado has among the nation’s most active citizens and the state is one of the fastest-growing in the nation.
In September, our Future of Sports series put the question on the table of whether US states should use sports betting to fund the base of our sport system. It’s a conversation we’ll stay with as states make their plans.
Tom Farrey is executive director of the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program. On October 16, the Sports & Society Program will host the 2018 Project Play Summit, the nation’s premier gathering of leaders at the intersection of youth, sport, and health.
The original story was published here.
Sports betting in the public interest
This article originally appeared in the Denver Post
Once in a generation, maybe once in a century, an opportunity comes along to deliver on the full promise of sports as a tool of nation-building. Not just entertainment. Not just an opportunity to reflect on our culture. But actual nation-building, meaning the use of sport to develop healthy children and communities, which in turn can help address a range of well-established challenges, from obesity to crime, and mental health to military readiness.
That opportunity is now before us, and I’d like to put it on the table.
It flows from legalized sports betting, which in May the Supreme Court opened the door to in ruling the federal government could no longer prohibit states from authorizing (and taxing) such activity. New Jersey was the first mover, but no less than two dozen states are now taking steps to allow gambling on sports events. Within five years, that market could generate between $3.1 billion and $5.2 billion a year in annual revenue, according to one projection.
The exact locations where such betting may occur, and the types of bets allowed, will be worked out, state by state, in the coming months and years. First in the door with their lobbyists were the casinos, who aim to limit sports betting to their facilities so they can hoard the winnings. Behind them are the professional sports leagues, who argue they need a cut of action — a so-called “integrity fee” — to have the resources to keep gamblers from compromising the results of games.
Within five years, the sports betting market could generate between $3.1 billion and $5.2 billion a year in annual revenue.
Those who lawmakers really should be hearing from are their peers in Norway, who have no vested interest in our policies, just a powerful example to share. With a population of 5.3 million, the westernmost Scandinavian nation is the size of many US states. It’s also among the healthiest nations in the world, which starts with a commitment to get children out of the house. Though Norway is bone cold most of the year that close to the Arctic Circle, most youths are physically active at least 60 minutes daily, according to the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. They engage in a wide range of activities, from cross-country skiing to speed skating, soccer to team handball, and cycling to swimming.
Sports betting helps make all this possible. Along with other forms of gambling, sports betting is legal in Norway, controlled by a government-sanctioned non-profit company, Norsk Tipping. When placing a wager, a bettor is given the option of directing 7 percent of the company’s take to an approved local organization — sport, humanitarian or cultural — of their choice. In 2017, the “Grassroots Share” generated $58 million for such organizations, said spokesman Roar Jodahl.
Then, at the end of each year, Norsk Tipping sends its surplus to the government, which distributes the funds based on a formula determined by Parliament. Currently, sport and recreation groups get 64 percent of those funds, which in 2016 generated $330 million for new projects, most at the community level. Since inception in 1948 when Norsk Tipping was created to finance the rebuilding of the country after World War II, the fund has delivered $6.4 billion (in 2016 value) to sport providers alone, who have used the support to build local facilities, buy equipment, and train their mostly volunteer coaches.
“This is critical to the stability and health of the Norwegian people,” the great Olympic speed skater and humanitarian Johann Olav Koss told me recently.
States would be wise to draw on this model. Americans, like Norwegians, want to live in active, vibrant communities — and most of us understand intuitively the essential role of parks, bike paths, and recreation programs in creating them. Overwhelmingly, parents want their kids involved in organized and unstructured activities that lay the groundwork for healthy lifestyles into adulthood. And right now, that’s just not happening as much it needs to. Fewer than 3 in 10 high school students are physically active daily, and 39.8 percent of adults are obese.
Money alone won’t solve the problem. But as someone who has studied our sport delivery system for two decades, I can assure you that only so much progress can be made without greater investment in the hardware (nearby places to play) and software (better youth coaches, quality P.E. programs) of community recreation, especially in low-income urban and rural areas. In places like Harlem, Buffalo, Detroit, and Mobile County, Alabama, where our Aspen Institute program has landscaped the state of play, we’ve found no lack of desire by kids to play sports or adults who want to help – just a lack of resources to scale the best programs or provide safe places to go between the hours of 3 and 6 pm when parents are still at work. Baltimore had 130 neighborhood rec centers in 1990. Today, there are just 42. Neighborhoods without them have some of the highest crime rates.
Earmarking funds derived from sports betting to get more kids active turns a threat into a clearly articulated opportunity.
For states right now, the argument to legalize sports gambling lacks any defined public purpose. Former Senator Bill Bradley worries that turning every game into a betting opportunity, with the inevitable barrage of related ads, will change our relationship with sports and make it more transactional, less values-driven. So why do it? To prop up failing casinos? Grow franchise values and player salaries? Pump new revenue into a state’s general treasury, for legislators to argue over and spend who-knows-where, from government pensions to road construction?
Earmarking funds derived from sports betting to get more kids active through sports turns a threat into a clearly articulated opportunity. It’s coherent policy, leveraging the top of the sports pyramid – big-time entertainment – to underwrite the base. And we know the potential downstream results. For instance in Western New York, where we’re working, 16 percent of youth are active daily. If that number can be pushed to just half of all youth, the region will have 27,845 fewer overweight and obese children, which, if they stay active, projects to $472 million in direct medical costs saved and $500 million in economic productivity losses averted, according to Johns Hopkins University.
If that’s the value proposition, states should fully if carefully exploit the opportunity. Don’t force bettors to drive to casinos or race tracks to place wagers. Allow it on mobile devices so those who are inclined to bet (I’m not one of them) can do so from sports bars and living rooms. The more revenue derived, the greater chance states have to build healthier communities through sports, as well as develop the resources to limit problem gambling, behavior that certainly could grow. Agree to work only with companies that restrict bets to pro and perhaps college games, and with the leagues to keep game integrity issues from growing.
Then, watch your state flourish, as Colorado has with the aid of lottery revenues dedicated to funding recreation projects. There, 24 cents of every dollar spent on the lottery goes back to the state, which since 1992 has generated $3.1 billion to build 900 miles of trails and 1,000 parks, skate parks, pools, and ballfields. The funds improved facilities at some underfunded schools and preserved more than 700 miles of rivers. Small wonder Colorado has among the nation’s most active citizens, and the state is one of the fastest-growing in the nation.
Any state could take the leap into sports betting, smartly deployed. But I nominate Minnesota. It’s the same size population of Norway. Similar climate. History of investing in community sports. Scandinavian heritage, even. At the 2018 Winter Olympics, Team USA was practically Team Minnesota, whose hockey, curling and ski athletes helped our delegation win 23 medals, fourth-best in the medal count. The nation that finished on top? Norway, which won a record 39.
Amazing what grows at treetops when the grassroots get fed.
Tom Farrey (@TomFarrey) is a journalist and executive director of the Aspen Institute Sports & Society Program. On Sept. 14, the Aspen Institute held panel discussions on the topic titled “Future of Sports Betting: Reimagining its Public Value.” Read the recap and transcript from the event. Learn how
other countries handle sports gambling.
Councilman Brandon Scott: Political pressure is keeping too many youth sports coaches from being properly trained
Too many Baltimore youth coaches use political connections to avoid proper training that could keep more kids active in sports, Baltimore City Councilman Brandon Scott said.
Speaking at the Project Play: Baltimore Huddle in June 2017, Scott called for unifying language in Baltimore that stipulates training and background checks as requirements to be a youth sports coach – whether at a city school or recreation program. Scott recently announced he is running for Maryland lieutenant governor alongside Jim Shea in the Democratic primary for governor.