In the article The Case Against High-School Sports, Amanda Ripley argues that high schoolers are cherishing sports rather than focusing on the importance of academics. I personally agree with Ripley's claim in that I believe high school sports have become the main focus when compared to education across the United States and in neighboring countries. Studies show that huge amounts of time and money are being spent on high-school sports in the US while other countries are reporting better high-school-graduation rates than we are. Stated by Ripley, “When I surveyed about 200 former exchange students last year, in cooperation with an international exchange organization called AFS, nine out of 10 foreign students who had lived in the U.S. said that kids here cared more about sports than their peers back home did” (Ripley). I believe that eliminating sports would improve academic performance, bring about future economic benefits, and strengthen school funding.

Paying less attention to high-school sports would definitely improve academic performance within the whole student body. It seems obvious, but school should be a place for people to learn and grow towards success. Additional activities such as clubs and even sports distract one from performing well in school. If sports can …show more content…
Many high-schools spend way too much money on their sports; they then have to cut back on academics to afford sport costs. Coming straight from the article, “Football at Premont cost about $1,300 a player. Math, by contrast, cost just $618 a student” (Ripley). Furthermore, the money being spent on sports can be used towards something academically beneficial to the whole student body. For example, a school could invest in science lab materials for the price of one football season. Additionally, sometimes the cost of one sport season might not be worth it. The results of sports standings is unpredictable and a sport team may not be