@itz.tiana 1 answer, 0 votes
Well, honestly it truly depends on gender. In certain male sports the competition is brutal, i.e. football, baseball, and basketball. But even if you are a Male in a less mainstream sport like bowling, golf, lacrosse, etc. Even these less talked about sports can be more competitive than if you were a female. Unless of course if the female is active in the "female sports" like soccer, volleyball, softball, and basketball. Another thing to consider is like @Debate MAX mentioned, it's all up to the school. Factors like funding, participation, legacy, and so much more are at play here. But if the athlete has their stats (gender, experience, skill, opportunity, talent, etc.) they can definitely start researching the school's stats (funding, participation, ranking, etc.) for the prospective sport(s). I hope I have answered your questions well and that I wasn't too confusing.
@DebaterMAX3 years ago
Id disagree all sports are equal up until you factor in the institution in. All recruited sports don't care about gender as you are competing for a spot on a non-coed team. Also legacy isn't a factory in recruitment bar being a daughter of Nader.
@itz.tiana3 years ago
Sorry, I should have been more specific. I meant that in some sports males have more competition than in certain female sports based on popularity of the game. For example the pull on males in golf are higher than female golfers. It's also vice versa because the comp in volleyball is higher for females than males since it seems to be a more well known girls sports. Does that make sense, I feel like I'm doing a horrible job at explaining.
@itz.tiana3 years ago
Oh and, by legacy I meant that if the school is more known for its D1 football and not baseball. My apologies I had forgotten about legacy=the fact that your family has gone to a school before.
@DebaterMAX3 years ago [edited]
The issue is besides basketball tennis and possibly golf share the same name AO gender makes no sense
