Heck and darn—the National Bureau of Economic Research posts a working paper that says we nerds don’t get our revenge in the world of work; the jocks keep winning with bigger paychecks:
This paper compares the careers of Ivy League athletes to those of their non-athlete classmates. Combining team-level information on all Ivy League athletes from 1970 to 2021 with resume data for all Ivy League graduates, we examine both post-graduate education and career choices as well as career outcomes. In terms of industry choice, athletes are far more likely to go into business and Finance related jobs than their non-athlete classmates. In terms of advanced degrees, Ivy League athletes are more likely to get an MBA and to receive it from an elite program, although they are less likely to pursue an M.D., a Ph.D., or an advanced STEM degree. In terms of career outcomes, we find that Ivy League athletes outperform their non-athlete counterparts in the labor market. Athletes attain higher terminal wages and earn cumulatively more than non-athletes over the course of their careers controlling for school, graduation year, major, and first job. In addition, they attain more senior positions in the organizations they join. We also find that athletes from more socioeconomically diverse sports teams and from teams that have lower academic admissions thresholds have higher career outcomes than non-athletes. Collectively, our results suggest that non-academic human capital developed through athletic participation is valued in the labor market and may support the role that prior athletic achievement plays in admissions at elite colleges [Natee Amornsiripanitch, Paul Gompers, George Hu, Will Levinson, and Vladimir Mukharlyamov, “No Revenge for Nerds? Evaluation the Careers of Ivy League Athletes,” abstract to working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research, October 2023].
The authors find the Ivy League athletes they study earn 3.4% more over their careers than their non-athlete counterparts. That differences arises across niche sports like crew, polo, fencing, and sailing and non-niche sports like football and basketball, so higher pay does not appear to be an artifact of prior socioeconomic advantages enjoyed by the well-off kids who might tend to play such niche sports. Sports of all sorts, before and during university, appear to develop interpersonal skills “that are highly valued in the labor market.”
We may defend the nerd flag by pointing out that this paper studies Ivy League graduates, among whom, the authors acknowledge, there are “relatively modest differences in academic achievement prior to college between athletes and non-athletes….” So this study is not saying that the typical jock can sleep through classes and still count on making bank over the typical bookworm. This study is saying that, if you’re good enough to get in to Harvard, the skills you develop throwing or rowing Crimson will boost your earnings even further above those of your fellow pretty smart Ivy Leaguers.
But we can’t avoid the conclusion that this study does say to students seeking to optimize their career outcomes, Hey, nerds! Play ball!
I’ve noticed this for fifty years. Athletes aren’t smarter, cleverer, or more innovative. They’re just taller.
Research is adequate to assert that taller employees rise higher in business.
An extra inch correlates with an estimated $800 in increased annual earnings.
Someone who is 7 inches taller — for example, 6 feet versus 5 feet 5 inches — would be expected to earn $5,525 more per year.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/traversmark/2020/04/16/your-height-has-a-big-impact-on-your-salary-new-research-seeks-to-understand-why/?sh=368351da1071
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/the-financial-perks-of-being-tall/393518/
https://www.livescience.com/5552-taller-people-earn-money.html
We get our revenge. Generally, shorter folks live longer than taller folks.
Jocks are highly competitive, willing to sacrifice immediate positive outcomes for long term reward. Ivy League jocks are also very intelligent. Plus, they are tall and we all know the expectations for tall men always exceed those for the majority of us.
Making money is low information content. Making technical things is very high information content, requires high intelligence, and is very time consuming. Who has time to make money when they’re making things?
Can you see by the comments who’s short and who’s average and who’s tall?
In my 37 years of high school teaching, it is the debaters, theatre students, artists, history comic book creators, novelists who have kept in touch since 1966 and seem to be enjoying their lives rather than the money.
Mr. Walder’s observation is correct…the so-called Nerds are much more appreciative of their education, much more appreciative of people who took their time to establish interest and motivation in students, and who want to stay in contact with teachers. I’m not sure Jocks are any different. I was recently contacted by students who I had taught English, speech, and drama with 50 years ago asking if I would attend their reunion. I was flattered, as I had just briefly passed through their lives and was a young man at the time. I wouldn’t rule Jocks out of this equation but the drama students have a special place in my heart. That they wanted to share a part of their lives with me after 50 years, was humbling. Life is full of wonderful surprises.
P. You are right on. This is a classic ‘Correlation – Causation’ issue. Our society reveres athletes. I do agree they recieve more discipline and coaching which can make them more valuable in a company,
My wife is a kindergarten teacher, tall athletic kids get a ‘genetic admiration’ from the get go, and it pervades through life, coaching or not, regardless of economic class. A genetic inherent bias, like being tall.