Throughout history there have been many pairs of brothers, or sisters in professional sports. What is the reasoning behind this? Are these siblings so good because of the genes (nature) they were given or are they good because of the upbringing (nurture) they were given? Many of these questions have come about recently, especially with the emergence of adopted athletes.
There are many athletic families, such as the Mannings http://www.makemyfamilytree.com/articles/manning_football_family.html . Families such as these have been naturally good at sports and have also been nurtured into the same sport. This is a combination of natural talent and nurtured love and knowledge of the game.
Along with families like the mannings, the NCAA has seen many problems in recent history with dominant athletes being adopted. Some people view this as a scandal, or as if the child's adoption had some other meaning besides giving the child a home and loving it. Many of the NCAA's officials viewed these problems as crooks just trying to get money from the child. These rare cases cant actually be simply for the parents' monetary benefit, can they?
Although these do seem peculiar because these children turned out to be world class athletes, it really isnt fair to tell a mother who raised someone for 15 years that she must have only wanted her son to be a star. This seems crazy to me, and also brings up the idea of nature vs. nurture. Some athletes, such as the mannings have been nurtured to love and be great at the sport they play. Others used pure natural ability to make it into the big leagues.