JC Bradbury has this post on becoming a sports economist and points to reason #2 from Tyler Cowen's advice to "would-be economists:"
2. You could be happy as an academic without much of a research career. Working at a teaching school is a rewarding life, albeit a poor one relative to your investment in human capital.
JC writes:
The second reason seems attractive, but the real life at a teaching institution is a little less glamorous and enjoyable than you think. I always imagined it as something like Hal Hobrook’s school in Creepshow…without the monster under the stairs, of course. Yes, working with undergraduates who are eager to learn and love the subject is very rewarding. But, teaching the same courses over and over can get a little unchallenging. And then there’s academic politics. I know it’s bad everywhere, but imagine what academics do with their time when it’s not devoted to research. The rent seeking is disgusting and endless. Unless you have some sort of research agenda to motivate you, you probably won’t be happy as just a teacher. I planned to be a two, but it wasn’t enough.
Dave Berri is more upbeat about #2
Of course there is more to life than respect of people at top institutions. First of all, the life of a teacher beats the hell out of 99% of jobs out there. So Cowen appears to underestimate option #2.
Let me add that I find teaching to be a terrifically rewarding occupation. As teachers we are trying to move information from our heads into somebody else’s head. That is not simple or easy. But it is definitely rewarding. And if people in typical 9 to 5 jobs saw how college professors worked and lived, I think they would be more than a bit envious.
I had my eyes set on being a #2 - against the advice of some of my undergraduate mentors. But I knew I had a talent for teaching. Once in grad school, I chose my dissertation committee members wisely (I chose the toughest committe I could) and I got a good dissertation for my (and their) efforts. As a result, my outlook on the teaching side of the academy is more Dave-like: I now enjoy doing research and I enjoy writing as part of my job. I also still enjoy teaching.
The things that keep me fresh when it comes to teaching are two-fold. One is that there are many things that interest me. I find that I incorporate many non-sports interests in my principles courses. And while sports economics is becoming well-established as a field, teaching sports economics for me is still a novelty - I'm still playing with its format. Plus, I'm still learning about sports economics and economics in general (an expert who thinks he's/she's done learning is not really an expert). The result is that no two classes covering the same general material are exactly alike. That keeps the teaching side of the ledger interesting.
Secondly, as Dave mentions, there's the satisfaction that comes every semester when you see that lightbulb come on in a student's heads. Don't expect that light to come on in each student's head. It probably won't. But if you look for it, it's there... every semester... and that's a cool thing to see.