The Instigator
D-Dog
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
sewook123
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Are athletes paid too much

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
sewook123
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/27/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 851 times Debate No: 51079
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

D-Dog

Pro

They don't get paid too much because can you throw a ball down a field for 50 yards
sewook123

Con

I accept.

But I am a bit confused towards Pro's opening statement.
Please clarify.

As Con I am arguing that athletes are not paid too much.
I await Pro's arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
D-Dog

Pro

D-Dog forfeited this round.
sewook123

Con

Please do not instigate a debate if you are not going to put an effort to engage in it.

Since Pro failed to present any of his arguments, I will move on to mine.

1. Dedication
The time, effort and money spent by athletes is stupendous. Professional athletes train for decades, resisting temptations and sacrificing time and money that could have been spent on something more enjoyable.

2. They deserve it
Professional athletes are best players of a certain sports. As the fittest humans to play the sport, they should be awarded. Even nature herself awards the strongest and the fittest species.

I await Pro's rebuttals and arguments and hope that Pro will show some effort into this debate he has created.
Debate Round No. 2
D-Dog

Pro

Firefighter save lives and save peoples live all you do is thrown a ball through a hoop
sewook123

Con

Thank you Pro for your short statement.

I will first rebut the assertion made by Pro.

1. "Fire fighter save lives and save peoples live all you do is thrown a ball through a hoop"
Fire fighters do save lives. However, they do not put in thousands of dollars and spend the majority of their childhood training to be fire fighters like athletes do. Fire fighters only occasionally have to jump into the burning fire while athletes have to play, often dangerous and exhausting sport nearly every day.

Seeing that Pro has not rebutted any of my arguments, I will now proceed to presenting my arguments.

1. Risk
Professional athletes are in risk nearly every day. With the size and talent of contemporary athletes and the extremely rapid pace of game, athletes risk losing their careers every time they play. Despite the years of effort and contribution into their careers, some athletes have their careers ended in an injury. Because of the lack of education, it is difficult for these athletes to find new jobs.

I await Pro's arguments and rebuttals.
Debate Round No. 3
D-Dog

Pro

D-Dog forfeited this round.
sewook123

Con

I await my opponent's rebuttals and arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
D-Dog

Pro

A teacher needs to work 27 yrs and a little more to make a 1/4 of the athletes make. When athlete die kids that decided America's future aren't giving that large amount of money. Anybody can put a ball through a whole but can Kobe or Lebron save a guy's life with surgery but a surgeon can put a ball through.
sewook123

Con

I will first rebut...

1. "A teacher needs to work 27 yrs and a little more to make a 1/4 of the athletes make"

It is evident that Pro has not read my argument from Round 3. Teachers are not in risk of having their careers cut off everyday. Teachers do not have to work 27 years in order to become a teacher. But athletes need to start training at a very early age. Some of the very best athletes are said to have started playing their sports about the same time as they started to walk.

2. "When athlete die kids that decided America's future aren't giving that large amount of money"

I have no idea what Pro's trying to say here...

3. " Anybody can put a ball through a whole but can Kobe or Lebron save a guy's life with surgery but a surgeon can put a ball through"

Horrendous grammar. Anyway, not everyone can put a ball through at the high level as professional athletes do. Also, anyone can technically hold a knife and perform a 'surgery.' Some of the athletes have given hopes for young children. Some athletes actually travel across the country to grant a wish of a dying child. Surgeons may be able to perform some intricate surgery, but they rarely give hope to children as athletes do.

I have defended every points I have made and presented numerous points for Pro to rebut. However, Pro failed to provide a strong refutation nor arguments to substantiate his position.

Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by sewook123 2 years ago
sewook123
Merriam-Webster dictionary defines fit as the following: "suitable for a specified purpose." By this definition, an athlete who is sufficiently adapted is for his or her sport is fit.

"An athlete that is sufficiently adapted to his/her physical requirements in relation to sports specific skills is presumably able to perform with superiority in comparison to the counterpart"
Yes. That is why professional athletes are some of the fittest people to play the port. Even though talent must be present in order for athletes to excel, the majority of factors that comprise a successful athlete is hard work and dedication to the sport. There is no reason why the society shouldn't reward them for this.

" A fit athlete is not necessarily able to optimally perform in comparison to an efficiently adapted athlete"
As shown above fit is synonymous to efficiently adapted. Even if they are different, my point is that because professional athletes are undoubtedly the best people to play the sport, they should be paid accordingly. The better you are at a sport, the higher an athlete is paid.
Posted by intellectuallyprimitive 2 years ago
intellectuallyprimitive
An argument or discussion in which the content is blatantly subjective will most certainly attract dogmatic assertions. This debate specifically contains speculation and non robust arguments of which are hardly compelling for either position. Moreover, the contender stated that athletics involves the 'fittest of humans' to participate in sports. I disagree profoundly. An athlete that is sufficiently adapted to his/her physical requirements in relation to sports specific skills is presumably able to perform with superiority in comparison to the counterpart. A fit athlete is not neccessarily able to optimally perform in comparison to an efficiently adapted athlete. Pardon the lack of a succinct comment.
Posted by HyugaNeji45 2 years ago
HyugaNeji45
I'm confused. Did Pro switch sides in the middle of the debate?
Posted by HyugaNeji45 2 years ago
HyugaNeji45
In my humble opinion, athletes are not paid too much (though their salary is astronomical) I say this because:
1. They often spend the years leading up to professional sports completely unpaid. Imagine this: doing something for six years without getting paid once. Crazy, isn't it?

2. The only reason they get paid such an exorbitant amount is that they have a consistent schedule of matches within their sport, and sometimes have to go a few extra weeks for play-offs and tournaments, and even championships. Throughout all of this, they're forced to abide by the strict rules and regulations of their respective leagues, coaches, and managers. Alas, they are sacrificing copious amounts of leisure time so that they may compete at a professional level whether for the honor of their country, club, or self.

3. As for the case of Olympic athletes, it is only necessary to compensate someone who has devoted their life to a single sport, and have risked their career for the glory of their countrymen.
Posted by JamieForgrieve 2 years ago
JamieForgrieve
Yes
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
D-Dogsewook123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture warrants a loss of conduct. Clear win on arguments. Pro made no rebuttals whatsoever and continued his "ALL YA DO IS THROW A BALL" argument vs nature argument. Obviously, sewook's point of nature is much superior than Pro's contention. Rebuttals were made, hence points to Con.