The Instigator
rugreater
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
quarterexchange
Pro (for)
Winning
8 Points

Athletic competition on the Highschool level

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/15/2011 Category: Sports
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,359 times Debate No: 16533
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

rugreater

Con

I will argue against (con) private schools competeing athletically against public schools in district tournaments. Pro will argue for private schools competing against public schools in district tournaments.
quarterexchange

Pro

I thank Con for posting a debate in the challenge period.

Seeing as my opponent has made no arguments and does not specifically ask me to make an opening argument, I will take this round as an acceptance round and allow my opponent to begin to argue for his case as to why private schools should not compete athletically against public schools.
Debate Round No. 1
rugreater

Con

I think public schools should not have to compete against private schools in a state sponsored tournament.
Private schools have an unfair advantage because they can recruit students who are more developed in athletic areas by offering them scholarships. Also athletes at public schools must live in a certain district so there is likely to be fewer athletes in a small district as posed to all North America. I see no advantages for the athletes' of public schools. In Addition to the other two points I have made as the economy continues to be horrible and spending on education continues to be cut public schools are directly affected. Facilities will not be updated as needed because there is no money to do this with. Private schools are not affected by the funding cuts
quarterexchange

Pro

Most if not all private schools on the high school level don't offer scholarships to students who posses great athletic ability.

Colleges do, but then this debate would be about "Athletic competition on the High school level.

High schools whether public or private largely have the purpose to education and train students and give them the ability to get a job or go off to college to increase their likelihood of getting a better job.

While sports certainly are important, high schools focus more intently on their academic abilities and will cut any player from athletics who don't perform well academically.

My opponent points out that due to the negative condition of the economy, many public schools will be forced to cut athletics, this is very true.

What my opponent fails to realize is that businesses are also being hurt by the economy as well, and schools that educate students who pay for their education are a business, private schools are a business.

Due to the difficult economic atmosphere many private schools are forced to lower their tuition rates. [1]
Tuition is the main form of income a private school receives, and when private schools have to cut their tuition rates, they being to lose their spending ability just like public schools do when they undergo budget cuts.

Therefore Private schools are also forced to do without programs as well due to their loses in income.

In conclusion

1. My opponent has posted no sources supporting the notion that private schools on the high school level do in fact offer scholarships to athletically gifted students to play at their school and since he has the burden of proof he accepts as being the instigator, this is his part to fulfill.

2. My opponent claims that since public schools have to cut funding extracurricular programs such as sports may suffer. I have made the claim that due to the failing economy, private schools have been forced to cut tuition rates, their funding, meaning their extracurricular programs such as sports will suffer as well and I have posted a source to back this up.

Vote Pro

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
(Private schools are forced to cut tuition fees)
Debate Round No. 2
rugreater

Con

rugreater forfeited this round.
quarterexchange

Pro

My opponent had bad conduct for instigating the debate and forfeiting the final round.

In conclusion.

Highschools on the private level will be effected by the tough economy as well due to the fact that they have to cut tuition rates which I have a source for. This is the equivalent of a public school suffering a budget cut therefore my opponent has no basis to say that public and private schools cannot compete on the basis of funding when both will be equally affected and seeing as he posted no counterargument he agrees.

My opponent claimed that private highschools provide scholarships to athletically gifted students and posted no source to back this claim up and since he was the instigator it was his responsibility to do so.
Therefore the argument that private highschools have an unfair edge on public schools because they provide scholarships to athletically gifted students holds no water.

Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by quarterexchange 6 years ago
quarterexchange
Come on don't bail out on me
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by askbob 5 years ago
askbob
rugreaterquarterexchangeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: jar banned his vote removed
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
rugreaterquarterexchangeTied
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: Well argued by Pro. Conduct for forfeit. Incidentally, public schools are likely to have the advantage of having a larger student body, which yields more jocks ... and, um, jockettes.
Vote Placed by tvellalott 6 years ago
tvellalott
rugreaterquarterexchangeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Con really only made assertions and then forfeited the last round dropping all of Pro's arguments and rebuttals. Arguments and Conduct to Pro.