The Instigator
mattcarleo
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
JoshColon35
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Hockey is a better sport than football.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
mattcarleo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/7/2012 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,694 times Debate No: 21805
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

mattcarleo

Pro

In the world of sports, it is clear that there are certain sports that take more athleticism, skill, and fundamentals then other sports. In the argument that hockey is better than football, it is clear that hockey takes more athleticism, skill, and fundamentals than football, overall and in general.
JoshColon35

Con

football is a rich game and is one of the most, if not, the most popular sport there is to play. Given this fact, the atheltism that is used in hockey and football are two completely different skill sets and have nothing to do with eachother. Also, you have to have a fire inside your stomach and the desire to want to be a good football player and be fearless because once an opposing playe senses fear in your eyes thats when you have lost the batte on the field. Thats why not many people are lucky enough to play the game of football because they dont have those traits. Also, you have to be able to react on your feet in a matter of seconds. One false step can be the difference between a good play or a bad one, or a win or a loss for your team.
Debate Round No. 1
mattcarleo

Pro

Given the fact that hockey and football are two different sports, there are still core factors involved in being an "athletic" sports player in order to before at the highest level of any given sport. So, to stay that these are two have nothing to do with each other is correct in one sense, but also incorrect in the other. Such skills such as stamina, endurance, and strength are all key factors to athleticism that all sports players need, regardless of which sports they play. In both hockey and football, endurance and stamina are two very important skills, however, I believe that there is more endurance and stamina needed in hockey then there is in football. For example, in football there is a stoppage of play almost every few seconds after the ball is hiked. During this stoppage of play, players have more time to rest and regain their strength. In hockey, play is constant (unless stopped by the whistle, which indubitably never happens unless a penalty is called). Being that play is constant in hockey, I therefore believe that you need to have better endurance in hockey then you do in football. Also, with the more endurance needed for hockey, stamina is also needed. Stamina is the energy that you have over the entire course of the game which allows you to keep playing. You need a lot of stamina in order to keep playing at a constant rate. You do not need as much stamina for football because play is stopped almost constantly.
JoshColon35

Con

Football and hockey both need a high amount of stamia in order to be successful on the field and on the ice. Football and hockey use a high amount of stamia at different times of a game. For example, a football play of high contact lasts about 4-5 seconds. During that amount of time, because you have to react so quickly on every given play, you lose breath and arent breathing regularly than you might be doing in a different sport. You may get a ten to 20 second break between plays but after that you have to go back to action. To continue that for a long 5-7 drive is very tasking on your body and you need to be mentally tough to do it because the other team is feeling the same way as you are but its who wants it more. With hockey, you have to continue playing about 2 minutes then a new line comes in and you have a long period of breath. So your endurance and stamia are clearly a big part in football as well as hockey and just as important as hockey but are used completely differently.
Debate Round No. 2
mattcarleo

Pro

Again, given they are different, Hockey is still at a more constant rate where that if your constantly sprinting on the ice for minutes at a time, you are clearly more tired as if you were consistently stopping and going on a 5-7 long drive down the the field. There is more stoppage time in a football drive, which usually is just a "3 and done" drive most of the time as opposed to hockey where your sprinting non stop until a goal is scored.

As far as fundamentals are concerned, Hockey is more based on fundamentals then football is. For example, hockey involves skating. Skating is something not everyone can do, especially backwards. Being able to skate, skate well, and backwards are a huge part of hockey which separates a player from being good, and great. Stick and handling skills are also a lot more fundamentally harder then holding a football. Stick skills involve handling the puck well, passing the puck with accuracy, and being able to skate and shift the puck up the ice at the exact same time. Not to mention that while that puck is traveling on the ice, it does not come at you in a fluid, smooth motion. The ice is choppy due to the indentations of the skates from the players over a periods worth of time. The puck begins to bounce, jitter, and jump at you while it is either passed or deflected toward you. Being able to judge and catch that puck on your stick is much harder then catching a football which is thrown at you in a fluid, straight line pass.
JoshColon35

Con

Fundamentally, hockey and football are also completely different. However, you need just as much if not more fundamentals than hockey. You need to have the quickness and agility to change directions in the blink of an eye. Also, you have all that equipment on, helmet, shoulder pads, thigh pads, hip pads, knee pads and be able to move at such a fast rate is very difficult to so. Given that you have all that equipment on, you need to be very fit which leads back to the point of having alot of endurance and stamina to be able to compete at a high level.

As far as popularity goes, football is a way more of a popular sport than hockey. The NHL had a lockout a number of years ago and it took a few years for it to regain its popularity again. The NFL was in a lockout last offseason and once the collective bargaining agreement was settled it was like the NFL didnt lose a beat. The popularity continued to grow and it the highest that its ever been.
Debate Round No. 3
mattcarleo

Pro

Well Josh, on the argument about all the pads and equipment that football players wear, hockey players wear just about the same amount of padding as football players. And wouldn't you say that hockey players need to be very endured and have to change directions at the blink of an eye as well? For example, the puck consistently is either batted or knocked around on the ice multiple times in the matter of a few seconds. So, wouldn't you say, that as a hockey player you need to be ready to change directions as fast as the puck does?

In the argument that football is more popular than hockey, you are right in the sense that hockey stands beneath football in popularity, *in the United States. Football is an American made sport, where as hockey is a Canadian made sport. It is clear that football would be generally more entertaining and popular to the American public then hockey would be. However, internationally, hockey is much more popular then football. So overall, Hockey would win the popularity contest.
JoshColon35

Con

i agree with your point that you need to wear just as much pads as football players and that you need to change directions in a blink of an eye. My argument is that with all of the padding that a football has, you must have the endurance and stamina to keep and also with the change of direction football is a tough sport to deal with. Im not refuting that hockey doesnt have alot of padding as well as football does because they do. But in your previous argument you were refuting that endurance and stamina is tougher in hockey than football and thats not the case.

Now to popularity, i understand that hockey is very popular internationally but we are talking about AMERICA. We are in the United States and talking about AMERICAN sports. If we were in Canada or Russia were hockey is there national pastime then sure hockey is way more popular than football but we arent. This past Super Bowl there was an average of 111.3 million people who watched the superbowl and the past Stanley Cup had an average of 2.88 million viewers. You do the math
Debate Round No. 4
mattcarleo

Pro

Granted that we are in the United States and we are talking about American sports, you did not specify whether or not we were talking about national popularity or international popularity. If you were to have specified, which clearly you did not, then i would have not made that argument further. Wouldn't you have to argue on an international level to begin with? Clearly football is an international sport, so you referencing just one country is irrelevant to me because that does not sum up the larger picture of football's popularity worldwide. Popularity is accumulative, therefore you need to argue in the international sense. If football was isolated merely to the United States, then our discussion as far as our borders are concerned would make more sense.

Just to add, Hockey is overall a more highly respected sport than football. Hockey is featured in our world's olympic games. I do not see football being mentioned at all in the olympic games conversation. Too me, that shows that football is not only less popular as hockey, but also not as respected.

Lastly, talking about NFL football considering it is clear you want to argue about American sports only, with all these new NFL rules and regulations, it seems to me that the game of football is not even fun to watch anymore. With all of those "illegal hit" rules, fines are addressed to players left and right. The game of football was meant to be a physical game, and it seems to me that the NFL wants to take away that aspect. As long as the fines keep coming and these new rules are instituted, NFL football will be reduced to a backyard "two-hand-touch" football game. No one is forced to play NFL football, it is a privilege given to a player from the organization that grants them that time to play.

Also, just to argue more point, the Superbowl may be a more televised and watched event then the Stanley Cup, but are you even considering what the viewers of that event are watching the game for? It has been said that people tend to watch the Superbowl more for the half time show and the commercial ads from the many big name producers of our corporate world today. Clearly there are not many true fans to the sport of football if this is the case.

http://detroit.cbslocal.com...

http://articles.chicagotribune.com...
JoshColon35

Con

Just because hockey is played in the olympic games doesnt mean that football isnt popular. It isnt played the Olympic games because its an American sport and once again we have been arguing AMERICAN popularity. Also the Stanley Cup is televised just as much as the Superbowl but people just dont watch it as much. Have you considered this, that most of the people who play in the NHL are mostly from outside our country? Because of this, it shows that in the US not many people play hockey over football which is why the popularity is down in the US. Internationally hockey is way more popular than football but once again we are talking about the US. I myself am a hockey fan and enjoy the game because of its toughness and athletism it takes to play the game but to say that it is more popular than football isnt a fair judgement.

As for the rule changes that the NFL has been coming too, the league is just trying to limit the amount of head injuries that are causing men to suffer alot of brain damage because of how physical the game of football is. Your right that it is a privelige to play in the NFL but why risk causing life threathing injuries over vicious hits that are completely illegal. To say that it is becoming a "touch football league" it is completely un-jusitfied because these head injuries shouldnt be nessessary and jeopardizing the lives of people. There are plenty of hard LEGAL hits in the NFL that show how physical of a game it is and always will be. Also, most of the rule changes in the NFL are just to protect the quarterback which i might say is something a little childish to the quarterbacks and favoring them a little bit but still doesnt take away from still being the most physical sport.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by bigbee99 3 years ago
bigbee99
Well I see where you both are. Coming from but, even though hockey is a non<x>stop sport, the shifts are only 45 seconds long. Therefore if you are on a normal 22 player hockey team there will be approximately 4 shifts so you cut ally are getting more time to rest in between playing time. You argument is invalid. I completely agree hockey is better though.
Posted by Alfredisimo 4 years ago
Alfredisimo
lol josh im mad how u copied my idea smh
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Yep 4 years ago
Yep
mattcarleoJoshColon35Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Agree with Zaradi, bad debate, sources win
Vote Placed by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
mattcarleoJoshColon35Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had two sources compared to con's none. That's how I vote. Debate wasn't particularly good.