The Instigator
StaticG64
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Blade-of-Truth
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Is football to dangerous for children?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 3 votes the winner is...
Blade-of-Truth
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2015 Category: Sports
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 992 times Debate No: 70990
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

StaticG64

Pro

Is Football to dangerous for children? I don't really know the answer for this being a football player myself, but children are suffering from severe brain injuries/concussions and they are getting horrible injuries. But the Bright side about this is that they get to experience the glory of winning the championships or getting a trophy. so this debate is kind of on a half and half vote but i am going to leave the voting to you guys.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

I accept the debate, and as Con will be arguing that football is not too dangerous for children.

Please begin Pro, and best of luck!
Debate Round No. 1
StaticG64

Pro

StaticG64 forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

My opponent, Pro, has forfeited Round 2.

Since this is a 5 round debate, I will extend the opportunity once more for Pro to begin.

I thank the audience for your patience.
Debate Round No. 2
StaticG64

Pro

StaticG64 forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

My opponent, Pro, has forfeited Round 3.

Since this is a 5-round debate, I will extend the opportunity only once more for Pro to begin. That way, at-least he'll have a fair chance at rebuttals.

Should Pro forfeit the next round, I will begin with my arguments immediately.

I thank the audience, once more, for their continued patience.
Debate Round No. 3
StaticG64

Pro

StaticG64 forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

It's more than apparent that Pro has already lost this debate, and the fact that he hasn't even been back online in 2 weeks truly angers me, as now all the fun of debate is thrown out the window with his lack of participation.

Regardless, I will present my own arguments which will serve to negate his position on the given resolution.

Arguments

I. Protective Gear

The most immediate issue that I could see Pro taking would be the injuries children may potentially acquire while participating in contact sports such as American Football. However, there are numerous ways in which the child can be adequately and fully protected from these potential dangers in the form of protective gear.

For instance, if we take a look at the shopping center known as Dick's Sporting Goods, we can see that they offer a wide variety of protective gear such as:

-Gloves
-Helmets
-Shoulder Pads
-Cleats
-Rib Protection
-Padded Pants
-Girdles
-Arm Pads
-Mouth Guards
-Neck Rolls
-Cups

all of which can be seen here: http://www.dickssportinggoods.com...

This goes above and beyond what is required in Professional Football, and thus is catering specifically to our youth. Clearly there is added protection that is allowed in the youth leagues which only serves to better protect our children rather than harm them.

II. Active lifestyle = Healthy lifestyle

I don't believe it is necessary to show how being active can lead to a healthier lifestyle, as this has already been proven by the health conscious community and is now accepted as a truism. What I need to do is remind the audience that by having your child active in sports, in this case American Football, you are promoting and allowing your child to have a healthy lifestyle by letting them be active in a sport.

It goes beyond this though, because in any sport there comes a need to perform exercises, drills, and pushing ones own body to their limit. The way muscles work is that once you hit their peak, they start tearing down and rebuilding to meet the necessary needs of the body. For instance, if I tried to lift a 50 pound bag of sand, but am not able to do it, what I would need to do is start lifting lighter bags of sand until my muscles catch up to the demand I am placing on them. Eventually, my muscles will have torn down and rebuilt enough times, that I would be able to lift the 50 pound bag of sand. This is evident in anyone who lifts weights, as within a few weeks they will find themselves able to lift more weight than they were originally able to back when they first started.

The same goes for youth playing football. By participating in this contact activity, they are causing their bodies to reshape themselves into better form. Clearly, having a stronger body is more beneficial than having one that remains stagnant during the key development years of youth. Not only does having a stronger or fitter body pay off in the long-run, but it allows children to develop the habit of an active lifestyle, which promotes good health across the board.

III. The importance of teamwork

An additional benefit to participating in sports of any nature where teams are involved is the fundamental lesson of working successfully with others towards a common goal. This is a key stage in the development of any successful human, as by nature we are animals of a herd mentality and constantly find ourselves working with others in the real world. If we take an anti-social youth who had minimal interaction with others while growing up, compared to the social youth who learned the mechanisms of working with others at a young age, and tossed them both in the world of grown-ups, who'd be the one more likely to achieve success? Most likely, it'd be the one who developed social skills. The reason being that in nearly every career or facet of adult-life, we are working with others in some way, shape, or form. Be it a employer - employee dynamic, or serving on a local council.

By being a part of a team during youth, the child has the clear benefit of learning to work with others in a productive way at an early stage of his or her life.

In closing,

I've now presented three arguments which serve to uphold my position within this debate.

It is my hope that my opponent will at-least return for the last round.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
StaticG64

Pro

StaticG64 forfeited this round.
Blade-of-Truth

Con

My opponent has unfortunately forfeited the final round.

I extend all arguments as they currently remain standing unchallenged.

For this reason, as well as the fact that Pro forfeited this entire debate, I urge a vote for Con.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Dang, it does look like he's inactive now. I def wasn't hoping for that... now it's just too easy which ruins the whole fun part.

As for skill levels, I try to hold back judgement, because as I said, I once was a noob here too - yet beat everyone who came at me. For all I know, he could have been highly knowledgeable in football and the injuries and could have presented a strong morality case for protecting youths. Additionally, he's done no debates - if you look at my very first debate I partook in (it was the church one even though there's one that is listed before it due to it finishing first) you'll see that even as a noob, I was somewhat good. I doubt my opponent expected it when he saw that someone who was 0-0 accepted his debate. That's the point I'm trying to get across, it's not like Pro is 0-6 or something shitty like that, he is untested, so I have no idea what his skill levels could be. Assuming that someone is bad just because they have no record is silly.

What I saw when accepting this debate was a chance to have some fun with a topic I've never debated before. If I wanted to noob-snipe I'd just accept 1 round debates and pull the Burden of Proof card. Doing that isn't fun for me though, I like discussing/debating things with people, regardless of their skill level. For me, it's an exercise in discovering my own capabilities. Can I hold my own in football debates? Idk, let's find out! That's what I was thinking when I accepted the debate.

Lastly, in regards to clarification, idk what sort of clarification you think was needed. Maybe it's just because I've done more debates and can see what the root issue is in resolutions of this nature, but for me, I think it's pretty clear - he took aff meaning he thinks football is too dangerous, and I disagree. In the past, I've definitely sought after clarification for certain resolutions, but this one is pretty straightforward in my eyes, hence why I didn't waste time clarifying things.
Posted by footballchris561 2 years ago
footballchris561
I'm not saying you have to debate the top tier always. I'm not trying to be insulting even though it is but this guy doesn't even compare to you. I'm sure that you are smart enough to figure that out. And it's not just because of the experience difference.

I know it is a bold assumption but to me it seems like you saw 2 opportunities. Either he goes inactive (which seems like he has) and he forfeits while of course you would get the win, or even if he does intend on debating (which like I said seems unclear) and is active you have an easy win.

My problem is less than a half hour in you accepted an unclear debate without trying to clear things up or maybe set some minor ground rules or definitions.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
I understand your concerns, but you have to keep in mind that I was also once a noob at online debating. Yet I overcame every challenge, even as a noob. So, you have to forgive me for lacking reserve in regards to debating noobs, because in reality I will never know when one might be as good as me. Additionally, and as I said previously, I've never debated this topic before, so it's not like I have experience in this specific topic. I saw a football related resolution that I disagreed with, hence why I took the Con position. If you are trying to say that I should only stick with top teir debaters then I must disagree, due to the fact that those members rarely debate and usually do topics I have no interest in. Ultimately, I saw a topic that interested me since I've never done it before, hence my acceptance of the challenge.

Would you care to debate me on something? My inbox is always open if you'd like to shoot me over some potential resolutions.
Posted by footballchris561 2 years ago
footballchris561
Sorry my confusion on your stance. But I'm still not sure that staticG64 understands this debate.
Posted by footballchris561 2 years ago
footballchris561
But again you didn't even bother to figure out what the debate was if this guy even knows that it is a debate.

he said, "children are suffering from severe brain injuries/concussions and they are getting horrible injuries."
And you assumed, "Con will be arguing that football is not too dangerous for children."
And the fact that he took pro in a debate titled as a question typically means yes if it is a yes or no question which it is. It seems that pro is arguing that football IS dangerous if he even knows that this is a debate and he is supposed to take a side.

Forgive me for the accusation but it seems like you are simply jumping at the opportunity to beat someone in a debate that has no experience and will not be a challenge for you. The least you could have done is try to get him to clarify.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
I've never debated this topic before, and wanted to. So here I am.
Posted by footballchris561 2 years ago
footballchris561
You are 85 and 0 that just accepted a debate from someone that joined 40 minutes ago and I don't even think they know what they are doing.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
StaticG64Blade-of-TruthTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
StaticG64Blade-of-TruthTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Maikuru 2 years ago
Maikuru
StaticG64Blade-of-TruthTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Easy peasy lemon squeezey. Pro offered no substantive case - Arguments: Con. Pro's opening round had numerous spelling and grammatical errors - S&G: Con. Pro forfeited nearly every round - Conduct: Con. Con is sexy as hell - Win: Con.