The Instigator
basketball
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
tmar19652
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

Most Pro Athletes are Overpaid

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 4 votes the winner is...
tmar19652
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/19/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,361 times Debate No: 30401
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (4)

 

basketball

Pro

Good Luck to my opponent I'm looking forward to debating
tmar19652

Con

I will argue that most pro athletes are not overpaid, and you have the burden of proof in showing that most pro athletes are overpaid.
Debate Round No. 1
basketball

Pro

Not all athletes are overpaid but here are just a few; Stephen Jackson salary 10,060,000 last years stats 8.9 points 3.4 rebounds, Carlos Boozer salary 15,000,000 15 points 8.5 rebounds and the last one for this round Amar'e Stoudemire salary 19,948,799 17.5 points 7.8 rebounds. Some very good players but not worth that kind of money.
tmar19652

Con

Athletes are paid based on the amount of money they can bring in to a team in revenue. Can you show that those guys do not earn their team as much money as they are paid? If you cannot, you lose.
Debate Round No. 2
basketball

Pro

Have you ever heard of Stephen Jackson? however Carlos Boozer is a very good player so, yes I can see that he brings a lot of money to a team, and Amar'e Stoudemire is also very good but he is aging and is not the face of the Knicks, therefore he should not be getting that much
tmar19652

Con

But why should they be paid less? You have not given any valideconomic reason as to why their pay is extraordinary. Also, acording to your logic, all senior citizens are overpaid because they are aging, so your arguments do not hold water.

My opponent has not fufilled their burden of proof, and therefore I urge you to vote pro!
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
An absolute proof is not required in debates. We could justify that someone overpaid for a toilet seat by paying $10,000, by showing that comparable ones were available for less than $100. Whether to pay a babysitter in my area $10/hr or $20/hr could be debated. Paying them $1000/hr would be difficult to defend.
Posted by robertqiu 4 years ago
robertqiu
this is actually a one-sided debate, as it isn't really possible to prove people are overpaid, which is just an opinion.
Posted by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
Minor mistake.
Posted by angelcoba 4 years ago
angelcoba
Lol you urge for people to vote for pro?
Posted by tmar19652 4 years ago
tmar19652
He did not show that they are overpaid though.
Posted by robertqiu 4 years ago
robertqiu
tmar19652, he actually fulfilled the burden. He gave you examples of extremely high paid athletes, which fulfills the burden.
Posted by angelcoba 4 years ago
angelcoba
Pro's round 3 contradicts his debate on "Athletes are overpaid"
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 4 years ago
wrichcirw
basketballtmar19652Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: zzz debate, PRO didn't have an argument.
Vote Placed by malcolmxy 4 years ago
malcolmxy
basketballtmar19652Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't do much, but only because they didn't have to. no one used any sources and spelling and grammar were not stellar on either side.
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
basketballtmar19652Tied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not fulfill his burden of proof to demonstrate that most pro athletes are overpaid, and his lack of a statistical justification actually acted against his position. He could only point toward several examples, while there are thousands of professional athletes.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
basketballtmar19652Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not establish that those few players he mentioned are paid more than they generate in revenue for their team, let alone most players.