The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Old Spongebob (PRO 1999-2005) is better than New Spongebob (CON 2006-now)

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/8/2015 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 606 times Debate No: 74972
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)




First round is acceptance.

Second round will include arguments

Third to Fourth round will consist of rebuttals

Fifth round is conclusion

-Every argument needs concrete reasoning
-Must include episodes from each era for sources
-No equivocation


I can believe that it is safe to say that the early spongebobs were not as good as the 2004-20010 era. the early early one were just not as good because of the bad resolution and the cheesiness (at first!!!!) it started really to become popular in the 2004's and that's were the great ones came the band bubble bowl one and the suds episodes. but however, the newer (2005-2012) ones are not any worse, they have actual produce some quite good ones such as the krusty krab 2 episode and the surfur dude episode. though I do agree that the one made in the 2014-2015 are very terrible and they should be playing more of the all-time classics.
Debate Round No. 1


There are many flaws within your argument. You have broken a few of my rules.
First off, the 1st round was only supposed to revolve around acceptance. Secondly, you mentioned that Old Spongebob isn't as good as 2004-2010 Spongebob. I'm considering 1999-2005 Old Spongebob in the title of my argument, meaning that right when it got popular, it was still in the "old" era. Third of all, "the band bubble bowl episode" (known as Band Geeks) and "Suds" both aired before 2004. Suds aired in January 17th, 2000, a year after it began. Band Geeks aired in September 7th, 2001. So accordingly, Spongebob became popular and liked within its first few years, and both episodes are within the range of 5-6 years away from what we will consider New Spongebob. There are also grammar errors that can be found in your argument. Lastly, you aren't specific enough. "Krusty Krab 2 episode?" You mean "As Seen On TV," which included a reference to a second Krusty Krab? Or the Spongebob Movie, which also include two Krusty Krabs? "Surfur Dude?" That could be any episode, in which both eras have episodes with surfers in it.

That being said, I will get into my legitimate argument.

You say that Old Spongebob was cheesy. However, New SpongeBob does not do the job any better. New Spongebob has episodes like "Face Freeze," which was a plot about Spongebob and Patrick making zany faces. The jokes fall flat because the faces they make are hideous, the audio is annoying, and the humor itself is repetitive. New SpongeBob has a lot of gross-out humor that utterly destroys the plot, and makes the audience want to cringe. Spongebob gets a close-up splinter in "The Splinter," Squidward's toenail gets a close-up while getting ripped off of his foot in "House Fancy," everything about "Fungus Among Us" is outright cringe worthy, having gross scum take up most of the episode.

Dark and mean-spirited jokes are also played for laughs. In "Are You Happy Now?" two jokes about squidward committing suicide (jokes as in he is really doing so, but it seems like it) are used. What about Plankton trying to get himself run over because of Mr. Krabs in "One Coarse Meal?" How about when Ms. Puff tried to murder Spongebob in "Demolition Doofus?"

Speaking of which, all of the characters causing trouble don't always get a form of comeuppance, they just get away with whatever crap they committ. Ms. Puff goes to jail in older episodes like "No Free Rides." Patrick is an awful friend in "Stuck In The Wringer" by injuring Spongebob, eating his ice cream, etc. Yet, we are still expected to feel sorry for Patrick after worsening the problem. And should I even mention the episode's terrible moral: "I guess crying does solve your problem after all!" Mr. Krabs is a greedy douche who fired Spongebob over a nickel in "Spongebob You're Fired!" And by the way ignorance doesn't work when it harms others deeply, without even showing that a character is trying to help another. Spongebob is so oblivious in "A Pal For Gary," that he gets mad at GARY for what PUFFY FLUFFY is doing, even when he can CLEARLY see that Gary is being EATEN ALIVE!!!

Now with the awful character value and atrocious so-called humor out of the way, I will dig into the plots. New Spongebob sometimes doesn't even try to have an interesting plot. "Face Freeze," the epitome of horror, is about making stupid faces. How do they execute it? Every main character (excluding Sandy) gets a stupid look on their face. That's all. No moral, no proper execution or somewhat tense climax, just shots of characters with hideous looks. Another example, which is "Squidward in Clarinetland," has a plot that is all over the place. Squidward wants to keep his clarinet protected, he hallucinates Spongebob stealing his clarinet, he locks Spongebob in a locker and sends him in a bus, and for some reason, Spongebob shows up at his presentation to give him his clarinet. Now Old Spongebob has bad continuity, but it only contradicts with logic from previous episodes. The contuinity error that has Spongebob somehow get to Squidward without explanation interferes with the episode's execution, making it seem lazy. Old Spongebob will explain how characters did illogical things. In "Idiot Box," Spongebob and Patrick revealed that they used their imagination to make weird and yet realistic sounds.

As for Old Spongebob, it packs more jokes per minute than your average New Spongebob episode. "Band Geeks" has some of my favorite jokes in Spongebob history, such as Patrick's line "Is Mayonnaise an instrument?" The jokes can be rather idiotic, but the good part is, the characters act stupid for a few jokes, and can be smart at other times. They don't act that way for the sake of being stupid or annoying. Some of what Spongebob and Patrick did are stupid things we would do every once in a while. Patrick riding hooks in "Hooky," that's what an ignorant young adult might do. He also gets a comeuppance for doing so. That's better than hearing Patrick make obnoxious noises with Spongebob. Old Spongebob also contains better plots that keep you intrigued, like "Ripped Pants." Yes, an episode with such a cheesy premise has a great plot. The episode is about how Spongebob fooled around too much, and that he blew it by taking it too far. It teaches kids not to fool around too much to win a friend's attention, and that you should just be yourself. The characters are great as well. They aren't always at their best, but they stay in character a lot more often than in newer episodes, and usually take responsibility for their actions.

I'm aware that New Spongebob has good episodes as well. However, there are a small amount of those good episodes compared to Old Spongebob. Season 6 is a good example. Almost every episode has a disgusting element, a mundane plot, and some terrible jokes. Anti-humerous gags and a lack of gags is what Season 6 has. Season 7 and 8 have worse episodes that exponentially go downhill when it comes to bad humor.

There is much more to talk about, so I decided I would cover both eras in a nutshell.
The situation looks dire for PRO, as he/she has not only failed to follow all of the criteria, but also needs to develop a more convincing argument with more depth and reasoning.

Source: (I used this one website in order to look up various episodes of the show)


Woah....that is way too much sh*t for SPONGEBOB. I MEAN...i was reading like to first paragraph of your argument and I was like ok...but when I saw that u wrote a 200 page essay...i was all like, "ain't nobody got time for reading this sh*t". I'm just sayin...i like SpongeBob, and the 2004-now era is not terrible... I mean you are going to run out of idea for SpongeBob some time. This era has produce some of my favorite episodes...thats all. I dint want to get in like a fight about it...its SpongeBob. But I can agree that it is an opinion thing... There is no right or wrong answer.(btw...i don't give a sh*t on whether I have good grammar or not...and two, I meant the SpongeBob movie...and you know, the one episode with the tan surfer dude that plays the drums and the big wave eats might be called the big one or something.)
Debate Round No. 2


No offense, but this how an argument is supposed to be. This isn't sharing opinions. And long arguments are what win the debate.

Well then, now for rebuttals.

"I was reading like to first paragraph of your argument and I was like ok."

So... are you stating that my argument was just okay, without giving any sort of reasoning?

"But then I saw that u wrote a 200 page essay"

Exaggeration at its finest. My goodness, do you even get the point of debating here? It is not about writing one weak paragraph, it's about writing as much as you can and giving concrete reasoning for your argument. People like you personally frustrate me, as you are claiming that quantity surpasses quality.

"Woah....that is way too much sh*t for SPONGEBOB"

No it isn't. Spongebob is widely talked about and people do this all the time. People on fill up all of the characters in an argument ALL THE TIME. You're the one taking things seriously, this is how debaters are supposed to argue.

"I mean you are going to run out of idea for SpongeBob sometime."

Ok, so how does that make it better than Old Spongebob? Sounds more like an excuse than an argument. It also implies that New Spongebob is not good.

"There is no right or wrong answer"

So that's it? You're equivocating, which breaks one of my rules once again. If you accept the debate and read the rules, than you have no excuse for projecting a poor argument. This is, where you are supposed to argue effectively with your opponent, not to share opinions. You don't say there is no right or wrong unless you don't care about winning an argument. Although the quote is true, it makes you seem like you have no clear opinion.

"I meant the Spongebob movie"

Ok, if you look at the argument title, that's in the Old Spongebob era. You've said that Band Geeks, Suds, and The Spongebob Movie were good. As for New Spongebob in a later quote, you state that one episode, Spongebob V.S The Big One, was good.
So you are giving more sources for Old Spongebob than New Spongebob, meaning you are unaware that you support both. Once again making your opinion seem opaque and all over the place.

Look, I am not trying to be mean, but your acceptance to this debate was immediately shoved out of the door with little regard. If you're going to accept my debate, you are aware of the consequences. You say that you don't have time to read my argument, don't care about grammar, and make your opinion opaque at worst, and unclear at best. You just don't care about debating anymore, and you hardly tried. You probably shouldn't have accepted this debate, expecting I might be this illiterate man who doesn't know how to debate. I'm sorry, but constructive criticism is what makes you stronger. If I don't tear your argument apart, you will never learn what a good argument is. But if you don't even care, then you might as well forfeit.

And to be honest, I think Spongebob V.S The Big One is alright. I thought they could've done better with the comedy, and the episode could be dull at times. He also says, "One of you will not return," meaning one of the people he is speaking to. Instead, he doesn't return. I didn't expect them to kill a character, but at least have him say "One of us will not return."

Your entire argument can be summed up as:
-Making claims without providing much reasoning
-Sub par grammar
-Getting all offended by someone arguing on, which is what we're supposed to do
-Saying New Spongebob isn't terrible, while not explaining why Old Spongebob is worse, but rather, providing three sources out of four that are Old Spongebob episodes.

Well, this should pose an automatic win for PRO, as CON doesn't seem to care about continuing the debate.


Bruh, I'm not some nerd that goes to comic cons and stuff. I don't really care enough to go actually research SONGEBOB. Btw, u saying that everybody talks about characters like u do, ONLY NERDS WHO LIVE WITH THEIR PARENTS BASEMENT DO! Man...i just like the 2004-now spongebobs a little more than the older doesn't mean that if a older one comes on tv, I am not going to watch it, I will. I don't give a crap on your "rules". I just joined this debate because I felt sorry for your sorry debate...NOBODY ELSE WOULD HAVE JOINED, plus I like SpongeBob...soooo yeah. I'm gonna be serious here...their is no possible way that u can legitimately prove that the older ones are better. It is a total OPINION! It's like saying that chocolate cake is better than vanilla...ok, I don't give a YOUR CHOICE!!!
Debate Round No. 3


You know what? That's your problem. This is, not The point of an argument is to back up your opinions with reasoning, and don't you dare tell me I'm a nerd and that I can't legitimately prove the older ones are better. This is a ARGUMENT. That's the whole point. So you're attacking nerds by saying only people living in their parents' basements care about reasoning in arguments; LOOK AT OTHER DEBATES! People do the same thing. This is a debate, and if you don't want to follow my rules, don't join arguments like this. Don't join debates because you are "sorry" for me. You are the one who should be aware of what you get into. Don't you know how arguments even work? You're making a big deal out of this, not me. You are automatically switching the topic, and didn't even come close to making any sort of argument.

You are being a total douche. There are tons of debates that have nobody join. Consider that it could be better cause most people prefer Old Spongebob, and thus, they agree with me. Now you're just plain insulting.

People like you frustrate me, don't join a debate like this if you don't have want to follow rules. And how can you be so sure nobody would've joined, can you PROVE that, or is it just another opinion of yours.

There are "nerds" who don't live in their parents' basements, for your information. In fact, a lot of people don't live elsewhere because they are uneducated and can't get a job. All I did was rebut your argument like I was supposed to, rather than verbally attacking your type of people. People like you would spend time in their parents' basement as well.

You don't have to research, just explain argument the claims you make if possible. Please, for gods sake, calm down.

I have debunked enough of your claims. Don't respond to me another insulting speech, you will just embarrass yourself. Oh, and by the way, you go on about my "sorry debate." And could you do better? Your argument was non-existent. It doesn't matter what the debate is about, what matters is how it's presented.

The debate states that CON is for 2006-2015, not 2004-2010, if you haven't figured out already. You have to be aware of what you're arguing about and how to do so in the rules, so this is all on you, not me.

The fatal flaw you have is that since you state that my arguments are too long, you probably don't have even read the whole thing. That means you are very lazy, thus, not even attempting to refute my claims.

As a final conclusion for my rebuttals I must note that:
-CON is now verbally attacking me
-CON didn't back up his/her argument
-CON had subpar grammar (I have made a few, although I don't have errors in every sentence)
-CON switched the topic
-CON didn't come up with any rebuttals for the actual debate
-CON equivocated

The only thing you can attack me about is some of my grammar errors. But everybody has a little bit of them every once in a while, you have at least one in almost every sentence.


I don't care about your stupid rules. This is No rules! Spongebob is good but the newer ones are better. I am not going to back it up because it is obvious. Your Grammar is horrible, you have mixed up words everywhere. " This is a argument" is bad grammar. You are being such a hypocrite. You say that i am freakin out but i'm not you are. Its just spongebob.There is no need to get all flustered. Just argue about spongebob not my stupid grammar flaws. If you were to have a group of people pick out their favorite episodes, there would be some new ones and some old. i agree that the old ones are good, but the new ones have just as good of episodes. BUT, ONE OF MY 'PET PEEVS' IS THAT THERE IS NOT RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWER HERE, IT IS TOTALLY OPINION OF WHAT ERA U LIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM EXPRESSING MY OPINION. YOU ARE TRYING TO GIVE FACTS AND STUFF AND GOING OVER THE TIME. It is not needed.
Debate Round No. 4


My grammar isn't "horrible," that's an exaggeration. There's not an error in every darn sentence at least. We both have awful grammar.

I'm not taking this seriously, most people argue back rather than state that it's an opinion and not a debate.

Your arguments are awful, and the point of debating is to argue, not share opinions. You make absolutely no sense. Getting all mad about me arguing with you is illogical. I know that it's an opinion, I know that there's no right or wrong, but the point of debating is to have the better argument, not the better opinion. You're the one taking this seriously, since you are the one who started bugging me about trying to argue effectively, insulted me, and wrote in all caps (you did it first, so don't bother me about using all caps) to express being flustered. This makes you a hypocrite too, you know. I at least try to have good grammar, I try to argue, I try to do everything, you just don't care.

Oh, and your statement: "This is No rules!" makes no sense. These aren't rules are not for, these are rules for MY argument. You are attacking me for trying to argue correctly, and set up a debate logically. Are you kidding me? Don't join debates that have rules if you don't like the rules, surely you must know that by now! Oh, and these aren't "stupid" rules, they are logical rules, that pretty much everyone who cares would use. And by the way, you're it's better to have horrible grammar than bad grammar? My grammar is mostly by complete accident, especially with my phone's atrocious Autocorrect system and enclosed keyboard. For most of them anyways. I did say "The situation looks dire for PRO," I admit that was a terrible mistake. But a few mistakes of mine translate to "horrible" grammar?

I'm sick and tired of your "It's just Spongebob, there is no right or wrong" claim. This is a debate, not sharing opinions. How many times do I need to say that? I know Spongebob is not an extremely important topic, but there are people who constantly debate about which era is better.

The main problem with your argument is that you have already switched the topic by Round 2. As you are aware of the rules that only apply to this argument, not the whole website, you only had one argument, which was on the wrong round. The point of a website like this is to show that you can argue and follow the criteria, and your flawed argument is downright poor.
Even if there weren't rules, people will still tear your argument apart for not providing at least some form of reasoning. You go on about how you say New Spongebob is better, and yet you have nothing to back it up. Wait, so you can't accept that I am a so-called nerd, (even though you know nothing about me) and you judge me for having an argument, but you think I should accept that this is an opinion-based debate? You don't get to decide like that, this is my debate. You judge me for putting this debate out into this website, so you are judging me for my opinions. Meanwhile, I only judge your arguments, which is what you do in You need to drop the act, seeing as you are the one who started this controversy. Debunking others' arguments isn't being serious or mean-spirited, attacking someone is. This site is full of nerds, get over it.

I'm now done debunking CON's statements. I will now come to a conclusion.

PRO argues that Old Spongebob is better because-
-It contains better comedy
-The character value is enjoyable
-The plots are not dark and mean-spirited
-Old Spongebob has more comedy
-Old Spongebob has more good episodes

CON doesn't provide legitimate arguments and switches the topic. CON also equivocates constantly in each round, and has failed to meet the criteria.

As CON contains major flaws in his/her argument, and PRO only contains minor flaws and has a legitimate argument, I believe that this should pose a win for me.

Vote PRO


I honestly don't care about spongebob. It is a mindless stupid cartoon that depletes brain cells. There is honestly not much of a difference between old and new. It is just a cartoon. A time waster like this argument. I know i am being mean and i am sorry but I don"t care. A spongebob argument can only last one round because there is not enough to put in.
Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
I just felt the need to elaborate and add to my rebuttals. Pipster, if you're reading this, please do not freak out. If you are, just take this into consideration.

Posted by lol101 1 year ago
"There is no need to get all flustered. Just argue about spongebob not my stupid grammar flaws."

You were the one getting flustered. Read my previous comments. And I WAS arguing about Spongebob until YOU got flustered. Another reason to call you a hypocrite.

"If you were to have a group of people pick out their favorite episodes, there would be some new ones and some old. i agree that the old ones are good, but the new ones have just as good of episodes."

This is a strawman argument. You say that people would pick both old and new Spongebob episodes as their favorites. Proof? On IMDB, most of the best episodes of Spongebob are Old ones. I also did a poll on this topic, and most people picked Old Spongebob.


And one of my pet peeves is when people tell me to morph this debate into a opinion argument in YOUR favor because YOU want to make up the rules in MY debate even though you tell me NOT to do so for mine, and then say that the new episodes are better like it's a FACT. It's needed because it's a DEBATE. That's how it works.

"I know i am being mean and i am sorry but I don"t care. A spongebob argument can only last one round because there is not enough to put in."

So basically what you're saying is, "What I'm doing is wrong, I know it's wrong, but I'm going to do it anyway." And no, any debate can last 5 rounds if you put effort into it. There is a TON to put in. In fact, remember my "200 page essay"? Yeah, there is a lot to put in.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
"Bruh, I'm not some nerd that goes to comic cons and stuff. I don't really care enough to go actually research SONGEBOB. Btw, u saying that everybody talks about characters like u do, ONLY NERDS WHO LIVE WITH THEIR PARENTS BASEMENT DO!"

This is way too insulting and stereotypical. So everybody who analyzes characters lives in their parents basement and goes to comic cons. You are being REALLY aggressive here. This was extremely uncalled for. Seriously, this is just a straight up insult, I don't need to go into depth about this. This is pretty straight foward and insulting. Moving on.

"I don't give a crap on your "rules". I just joined this debate because I felt sorry for your sorry debate...NOBODY ELSE WOULD HAVE JOINED, plus I like SpongeBob...soooo yeah. "

You have to follow my rules. It's my resolution, and my debate. Why even join because you feel sorry for someone? You really don't get the point of debating do you? And yeah, you like Spongebob, cool. So do I. This is still debatable. In fact, that's why I talk about opinions in debates. It's debatable. Talking about facts is just too easy when someone is supporting the position that represents the truth. With opinions, there is no wrong answer, so the circumstances are fair. By the way, someone else DID join when I redid this debate, so your point is moot.

"No rules! Spongebob is good but the newer ones are better. I am not going to back it up because it is obvious"

But the newer ones are better? So are you treating this like a fact now? I thought this was an opinion? This is a contradicting statement. Also, really? You're not going to back your claim up because it's OBVIOUS? That's extremely lazy and hypocritical, considering you told me that this is only an opinion and this is not obvious. And I'm not going to quote your claim on me being a hypocrite about grammar. It's a small thing and my grammar obviously isn't "horrible" by certain standards. But you have been a hypocrite as well.

Posted by lol101 1 year ago
Ok, since Pipster hasn't been online for 2-3 months, and he probably won't respond to this, I feel the need to make some extra rebuttals that I should have made. I feel like since this was my first debate, my arguments and rebuttals were sort of frail. On with the rebuttals. And I do apologize for being a bit harsh on grammar, although, as a debater, that's what I'm supposed to do. I'm not going to concede, I'm going to argue why my points are more reasonable then yours. That's 101.

"I'm just sayin...i like SpongeBob, and the 2004-now era is not terrible..."

Yeah... okay. So are you really going to not provide reasons for this? This is a bare assertion. Also, you are supposed to follow my resolution and rules. This is MY debate, so you have to follow the topic and rules. My era was 2006-Now. By the way, it doesn't matter if New Spongebob is terrible or not, as long as I can prove that it's not as good as Old Spongebob (1999-2005), then my point still stands.

"I mean you are going to run out of idea for SpongeBob some time."

So this must be a concession. By admitting that they are running out ideas, you are conceding in this debate. Well, you pretty much already conceded by refusing to rebut my argument, but still, this is a concession nonetheless.

" I dint want to get in like a fight about it...its SpongeBob. But I can agree that it is an opinion thing... There is no right or wrong answer."

This is a site where you are SUPPOSED to debate people. I created this to have some fun talking about Spongebob. I'm only criticizing you constructively, not aggressively. Also, even if it is an opinion, stuff like this gets debated about all the time. The winner of this debate doesn't determine who's right or wrong, that's not what debating is about. Debating is about determining who supported their opinions with better reasoning. This is why I won, because I actually created and supported a case.

-To be continued.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
But your arguments were not of quality, nor quality. My argument in Round 2 was full of reasoning, not opinions. The argument was only supposed to be in Round 2, and then Rounds 3-4 were rebuttals. My grammar issues make it look like someone made a few mistakes, not like an illiterate person. This is a debate. By the way, if that's the case, I can have my opinion on the rap battle as well. You said he will smack you with a door hinge, and told you to go back to fapping to oranges. Sounds pretty insulting to me. Voters tend to sum their reasoning in short claims, since it's technically not an argument.

Oh, and I will not respond after this.
Posted by pipster229 1 year ago
NVM.... i dint see that the first one came after the them mixed up. AND YOUR ARGUMENTS WERE OPINIONS!!!!! THIS WHOLE DEBATE IS A OPINION!
Posted by pipster229 1 year ago
#1 my phone has auto correct issues too so stop judging others you hypocrite. #2You cant be "out" then come back in...really bro? You are so ignorant.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
See, I told you. The voters only care about arguments, not opinions. Lol101
... out.
Posted by lol101 1 year ago
And my grammar errors are because of my phone's awful autocorrect features, I forgot to mention that.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by That1User 1 year ago
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro adequately convinced me that Old Spongebob is better than New Spongebob while con provided little for his/her argument and insulted pro, thus pro wins.