The Instigator
Igotnext1986
Pro (for)
Losing
17 Points
The Contender
Double_R
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points

Scrutiny of LeBron James becoming too much

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
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: 6/18/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,938 times Debate No: 17078
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (66)
Votes (8)

 

Igotnext1986

Pro

[Opening Statement] I admit... LeBron James did make me feel like I wanted to take a 2 by 4 & turn him into a fudgeycle. But I refuse to hold hands in celebration of his failures.

Though it is theatre, the actors are real & the scrutiny has gone to far. Murders, Genocide, Rape, etc, etc is "EVIL"... but LeBron James is just an athlete. If you are naive enough to believe to only hate on LeBron in a basketball context & not personally, is a hypocrite. It's his livelihood that's in question from most his critics. There is nothing more personal than taking pleasure in someone else's failures. To you it is theatre but these players are real & as audience members you also share something in common with him- a sense of entitlement to call him the bad guy on this production. You feel as though "he brought it on himself" so it gives you every right scorn & ridicule him. Seems to me the shoes on the other foot with a bit of a superiority complex. Kinda puts it in perspective that we all have character flaws & attributes that if they were magnified by theatre would make us not seem so flattering to the audience watching us.

I don't care how he self-proclaimed to be the bad guy... if we're supposed to be the good guys, we sure as hell didn't act like it. The good guy doesn't win the fight & rub it in your face because its important that he distinguishes himself from being a bad guy. I can't seem to find it in me to rejoice in someone else's pain. No matter how self inflicted it may be. I felt there is too much of an emotional attachment to this story. Though I'm happy he didn't win because it would have made "The Decision" feel right, but for me... it feels like all the celebrating & rejoicing in watching someone fail, is too much. The way I see it, its the equivalent of getting bullied for years & finally able to fight back to come out victorious! Until everyone in the schoolyard joins hands, celebrating in mocking him. At what point do you acknowledge your own behaviour is as flawed as the bully?

"No One Roots for Goliath"- but this David vs Goliath story isn't what it seems. Truth is: People are more flawed than what they would like to admit & hate the shadows we repress in our ourselves. I believe you haven't heard the last from him and think that all this could solidify his foundation of where it all started. His legacy is just starting. Don't take for granted what losing does to a man but what it does FOR a man. Not everyone loved Jordan from the start and he's a mean son-of-a-bitch!!! But he's "your" mean son-of-a-bitch.

LeBron stands for something you refuse to accept. Pride is admirable, but like all attributes is a flaw. Like having a fist fight about ideas but with Mike Tyson! It's not a good idea! He isn't what you want/or think he should be, but because he stands on a pedestal, you think it gives you the right to chop him down to your level. A level where culture today can't wait to cut you down because they can't get there themselves.
Double_R

Con

Thanks to pro for initiating a very interesting debate. Although very spirited, Pros case did not focus heavily on specific points so I will simply make my own case this round.

Every profession in America has a certain balance in terms of what a person endures, and their rewards for it. For example police officers enjoy a position of authority, but must endanger their safety. Garbage men pick up trash all day, but normally receive a good salary with no skills or education required. Athletes are extremely well paid and enjoy a profession most people dream of, but must endure being in the public eye and whatever comes from it. They know this when they accept the job.

In the case of LeBron, let’s remember that he is simply part of a bigger system. The NBA makes money by providing fans a form of entertainment. All basketball players are part of this, and it is the entertainment factor that pays the players salaries. That is why players must endure whatever is thrown at them, because that is what makes the games interesting for the fans. In terms of that balance I referred to earlier, for $14.5 million dollars for one year I think it would be a no brainer that anyone would gladly switch places with him.

Beyond the job requirements LeBron also dug himself into this hole. After spending his first 7 seasons with the Cleveland Cavaliers he made a decision to leave the team that drafted him, and the fans that rooted for him for those 7 years so that he could pursue his own personal desire to win an NBA title. This is something he could have pursued with Cleveland being that they just came off a year in which they had the best record in the NBA. Yet in addition to all of this, he decided to embarrass his fans and city by making his announcement in a nationally televised hour long special in which he did not even tell the owners of his former team until he went on the air to announce it(1). Instead of making his decision in a traditional and more respectful way LeBron chose his moment in the sun, but like all things it comes at a price.

Pro states that people are naive to believe that their feelings about him are not personal. This is simply false as people who “ridicule” him have never met him. It is one thing to root for someone to loose a basketball game but LeBron will still have a job, and will still go home to his mansion. People realize this. And as much as people may rejoice in his failures, if suddenly he suffered a career ending injury no reasonable person would be rejoicing. Also when it comes to him loosing people also realize that for every looser there is a winner, so voting for him to loose is very different from wishing someone harm.

So simply put, enduring scrutiny is part of being an NBA player, he helped bring it on himself and people are more reasonable then Pro would suggest.

I wish Pro good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
Igotnext1986

Pro

[My Rebuttal]
I'm a make a hypothesis that LeBron has by far been the most talked about & scrutinized athlete of ANY generation. Through out this debate, I will prove the specifics in how in Cons words represent a society who has developed a superiority complex out of sheer envy & thus continuing to prove the Ultimate TRUTH: People are more flawed than what they'd like to admit.

We can agree we don't wish bad (of the worst circumstances) on anyone, but their isn't anything more personal than wishing someone to fail. Especially against LeBron. But because of the emotional attachment to the sport of the paying customer, FANS BELIEVE THEY OWN A PIECE OF LEBRON (because he is apart of the bigger show- NBA- who's actions & decisions weren't popular to the majority- thus claimed he's wrong). Claiming he was selfish for leaving Cleveland & made it known what THEY THINK IS RIGHT as shaming him for not doing what popular demand wanted. Fans today are TOO emotionally invested in their sports. He did what he felt best for himself & family & whether you agree or not, it was his choice ('The Decision" was classless- agreed but I bet he'd redo it). You can't control him!

I feel after watching his game 6 press conference he was humbled, yet his words were misinterpreted (http://sports.espn.go.com...). The majority feel he thinks he's better than us & refuse to accept any different. He's proving he's a real person who's no different our better than us.

"Scrutiny is just apart of the job description;" "They must endure..;" "Dug his own whole..;" "enjoy a profession most people dream of"...

Proving- You (the audience) feel an obligation to cut up & chop down but theirs "No such thing as halfway crooks or half righteous/Those who have eyes should act like it//"- Shad "Rose Garden". Since when does that give you the gavel? I believe most people root against LeBron for his SELF ENTITLED demeanor & ARROGANCE. Not to mention "The Decision" left a lot of people with a bad taste in their mouths (even mine). Understandable. Then the scrutiny in the media followed in taking pot shots at his game in result of who he is as a person, thus have all since then, been overwhelmingly shameful. People couldn't get enough of it as they fiended for it! I think its safe to say, after this video aired, fans & media alike we're happy to see it.
> Seething because he's a public figure & his behaviour is what you describe as being "Dishonourable" with no sign of "MODESTY". But NEITHER do the audience members who feel SELF ENTITLED & ARROGANT in justifying it by rejoicing in watching him fail. Behaving like the individual you scrutinize & thus showing EXACTLY that people repress & hate their own shadows. Showing that both are no different & that they both are more flawed than what they'd like to admit. After everything, LeBron is the one who's coming out on top of it.

Welcome to our culture where we take our sports as serious as our riots!
Double_R

Con

My opponent begins with statements that LeBron is by far the most scrutinized athlete of any generation and also that people are more flawed then they like to admit. These statements may or may not be true but I remind my opponent that this is not the resolution that was laid out. The debate is about weather the scrutiny of LeBron James is “too much”. My contention is that it is not.


Pro acknowledges that no one wishes the worst, but again states that there is nothing more personal then wishing someone to fail. This is true if we are talking about failure in a personal sense but as I laid out in R1, the scrutiny of LeBron is not as personal as Pro suggests. People are not scrutinizing his relationship with his wife and children, or whatever business investments he is making with his salary. What people care about is what happens on the basketball court. And on that court this past season, many did not want him to win the NBA title. There are various reasons why but mostly because people generally do not want to see any basketball player get rewarded for doing what he did. This was about his actions as an NBA player, not him.


Many fans do believe that they “own a piece” of LeBron, because in a way, this is true. Anybody who accepts a high paying position in any industry must accept the sacrifices they will have to make. The fans pay LeBron’s salary, if he does not want to accept what comes along with that then he can reject his $14 million salary and move on. That is his choice, and the choice of any professional athlete.


Fans do not shame LeBron for making a decision they personally disagree with, they shame him because of the way he did it. If he wanted to leave Cleveland to go to Miami, that was his business. There is a certain level of scrutiny that will always go with a decision like that, as many players have learned. In LeBron’s case, he took that to another level. He may regret it, but that’s life. We only get one chance to make a decision, after that we have to live with it.


Pros main contention however seems to be that the audience members are just as self entitled and arrogant as LeBron and that this shows they are no different. This issue with this concept is that the fans are not the ones on the basketball court. It is not the responsibility of the fans to act any certain way (assuming they are within the limits of society), again they pay the players salaries. But more importantly if the fans are matching his arrogance then that only shows further why it is justified. If LeBron did nothing to deserve the level of scrutiny he is under then my opponent might have a case, but the simple fact of the matter is that besides being part of what comes with the job, he dug himself in this hole.

Debate Round No. 2
Igotnext1986

Pro

[In Closing] Thanks, Double R for helping spark an interest for the community & look forward to the end results.

Now...My opponent believes their is a limit to the scrutiny & suggesting it hasn't reached its peak. We're not focusing on his wife, children, family etc or anything like that, no.. this is about LeBron as a player. If my opponent plays sports, he'd agree that on any battlefield, sports is a mirrored alternate universe that reveals yourself to you. Who you are on it, reflects GREATLY on who you are, off of it. So because of the emotional attachment culture today has for its sports, the audience feel a sense of entitlement to PICK & CHOOSE when to justify acting like ASHOLES.

NO- fans do not own any part of him (even if your thinking below the wasteline- its wishful thinking, Peter) what so ever!? Again, my opponent forgets sometimes that even though this is theatre, the players are real. They don't owe you anything in return- they already showed up & played the game that you paid them too. Its your own selfish desires to fill your own wholes by living intermediately through them. Fan want control over their actors, but just because you want to see the movie doesn't mean you have a say on the way it ends? So for the fans own personal thrills, they falsely believe that his actions justified a "F*** LeBron James" anthem (). That's pretty personal level too me. The hate became so much it came from a whole different ARENA!!!

"This issue with this concept is that the fans are not the ones on the basketball court. It is not the responsibility of the fans to act any certain way (assuming they are within the limits of society), again they pay the players salaries." Tell me (in your closing statement, PLEASE...) what is the limit of society? Because what I KNOW that my opponent believes behaviour such as being arrogant, self involved, entitled, rude & obnoxious are all traits that the normal society frown upon. He believes that modesty, humble, & gratitude are traits that are accepted. But beware... those such as LeBron who do not live by our demands will be scrutinized to highest public degree (without killing, though because that would just be nuts- right?) will sacrifice their morals & ethics to chop you down as low as they see fit. I know... alil bit of a superiority complex...

To me it looks like the inmates are running the asylum. "Media lynching" will now become as cliche as a bumper sticker because people seem to be alright with taring people down when their standing on higher pedestals. Not when its your own nextdoor neighbour cause you'd have to see their faces everyday & that would be weird. "But more importantly if the fans are matching his arrogance then that only shows further why it is justified." So if we got into an arguement & my friends out numbered your friends, would that make me right? YES! Power to the people! If your friends went bungie jumping without the bungie- would you?
Double_R

Con

Pro states “because of the emotional attachment culture today has for its sports, the audience feel a sense of entitlement to PICK & CHOOSE when to justify acting like ASHOLES”. Agreed. In America I would define this as Freedom.


Pro continues to assert that the scrutiny of LeBron is personal by using an analogy of the court as an alternate universe. I simply ask the readers, if you suddenly found out that LeBron was having serious issues in his personal life would you be happy? Clearly any reasonable person would say no.

What are the limits of society? The limits are what society decides. That is why we have laws and rules. Fans at a game can not throw things, or shout profanities or they risk ejection. Radio and TV personalities may not make obscene comments or risk loosing there job. These are limits society decides on.

Pro states “So if we got into an argument & my friends out numbered your friends, would that make me right?”. I never made an appeal to popularity. Pro should respond to the argument being made.

After reading Pros arguments there seems to be two main places where we disagree:

1.
Pro seems to believe fans should not be entitled to express their own “superiority complex” or “live intermediately through them (NBA Players)”. The only people with a responsibility to act or express themselves in any certain way are the people who get paid for it.

2.
Pro believes as stated:

"They don't owe you anything in return- they already showed up & played the game that you paid them too.”

This could not be further from the truth. When fans turn on an NBA game or buy a ticket they are not doing so just to watch a bunch of guys play basketball. An enormous amount of the NBA’s revenue comes from the fans interest in the players playing the game, not just the game itself. Players being scrutinized helps to create a sense of character which creates attention. It is a big reason why fans enjoy the game they pay to see. To suggest that athletes only get paid to play their sport completely disregards why so many people pay attention to sports in the first place.

Conclusion:

I don’t mean to sound cold hearted with the argument I make as I do believe there is a point where it becomes too much. I make the constant salary argument to demonstrate that it is part of the job. And as being part of the job, the point where we have gone too far must go beyond the point where it has been deserved. Yet throughout this debate I have shown that it is not only deserved but expected and Con has not effectively countered that argument. Without even showing that it is undeserved there is no case. Therefore I have shown that it is not only deserved but it is also part of the job. The scrutiny level is appropriate.

Vote Con.

I wish my opponent luck in the voting round and in future debates.

Debate Round No. 3
66 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ElHombre 1 year ago
ElHombre
Con seems to be ignoring the idea of common decency. He says that the scrutiny that LeBron receives comes with the territory, and that is true...but should it? Has our society become overly judgmental and malicious towards those in the public eye (in this case LeBron)? Have we gone too far? That is the question. And I think the answer is yes. It's to the point where we are straight up hateful and irrational. It's as simple as that. Burning jerseys, rioting, making mean-spirited remarks about ones mother, taking pleasure in one's failures not because of some indirect positive results yielded but simply because said person failed...it's a gross overreaction. And it is personal in many cases. Do we wish him trouble in his family life? No. Do we wish him physical harm? No. But there are different levels of personal dislike. And while people may not hate LeBron as much as they do say Hitler, they do still hate. And it is clearly out of line. Just let him play basketball and be a kind, civil human being. Period.
Posted by Igotnext1986 2 years ago
Igotnext1986
Piece by piece & bit by bit your whole argument is crumbling from underneath you. Though it took this long to do it (maybe I under estimated how far this debate would go in rounds) but I'm finally noticing the cracks in your arguments. Now 'm really enjoying being able to destroy it! Soon i'll sweep the rug out from underneath you.

I smell blood so here comes the full court press!

>D There's my "4th" reply.
Posted by Igotnext1986 2 years ago
Igotnext1986
You say fan's don't have any rules & because they paid the admission fee they get to do as they please!

... so then the LeBron fan shouldn't have been escorted out according to your own rules. Though he was & ljust like the status quo, you accept it! Thats mighty hypercritical incriminating of you to admit!

>D
Posted by Igotnext1986 2 years ago
Igotnext1986
Not that I need to go further but I can't help it! Now this debate has gotten crazier with CENSORSHIP playing a key part in all of this.

You dare say that the fan was "in the wrong" for agitating the crowd by "disrespecting them" for wearing a LeBron jersey!? SO THATS WRONG, NOW!? Sure! theres things that would be said & obviously risks of receiving backlash- BUT WHO ARE YOU or ANYONE ELSE to say what a person is allowed to wear on there night out!? SO WHAT!!?!?!? So what, if got off at rattling their cages- he probably knew it would- whether that was his intention or not... it shouldn't make a difference! You take it for what it is... everyone has the right too their opinions & be who they want to be or dress the way they want to dress. Not only was that fan's privileges wrongfully revoked but his CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT in censoring the fan's shirt & taking away the fan's seat that he ALSO PAID money for!

You say fan's don't have any rules & because they paid the admission fee they get to do as they please! Have you ever seen fans escorted out for taking it to far? It happens all the time so don't say the fans, media & politicians/audience in general don't have a code of conduct they don't have to obey. You will if you want watch the rest of the game! All this fan did was show up wearing the wrong colours & that was enough to get escorted out!? That doesn't make sense! The fans AROUND HIM could have minded their OWN BUSINESS & NOT TAKE IT SO PERSONAL!

This is incredible... you can't censor what people wear, say or do. How hard did you think about those 4 replies because this is mind boggling stuff!
Posted by Igotnext1986 2 years ago
Igotnext1986
THIS IS REAL LIFE! LEBRON ISN'T SOME CHARACTER IN A MOVIE!?
Take into consideration the last link I showed you. Here is a fan of LeBron wearing his jersey at a Cleveland BASEBALL game & being EJECTED FOR THAT. Tell me what that has to do with basketball? NOTHING! They're taking their personal feelings & turning it into a vendetta AGAINST LEBRON while taking it out on "LeBron" fan AT A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT EVENT!? LMAO but you accept it as the status quo of how things will always be!? Calling HIM "Disrespectful?!" You can't tell me that isn't PERSONAL because that is delusional!! Now its going as far as CENSORSHIP that your condoning. You are spiralling out of control...

Shouldn't all individuals be allowed to do whatever he wants as long as it doesn't impede on someone elses happiness? The answer to that is: YES! Though as you, the fans, media & politicians have proven, you don't want that to be the case cause entertainment is filled with politics & predigest. You may say that I have said things that have "gone to far" but where we differentiate/separate is that you want to suppress & eliminate the things in society that you think, in terms of ideas or the exchange of ideas, that don't mesh well with your own morals & ethics. I want to live in a society where people can voice & say unpopular opinions & ideas because the result of that will be a society that grows & matures. If only we do come to grips with some of these problems that we've avoided with some of these old rules that are already there & ignored. Make your actions look like your words because it is beyond your ability to make personal recommends for the sins you commit.
Posted by Double_R 3 years ago
Double_R
"Are you contending that the fans (even the ones in my evidence) don't care about LeBron's or any other athletes, personality!?!?"

On a professional level – Yes
On a personal level – No

Professional level: refers to his behavior on the basketball court, in press conferences, at charities etc… (anything that is part of his job and therefore his professional character)

Personal level: his family life, time spent at home, time spent with friends. Etc… (anything that he is not paid for)

Of course personal gets mixed at times. A rude interaction with a fan on the street for example. But that is not what people "hold hands and rejoice" about. It plays almost no role.
Posted by Double_R 3 years ago
Double_R
Have you ever been to a baseball game? Have you never seen people get rallied up over stupid things? I see it all the time. It is common knowledge that if you wear an opposing teams jersey to a game that you will be picked on. When you flash your jersey and middle finger to the crowd it goes to show why you are being picked on in the first place. Yes the fact that it was a LeBron Jersey had a lot to do with it. If I was a Cleveland fan and someone came to my home ballpark wearing a LeBron jersey it is a clear indication that this person is rubbing it in my face and everyone elses. It is a matter of disrespect a lot more then it is about LeBron.
Posted by Double_R 3 years ago
Double_R
You still say that we all have the freedom to be a$$holes, and so does LeBron. No one is taking that right away from LeBron. But LeBron should be held accountable and the fans should not. The fans do not have a responsibility to act any certain way. They are not getting paid to represent anyone. LeBron has that responsibility. LeBron gets paid millions of dollars to represent his organization and the NBA. When you get paid to represent your team and your league, you can, should, and will be held accountable for how you act.

If you disagree can you please give me a logical reason why LeBron and the fans should be considered on the same level of accountability, and why LeBron getting paid millions of dollars to represent his organization is not a reason for him to be held accountable for his actions.
Posted by Double_R 3 years ago
Double_R
Your still stuck on this personal thing. The statement of how we should care about our entertainment is very simple: if you don't care you are not entertained. What does Romeo and Juliet, Bambi, and Titanic all have in common? They all have sad endings. Why are they sad? Because a very important character dies. The only way a person will experience the sadness of a movie is if they care about the character. A movie is designed to do that. It is designed to make people care what happens which leads to experiencing emotional reactions when certain things happen. Without that there is no entertainment.

But if someone cares about a movie character does that mean they think the character is real? Of course not. But they care anyway. Their feelings are personal to the character not the person in the movie. Athletes are characters just the same. Yes they are real people who are not acting. But the attachment people have has nothing to do with the person, it has to do with the character. LeBron is a great basketball player who made a terrible decision to do things the way he did. People will get on him for that on the basketball court. No reasonable person is breaking into his house over it. These same people who celebrate his defeats are the same people who would run up to him for an autograph if they saw him on the street. Do you not believe this is what they would do? People are connected to the character not the person.
Posted by Igotnext1986 3 years ago
Igotnext1986
I want to be 100% clear on this... "Fans get into sports for similar reasons. They don't care about the players personally anymore then I care about the subject of this conversation."

^^^Are you contending that the fans (even the ones in my evidence) don't care about LeBron's or any other athletes, personality!?!? That ALLL this has nothing to do with his character but more importantly- just been entertainment!?!? THAT IT ISNT PERSONAL!?!? This is SHOCKING NEWS! Your Wow, this exciting! I can't wait for your answer!!!

... a straight YES or NO!? >D
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by thett3 2 years ago
thett3
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: counter to MDs absurd votebomb.
Vote Placed by MassDebator255 2 years ago
MassDebator255
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: WHY SO SERIOUS???
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: I had trouble following Pro's arguments. How do we know "too much" ... relative to ... what? Con's case was clear: James is paid handsomely to be the subject of scrutiny and he upped the ante by changing teams. Pro's ampersands and shorthand symbols were a distraction.
Vote Placed by ApostateAbe 3 years ago
ApostateAbe
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had more convincing arguments. Yeah, if you become a hero to your fans, then switch teams, you are all but inviting the cameras fed by intense hatred of viewers. It has happened plenty of times before. You can't be a celebrity and accept praise and adulation from fans, then get offended after you stab them in the back. Pro gets a point for using sources.
Vote Placed by Deathbeforedishonour 3 years ago
Deathbeforedishonour
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: It was a close debate on topic that I find boring (no offense) but in the end Pro did a little better than Con
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 3 years ago
BlackVoid
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Pro seemed to go on random mini-rants about his opinion rather than directly refute the arguments Con brought up.
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 3 years ago
SuperRobotWars
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: He did have better conduct, but I am not such an avid of an critique on sports stars to give the convincing arguments critique.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 3 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
Igotnext1986Double_RTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: "To suggest that athletes only get paid to play their sport completely disregards why so many people pay attention to sports in the first place." - no properly refuted and Pro resorted to appeals to emotion. 3:1