Should the NFL extend their season?
Debate Rounds (3)
Football tickets are not easy to come by, which indicates that there is actually a surplus of demand and that there would be little if any decrease in fan attendance given an increase in the length of the season. Additionally, the proposal actually on the table entails an increase in the NFL regular season from 16 games to 18 games and a decrease in the preseason from 4 games to 2 games. The average regular season attendance is much greater than that of preseason attendance, so we can conclude that an increase in the length of the schedule would actually increase fan attendance rather than decrease it. The increase in relative proportion of regular season games to preseason games also means that two games that were preseason season games would now be more meaningful, thus nullifying the con"s "no meaningless games" argument.
Finally, since the overall number of games remains the same, the injuries argument also does not seem to apply.
Con is correct in saying that there is less interest in every game of the other major sports in the United States, but voters should remember that one should not compare the 82-game regular season of the NBA or the 162-game of the MLB, as the scale of the proposed change of the NFL regular season is only 16 " 18 games, and is thus far too small for Con to fairly use the NBA and the MLB as a comparison. Con acknowledges that a two-game increase in the schedule "would not do the same," which seems to defeat his own point as he does not then explain how stating these facts has to do with the debate itself.
Yes, 18-game regular season gives starters two more chances to become injured, but coaches are aware of this and would lighten up pre-season practices in preparation for the longer season, where a lot of players get injured anyway. For example, Sean Lee, linebacker of the Dallas Cowboys and arguably the Cowboys" best defensive player, is out for the year now with a torn ACL because of injuries he incurred during practice before the season started .
To conclude, the increased league revenue, increase in quality of play (substituting two regular season games for two preseason games), along with the seeming like of cons, leads me to support the NFL extending their season.
Thanks you, AirplanesAndBaseball for allowing me to participate in this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Neither had poor conduct. S&G - Tie. Neither made any major spelling or grammatical errors. Arguments - Pro. This was a good debate on both ends, but what it came down to was Con arguing that because (x) is good, we should not change that which is good, therefore keep (x) the way it is. Whereas Pro had the BOP to show why extending the season would be better. For me, Pro achieved this in the final round in which he not only rebutted the key points raised by Con in terms of how coaches could alleviate the increased risk of additional games and continued to show how ticket revenue would stay the same. I believe Pro took arguments because of these reasons and therefore award these points to him. Sources - Pro. He was the only one to utilize sources in this debate to strengthen his points. Good debate once again guys!!
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.