The Instigator
Kytax
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points
The Contender
1harderthanyouthink
Con (against)
Losing
1 Points

Should the NFL move a team to London?

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...
Kytax
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/1/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 803 times Debate No: 48174
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (1)

 

Kytax

Pro

Hello there, On this debate we will be discussing: Whether or not the NFL should Move a team to London, England. Believe it or not the NFL has been considering going international and moving a team to London. Source: http://espn.go.com...
I will be arguing why I believe the NFL should move a Franchise to London. Con, will say why they think the NFL should just stay in the USA.

Rules:
Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Arguments
Round 3: Rebuttals
1harderthanyouthink

Con

I accept the challenge and look forward to debating this topic. I do not think London should have an NFL team.
Debate Round No. 1
Kytax

Pro

Thank you for accepting my challenge,

Now, the reason I believe the NFL should move a franchise to London is for the following reasons. Firstly I believe it's about time that the NFL goes International, Football is my favorite sport. Secondly, many would argue that barely any one in London would watch their Franchise. I can safely deny that as ALL NFL London games for the 2014 season have already been sold out. While the super bowl only happened a month ago!!! [1] It must also be noted that the NFL is becoming super popular in the UK. [2] Thirdly, Many would argue that it would take too much time for an American team to get to London or Vice versa, However, I can safely deny this argument. Now, let's say the Giants played against a London Franchise, it would only take them 8 hours to arrive on plane. [2] Besides you must note that the NFL does play games in London every season, All games in London tend to be sold out, as stated in my original argument.

Sources
[1]http://www.theguardian.com...
[2] http://www.westerneye.net...
[3]http://www.tripit.com...
1harderthanyouthink

Con

I accept this debate. I will argue that the NFL should not have a team in London.
Debate Round No. 2
Kytax

Pro

Kytax forfeited this round.
1harderthanyouthink

Con

End debate.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by whiteflame 9 months ago
whiteflame
Not at liberty to say.
Posted by 1harderthanyouthink 9 months ago
1harderthanyouthink
Uhh...what? Who reported a vote?
Posted by whiteflame 9 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: birdlandmemories// Mod action: NOT Removed<

5 points to Pro (Arguments, Sources), 1 point to Con (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to con for the forfeit. Con never argued anything which leaves pro's arguments standing. He also used sources.

[*Reason for non-removal*] The voting period on this debate ended over 2 years ago, and thus it is well beyond the statute of limitations for vote moderation.
************************************************************************
Posted by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
From New York to London, there is a +5 hour time difference. Because of this time difference, an eastern time some team may have to fly at 6-8 PM to arrive in London at about 9-11 AM. This will throw off sleep patterns, and sleep is known to be a huge part of an athlete's success [1].

And while this is a scientific problem, many NFL players are strongly opposing a London franchise. Concerns about families and travel times come up. One player even said he'd retire before playing for a London team [2].

Back to time differences: a London team would have to travel 8 games to the US. Since one of the quickest flights from London-US is London to New York, there would be over 64 hours of travel if they played only New York teams on the road. But they don't: they have 3 in-division road games, and 5 out-of division road games. They would have to play teams as far as Seattle, which would add on a few more hours. This is problematic due to sleep being necessary: and most people are terrible at sleeping on planes (even without a crying baby).
So as you see, the idea of a team in London is not good because of a simple thing: sleep, and travel times. Even if they sell out every game, and win a Super Bowl, some players wouldn't consider it.

[1] http://breakingmuscle.com...
[2] http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...
Posted by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
Ok
Posted by Kytax 3 years ago
Kytax
You can post you're argument here. It's only fair
Posted by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
Wow I f***ed up. I saw "we are waiting for Kytax to post his argument for round #3 and I thought "f***." I'd also post another version of this and we can just copy/paste the rounds posted already (except for that mess-up). You can rebut anything, this debate cannot be fair.
Posted by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
I honestly thought we never started round 2
Posted by 1harderthanyouthink 3 years ago
1harderthanyouthink
F*** I thought it was round 1. I can post an argument in the comments for you to rebut if you'd like.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by birdlandmemories 3 years ago
birdlandmemories
Kytax1harderthanyouthinkTied
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:51 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to con for the forfeit. Con never argued anything which leaves pro's arguments standing. He also used sources.