The Instigator
Yanks4eva
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Tophatdoc
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

There should be no salary cap in sports

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 2 votes the winner is...
Tophatdoc
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/25/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,447 times Debate No: 44605
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Yanks4eva

Pro

Salary caps are unfair they take away a big advantage teams have what sports should do is like what the mlb does where they should just have luxury tax teams should be able to spend however much they want the only punishment should be having to pay
Tophatdoc

Con

I would like to thank Pro for hosting this debate. It should be fun. As Con I will be arguing that there should be a salary cap.Pro has the burden of proof to show why the salary caps should be removed from sports entirely.

A salary cap is fair unlike Pro would have you believe. By definition, my opponent is urging sports to become more unfair by getting rid of the salary[1]. Some teams would have a big advantage over others due to the amount of money they have available to be spent. How is that fair?

Fair:"treating people in a way that does not favor some over others"
[1]http://www.merriam-webster.com...

A salary cap limits the amount of money being spent on players, coaches, and staff. This makes sports more fair. Teams can not monopolize all the quality players, coaches, and staff. That is fair.

Here is my opening argument about why salary caps should not be removed:
1. Salary caps makes sports more competitive.
Let's compare what sports with the salary cap versus the sports with the luxury tax. The NFL had a hard salary cap and the MLB has a luxury tax. The NFL is far more competitive without doubt[2]. Teams stand a better chance b a long shot. It is common knowledge in Major League Baseball that the Yankees and Boston Red Sox will be playoff teams[3]. While other teams are known at the very beginning of the season that they will not make the playoffs. This is not competitive if it can easily be predicted who is going and who is not before baseball season even starts. With no salary cap it removes the competitive edge of the sport. People want to watch sports that are competitive.

[2]http://bleacherreport.com...
[3]http://www.weei.com...

2.Salary Caps lead to higher ratings, higher ratings lead to higher profits.
I said in point #1 salary caps make sports more competitive. Competitive sports tend to have higher ratings. Those higher ratings will lead to higher profits due to advertising and sales. Even the bad NFL teams gain higher ratings than good MLB teams[4]. There is more money to be made in sports that are competitive, unpredictable, and that have a slary cap than those without a salary cap. No salary cap means lower ratings because the sport has become more predictable with who is going to win after the best people are hired with ease.

[4]http://www.awfulannouncing.com...

3.Salary caps are fair.
I described this above.
Debate Round No. 1
Yanks4eva

Pro

A salary cap doesn't not let teams play into strengths and it is not true that the Yankees and Red Sox will make the playoffs look at Oakland they make the playoffs and Boston used Billy Beane system to win their championships meanwhile the Yankees did not even make the playoffs this year despite having the highest payroll and I would argue that teams who build with cheap prospects can be good also the nfl makes more ratings just because the sport is more popular however whenever you get a team that doesn't spend much and wins ratings are huge and not always does the best players go to the best teams because if the draft and building through prospects two of the best pitchers in the mlb Jose Fernandez and Matt Harvey are on losing teams also teams run a large risk in big contracts look at arod who is right now killing the Yankees and football despite a salary cap some teams are never good and some teams are always good
Tophatdoc

Con

"A salary cap doesn't not let teams play into strengths"

Of course it does not play to a teams strengths. That is the good part about it because the sprt is more competitve.

"It is not true that the Yankees and Red Sox will make the playoffs look at Oakland they make the playoffs and Boston used Billy Beane system to win their championships meanwhile the Yankees did not even make the playoffs this year despite having the highest payroll"

It is more than likely that the Yankees and the Red Sox will make the playoffs. Let us look at the MLB playoffs from 2007-2013 as I have shown below. The following teams have made the playoffs three or more times out of seven of those years Boston Red Sox, Detroit Tigers, the LA Angels, the LA Dodgers, New York Yankees, Philadelphia Phillies, St.Loius Cardinals, Tampa Bay Rays, and the Texas Rangers.It is true that the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees are likely to make the playoffs. That can't contended because it is a fact. If we went back even further it validated more so that the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees are likely to make the playoffs.

http://mlb.mlb.com...
http://mlb.mlb.com...
http://mlb.mlb.com...
http://mlb.mlb.com...
http://mlb.mlb.com...
http://mlb.mlb.com...
http://mlb.mlb.com...

"I would argue that teams who build with cheap prospects can be good"

That is not true. Let us look at the Baltimore Orioles and the Washington Nationals who have had cheap prospects. Both teams have made the playoffs only once in the last seven years.

"the nfl makes more ratings just because the sport is more popular"

No, people enjoy the NFL the same reason why they enjoy watching the most popular reality TV shows. It is that they are unpredictable, intense, and exhilarating[1]. The MLB is very predictable as I pointed out above. So how can it be entertaining as the NFL?

[1]http://academic.csuohio.edu...

"whenever you get a team that doesn't spend much and wins ratings are huge"

Not true, the Houston Astros last year consistently had horrible ratings according to Nielsen Media. At one point they drew 0.0 in the Nielsen ratings[2]. One should even wonder if this even should be on television at all if ratings will be so poor.

[2]http://mlb.si.com...

"not always does the best players go to the best teams because if the draft and building through prospects two of the best pitchers in the mlb Jose Fernandez and Matt Harvey are on losing teams are on losing teams also teams run a large risk in big contracts look at arod who is right now killing the Yankees"

You further validated my point. The worse teams talent will stick out because majority of the players are of inferior quality compared to the best teams. On the best teams, many players will be inhibited from ever being the best because the team has so much talent.

"football despite a salary cap some teams are never good and some teams are always good"

That is not true, even the Deroit Lions and Houston Texans have been to the playoffs recently. Tens years ago both teams would of not even be considered playoff potential. Also teams are not always good. Twenty years ago, one would of never speculated the New Orleans Saints, New England Patriots, or even the Seattle Seahawks would be considered good teams. But they are considered so in today's time.

Debate Round No. 2
Yanks4eva

Pro

Meanwhile the Red Sox have guided away from huge contracts and haves made the playoffs really the only two teams that spend a lot are the yankees and the dodgers also orioles and nationals are two very good teams right now Washington has maybe the best pitcher and outfielder in the game and Baltimore just made the playoffs and are still competing for a berth and have the best home run hitter in baseball also Oakland is one of the best teams and there payroll last year was so low and the World Series winner the Red Sox used the moneyball system and since using it have won 3 World Series also the most exciting off season is the mlb because many teams have no restrictions but the nfl offseason is boring
Tophatdoc

Con

"Meanwhile the Red Sox have guided away from huge contracts and haves made the playoffs really the only two teams that spend a lot are the yankees and the dodgers"

I agree b the Red Sox have moved away from huge contracts recently. Aso you should of defined what you mean by "huge contracts." Were you referring to annual salary alone or the amount gained from a contract cumulatively.

"also orioles and nationals are two very good teams right now Washington has maybe the best pitcher and outfielder in the game and Baltimore just made the playoffs and are still competing for a berth and have the best home run hitter in baseball "

That is Pro's opinion. I tend to think otherwise. Pro and I can debate this another time if he wishes. I wouldn't mind it because I have enjoyed this debate.

"also Oakland is one of the best teams and there payroll last year was so low "

What do you mean by their payroll was low last year?

"the World Series winner the Red Sox used the moneyball system and since using it have won 3 World Series"

Agreed.

"also the most exciting off season is the mlb because many teams have no restrictions but the nfl offseason is boring"

This is also Pro's opinion. I tend to disagree with this as well. We can debate it another time.


All the points I provided in Round 1 stand as is. Also my opponent seemed to stop advocating the resolution at some point in this debate if you have been following.
Here are the points again:
1. Salary caps makes sports more competitive.

2.Salary Caps lead to higher ratings, higher ratings lead to higher profits.

3.Salary caps are fair.

I would like to thank my opponent for hosting this debate. I found it a bit fun. Also thank you, the voters and observers who took the time to read this debate. Voters, read thoroughly as you wish and vote at you as you see fit. If you came to the conclusion after reading this debate that I provided a stronger argument for why there should be salary cap, Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Yanks4eva 3 years ago
Yanks4eva
Hey it was my first debate give me a break
Posted by Tophatdoc 3 years ago
Tophatdoc
@supergoalie1617, I allowed Pro to continue because it seemed it was his first debate. Hopefully, he will learn from it.
Posted by supergoalie1617 3 years ago
supergoalie1617
"A salary cap doesn't not let teams play into strengths and it is not true that the Yankees and Red Sox will make the playoffs look at Oakland they make the playoffs and Boston used Billy Beane system to win their championships meanwhile the Yankees did not even make the playoffs this year despite having the highest payroll and I would argue that teams who build with cheap prospects can be good also the nfl makes more ratings just because the sport is more popular however whenever you get a team that doesn't spend much and wins ratings are huge and not always does the best players go to the best teams because if the draft and building through prospects two of the best pitchers in the mlb Jose Fernandez and Matt Harvey are on losing teams also teams run a large risk in big contracts look at arod who is right now killing the Yankees and football despite a salary cap some teams are never good and some teams are always good"

If I was con, I would have ended the debate right here. Not to be rude, but not a single period, comma, ect... in this paragraph. And I use "paragraph" lightly. Incredibly hard to read what pro is saying here, longest run on sentence I've ever seen in my life. It's really hard to take your opinion seriously if you can't even construct a single paragraph using basic grammar.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
Yanks4evaTophatdocTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm simply not seeing strong reasons to support a removal of salary caps in all sports. Pro doesn't provide warrants for his explanation of how this will improve anything specifically. Meanwhile, I see well warranted, detailed argumentation from Con. He gives me three solid reasons to vote for him, and Pro only seeks to mitigate these. It's not enough. Con also wins spelling and grammar because, frankly, it was difficult to read and understand Pro's posts at times. Only Con sourced his arguments.
Vote Placed by Swagmasterpoopoo 3 years ago
Swagmasterpoopoo
Yanks4evaTophatdocTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: sources and formatting to con