WWE & TNA Forum
Wrestling News
Loading...


Go Back   WrestleZone Forums > The WrestleZone Forum Archives > Non-Wrestling Archives > Sports Debater's League
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Arcade vBookie

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-18-2011, 10:50 AM
Cena's Little Helper's Avatar
Cena's Little Helper Cena's Little Helper is offline
Registered User
WWE European Champion
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The DMV
Posts: 1,889
Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Sexy View Post
You said it yourself, no one can watch round the clock Olympic coverage. The World Cup has the advantage of having set times for each game that is very easy to follow and everyone knows when each game is on. It's nearly impossible to follow all of the Olympic coverage and the schedule they have. People tune in to the Olympic events that they want to see.
Which still leaves what? About 5/6s of the Olympics being nothing but events that only a handful of people will want to watch?

The comparison between the viewerships for each is still valid, especially when you consider the fact that networks have no problem choosing which events to broadcast. If there was more interest in the Olympics, it would be spread out over a longer period of time and/or networks would buy the rights to air more of it.

Quote:
And no the archery point doesn't work for your argument because there is still someone around the world that does like to watch the sport. Like I said the Olympics has something for everyone the World Cup is revolved around one thing. Do most people around the world enjoy it? Yes. Does everyone? No.
Whether or not one person likes archery is irrelevant to this debate. What's relevant to this debate is whether or not the aggregation of people who enjoy the more obscure Olympic events rivals the total amount of people who enjoy the World Cup; it doesn't, and it doesn't even rival the number of people who enjoy the World Cup when added to the number of people who enjoy the most popular events at the Summer Olympics.

Quote:
The Olympics even with all of the less watched sports still have multiple heavily watched events as opposed to the World Cup's one.
Again, you're incorrectly equating variety with popularity. I've already addressed this issue right above this quoted portion of your post.


Quote:
No, I'm comparing one of the biggest parts and attractions of the Olympics to the biggest attraction in the World Cup. The opening Olympic ceremony is a huge part of the event. The ceremony shows all of the different countries and allows each and every viewer to have pride in their country. We are comparing the importance of the Olympics to the importance of the World Cup and the fact that 1-4 billion people tuned in to watch the Olympic opening ceremony shows how important it is.
Yes, we are comparing which event is more important, and clearly the World Cup is when we take into account cumulative viewership numbers. And, yes, you're right; we are comparing the importance of the Olympics (not the Olympics opening ceremony) to the importance of the World Cup. One portion of the Olympics doesn't determine whether or not it's more important than the World Cup, especially when you consider the precipitous drop in viewership that occurs when you get to actual Olympic competition.


Quote:
That's fantastic, I never said the countries that attempted to qualify didn't care about the event. You said that 205 countries tried to qualify for the World Cup which is one more then took part in the Olympics. I responded by saying the qualifying tournaments are not actually part of the World Cup itself so that point is irrelevant.
Firstly, I never said that you said that, so I'm not even going entertain this cheap ploy of yours to make it look like I've skewed your argument.

Secondly, how are qualifying match-ups irrelevant to which of these events is more important? If the World Cup wasn't important to the majority of the world's countries, they wouldn't try to qualify, simple as that. They do, though, so it follows that they DO care about making it to the World Cup.

You could try and argue that caring about making it to the World Cup and caring about the World Cup are two totally different things, but that would be laughable indeed.


Quote:
And which part of this topic said anything about competition? It's about importance to the world and 4 billion people watching the opening ceremony shows the importance of it.
Uh, we're in a league, debating sports. I'd think that sports themselves would need to be directly addressed at least a little in each debate we have. Sports necessarily implies competition.

Quote:
76 out of 205 isn't very good especially when the majority of those 76 don't ever make it far at all.
Yet viewership figures for the World Cup grow every year and the number of countries that try to make it stays the same. The number I gave you here was meant to complete the citation of numbers that you intentionally left incomplete for the purposes of supporting your own argument. If I remember correctly, that argument was, "The possibility for a World Cup really isn't there for the majority of these countries." Like last time, my point still stands: even if making it to the World Cup is an improbability for most countries, they still try to get there every four years. If countries didn't care about the event, then they wouldn't persistently try to vie for a spot.


Quote:
And fielding Olympic teams and sending athletes to the Olympics is cheap? Just like every country attempts to make the world cup each time they also attempt to get athletes to the Olympics each time.
These costs are negligible in comparison to the costs associated with fielding a World Cup team when you take into consideration the fact that it's much easier to qualify for an Olympic event than it is to qualify for the World Cup. You've been stressing this point all along; I never thought that I'd be able to use it to my advantage in debating you.


Quote:
Unlike the World Cup not every single event could be seen worldwide. There were many territorial restrictions due to copyright issues that prevented this. You also have to take into account that multiple events were often going on at the same time. The set up of the two events is completely different in terms of how it is televised.
What territorial issues are you talking about? Show me a source that says the rights to a televised event aren't held by the IOC but held by the host nation instead. Furthermore, if you can find a source that says this, show me another that says certain host nations refuse to make those rights salable.

And, as I said in the beginning of this post, if there was interest in simultaneously-held events, then one of them would be broadcast later or they'd be held at separate times.


Quote:
Do you enjoy putting words in peoples mouths? I was just using the US as an example to show that not every single country sees football as the number one sport. With the Olympics every single country can find something they enjoy and something that is of importance to them.
I have never put a word in your mouth; since you're on the wrong side of the debate, though, I understand why you've resorted to saying this.

Again, I'll point out the obvious here: you're incorrectly equating variety with popularity. Popularity is what matters here since we're debating which event is more important to the world.


Quote:
The fact that you dismiss the opening Olympic ceremonies is absolutely laughable. It's probably the most important part of the event and in essence defines the importance of the Olympics to the world. Hence why it's viewership absolutely shit on that of the World Cup final.
It's not laughable at all. What's laughable is that you think this proves that the Olympics has a premium in terms of importance over the World Cup. If the Olympics actually had an importance premium, people would, relatively speaking, give a fuck about the actual Olympics that follow the opening ceremonies.
__________________
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-18-2011, 01:42 PM
Big Sexy's Avatar
Big Sexy Big Sexy is offline
Deadly Rap Cannibal
King of the Ring
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Age: 28
Posts: 3,212
Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdigle View Post
Which still leaves what? About 5/6s of the Olympics being nothing but events that only a handful of people will want to watch?
You can't look at the Olympic ratings in terms of each and every event because consistency obviously won't be there with the variety. The fact that 4.7 billion people worldwide watched a portion of the Olympics throughout the 2 weeks is what you need to look at.

Quote:
Whether or not one person likes archery is irrelevant to this debate. What's relevant to this debate is whether or not the aggregation of people who enjoy the more obscure Olympic events rivals the total amount of people who enjoy the World Cup; it doesn't, and it doesn't even rival the number of people who enjoy the World Cup when added to the number of people who enjoy the most popular events at the Summer Olympics.
Says who? FIFA? They have basically admitted that the high number they say watch the World Cup overall is estimated and it isn't a very good estimate at all according to most places. The fact remains the World Cup lasts longer and every match is broadcast as opposed to the OLympics that lasts two weeks and while in the US it may be on 24/7 the same can't be said everywhere around the world where only some parts are shown.
Quote:
Again, you're incorrectly equating variety with popularity. I've already addressed this issue right above this quoted portion of your post.
No. I'm using both variety and popularity to prove my point.

Quote:
Yes, we are comparing which event is more important, and clearly the World Cup is when we take into account cumulative viewership numbers. And, yes, you're right; we are comparing the importance of the Olympics (not the Olympics opening ceremony) to the importance of the World Cup. One portion of the Olympics doesn't determine whether or not it's more important than the World Cup, especially when you consider the precipitous drop in viewership that occurs when you get to actual Olympic competition.
The opening ceremony is just one portion but it is the biggest portion of the event and the one portion of the event that every person worldwide is given the opportunity to watch.

Quote:
Secondly, how are qualifying match-ups irrelevant to which of these events is more important? If the World Cup wasn't important to the majority of the world's countries, they wouldn't try to qualify, simple as that. They do, though, so it follows that they DO care about making it to the World Cup.
Are you serious right now? Where did I say countries didn't care about making it to the World Cup? I said that the countries that don't qualify obviously aren't going to care as much about the actual 32 team tournament itself. As opposed to the Olympics where every country has at least something to be prideful about and have the chance to see their country compete and possibly win a medal.

Quote:
You could try and argue that caring about making it to the World Cup and caring about the World Cup are two totally different things, but that would be laughable indeed.
I'm not trying to argue that countries that don't make the World Cup don't care about the event. I'm arguing that the countries that don't make it are not going to care nearly as much about the actual tournament when their country isn't in it.
Quote:
Uh, we're in a league, debating sports. I'd think that sports themselves would need to be directly addressed at least a little in each debate we have. Sports necessarily implies competition.
They are being addressed plenty in this debate. The opening ceremony ratings is one of many reasons why the Olympics are more important. As opposed to you who seem to think that skewed, inaccurate worldwide tv ratings are the only think that makes a sporting event important.

Quote:
"The possibility for a World Cup really isn't there for the majority of these countries." Like last time, my point still stands: even if making it to the World Cup is an improbability for most countries, they still try to get there every four years. If countries didn't care about the event, then they wouldn't persistently try to vie for a spot.
And once again, I never said these countries didn't care about making the event and I never said they didn't care to watch. I just said it isn't as important as the Olympics.

Quote:
These costs are negligible in comparison to the costs associated with fielding a World Cup team when you take into consideration the fact that it's much easier to qualify for an Olympic event than it is to qualify for the World Cup. You've been stressing this point all along; I never thought that I'd be able to use it to my advantage in debating you.
It doesn't advantage you in any way. What do you think costs more, fielding a potential World Cup team that most likely won't make the actual tournament or sending athletes across the world to the Olympics?

Quote:
What territorial issues are you talking about? Show me a source that says the rights to a televised event aren't held by the IOC but held by the host nation instead. Furthermore, if you can find a source that says this, show me another that says certain host nations refuse to make those rights salable.
Quote:
Globally, the 2008 Olympics was subject to extensive copyright restriction, which amounted to territorial restrictions whilst still being covered extensively online within various exclusive copyright autarkies. Thus despite the international nature of the event and the global reach of the internet, the coverage world wide of assorted nation-states and television networks was not readily accessible.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Su...Media_coverage
Quote:
Again, I'll point out the obvious here: you're incorrectly equating variety with popularity. Popularity is what matters here since we're debating which event is more important to the world.
And your skewed, inaccurate FIFA estimated ratings aren't a good base to prove that.

Quote:
It's not laughable at all. What's laughable is that you think this proves that the Olympics has a premium in terms of importance over the World Cup. If the Olympics actually had an importance premium, people would, relatively speaking, give a fuck about the actual Olympics that follow the opening ceremonies.
4.7 billion people did care and watched the Olympics. 204 countries were able to watch there athletes compete with the best in the world and 80 of those countries got to witness their athletes succeed and bring home a medal.
__________________
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-18-2011, 02:48 PM
Cena's Little Helper's Avatar
Cena's Little Helper Cena's Little Helper is offline
Registered User
WWE European Champion
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The DMV
Posts: 1,889
Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Sexy View Post
You can't look at the Olympic ratings in terms of each and every event because consistency obviously won't be there with the variety. The fact that 4.7 billion people worldwide watched a portion of the Olympics throughout the 2 weeks is what you need to look at.
It's this lack of consistency which makes the Olympics less important than the World Cup. I've already stressed this multiple times. The consistency's not there and the only viewership numbers that work in your favor are for a ceremony that doesn't include any competition.


Quote:
Says who? FIFA? They have basically admitted that the high number they say watch the World Cup overall is estimated and it isn't a very good estimate at all according to most places. The fact remains the World Cup lasts longer and every match is broadcast as opposed to the OLympics that lasts two weeks and while in the US it may be on 24/7 the same can't be said everywhere around the world where only some parts are shown.
I accounted for the overestimation in my second post, and even conservative estimates of the cumulative viewership for the 2006 World Cup are right above 8.7 billion people. That's 700 million short of doubling the cumulative viewership for the 2008 Olympics.



Quote:
No. I'm using both variety and popularity to prove my point.
You've given no proof whatsoever that the Olympics are as popular as the World Cup. All you've shown is that one non-competitive segment outranked the 2006 World Cup final in viewership. This is nowhere near proving that the Olympics are as popular as the World Cup.


Quote:
The opening ceremony is just one portion but it is the biggest portion of the event and the one portion of the event that every person worldwide is given the opportunity to watch.
Exactly, it's just one portion. The Olympics pales in comparison to the World Cup in every other measurable aspect of popularity.


Quote:
Are you serious right now? Where did I say countries didn't care about making it to the World Cup? I said that the countries that don't qualify obviously aren't going to care as much about the actual 32 team tournament itself. As opposed to the Olympics where every country has at least something to be prideful about and have the chance to see their country compete and possibly win a medal.
I never said you said this. I said that you could try to argue that caring about not making it to the World Cup is not the same as caring about the World Cup. I also stated that such an argument would be laughable.

Also, the hard evidence doesn't support your argument. If people truly cared about the Olympics more than they did about the World Cup, the cumulative viewership numbers wouldn't be so distant from each other. It doesn't matter how many countries have a stake in the Olympics; if the numbers aren't there, then there aren't enough people watching or there aren't enough die-hard followers of the Olympics watching consistently. This is obviously the case.


Quote:
I'm not trying to argue that countries that don't make the World Cup don't care about the event. I'm arguing that the countries that don't make it are not going to care nearly as much about the actual tournament when their country isn't in it.
Yet the quantitative evidence shows that they do care. Sure, they might not seek out tickets for the live event, but they're tuning in.


Quote:
They are being addressed plenty in this debate. The opening ceremony ratings is one of many reasons why the Olympics are more important. As opposed to you who seem to think that skewed, inaccurate worldwide tv ratings are the only think that makes a sporting event important.
Oh, I've given plenty of reasons for why the World Cup is more important than the Olympics. It's an all-out celebration of the world's most popular sport and it has brought about peace and violence in an equal measure that the Olympics has so far never been able to even partially match. You yourself have chosen not to address these points and have instead made this debate primarily about numbers. Admittedly, though, I have no problem with this since the World Cup's numbers win out every time.

Quote:
And once again, I never said these countries didn't care about making the event and I never said they didn't care to watch. I just said it isn't as important as the Olympics.
Every measure of importance you've given shows that this isn't the case. More countries are represented? OK, then how does it follow that this makes the Olympics more important? How do you even know that most countries care about being represented in the Olympics?

Unlike you, I think it's the case that people are more passionate about a sport that they love than about national representation in competitions that they have little to no interest in.


Quote:
It doesn't advantage you in any way. What do you think costs more, fielding a potential World Cup team that most likely won't make the actual tournament or sending athletes across the world to the Olympics?
Obviously, in terms of the expected payoff, fielding a World Cup team costs more.



Did you actually read this? Let's look at it in full:

Quote:
Globally, the 2008 Olympics was subject to extensive copyright restriction, which amounted to territorial restrictions whilst still being covered extensively online within various exclusive copyright autarkies. Thus despite the international nature of the event and the global reach of the internet, the coverage world wide of assorted nation-states and television networks was not readily accessible. There was no global or supranational media coverage. The international European Broadcasting Union (EBU), for example, provided live coverage and highlights of all arenas only for certain territories on their website, Eurovisionsports.tv. Many national broadcasters likewise restrict online events to their domestic audiences. The General National Copyright Administration of China announced that "individual (sic) and websites will face fines as high as 100,000 yuan for uploading recordings of Olympic Games video to the internet,"part of an extensive campaign to protect the pertinent intellectual property rights.
Firstly, this paragraph here is clearly about copyrights, not broadcasting rights. Secondly, look at the part I bolded: these restrictions that you're talking about primarily pertain to the redistribution of Olympic coverage over the Internet.

There were absolutely no territorial restrictions on what events could be shown in a country; if the US wanted to show all track & field events, it could have done so.

My point stands unscathed: if there was as much interest in the Olympics as you claim there to be, networks would have purchased greater broadcasting rights to cover those events which they initially passed over.


Quote:
And your skewed, inaccurate FIFA estimated ratings aren't a good base to prove that.
It's actually an excellent base since I've adjusted for reliability purposes at the beginning of this debate. Are you just now getting around to the article I posted in my first rebuttal?



Quote:
4.7 billion people did care and watched the Olympics. 204 countries were able to watch there athletes compete with the best in the world and 80 of those countries got to witness their athletes succeed and bring home a medal.
Oh, I don't doubt that people do care about the Olympics, hence why I qualified my statement with "relatively speaking;" it's just that they don't care about the Olympics as much as they care about the World Cup.

All right, we've debated all points thoroughly. I'll post my closing argument sometime tonight or tomorrow morning.
__________________
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-18-2011, 05:56 PM
Big Sexy's Avatar
Big Sexy Big Sexy is offline
Deadly Rap Cannibal
King of the Ring
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Age: 28
Posts: 3,212
Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tdigle View Post
It's this lack of consistency which makes the Olympics less important than the World Cup. I've already stressed this multiple times. The consistency's not there and the only viewership numbers that work in your favor are for a ceremony that doesn't include any competition.
The lack of consistency is one negative the Olympics has but that negative is not nearly as large as the World Cup's negatives in terms the little amount of countries involved making it less important to the world as a whole.

Quote:
I accounted for the overestimation in my second post, and even conservative estimates of the cumulative viewership for the 2006 World Cup are right above 8.7 billion people. That's 700 million short of doubling the cumulative viewership for the 2008 Olympics.
8.7 billion is still a very high estimation considering the fact that most places only estimated the World Cup Final at being around 262 million viewers and you know damn well the other 47 World Cup matches were not that high. Even so I've already explained that the World Cup lasts a couple weeks longer. You can say all you want that the Olympics has more overall coverage but I wouldn't be so sure. Yes the US shows it basically 24/7 but that isn't the case for every country around the world.

Quote:
You've given no proof whatsoever that the Olympics are as popular as the World Cup. All you've shown is that one non-competitive segment outranked the 2006 World Cup final in viewership. This is nowhere near proving that the Olympics are as popular as the World Cup.
Once again the non-competitive parts are still part of the games as a whole and with the way the Olympics are set up and scheduled with all of the different events the opening ceremony is the one time that all interested parties would be guaranteed to be viewing and the interested parties were estimated to be between 1-4 billion people.

Quote:
Exactly, it's just one portion. The Olympics pales in comparison to the World Cup in every other measurable aspect of popularity.
I already stated above that there is no definitive way to say which had higher ratings due to the set up of the events and the difference in length.

Another point I'd like to make is that you seem to be using popularity as a way to measure importance.

Popular- Widely liked or appreciated
Important- Strongly affecting the course of events or the nature of things; significant.

Those are two very different definitions. Is popularity part of importance? Sure. Is it the end all be all of what is more important? No.

There's episodes of Oprah that have had higher ratings then presidential elections. That doesn't make them more important.

Quote:
Also, the hard evidence doesn't support your argument. If people truly cared about the Olympics more than they did about the World Cup, the cumulative viewership numbers wouldn't be so distant from each other. It doesn't matter how many countries have a stake in the Olympics; if the numbers aren't there, then there aren't enough people watching or there aren't enough die-hard followers of the Olympics watching consistently. This is obviously the case.
There are plenty of people watching the Olympics and like I said there is definitive comparison that can be made ratings wise. I go back to point above of importance though. The Olympics try to bring together every single country around the world and promotes unity. The World Cup is often filled with violence from fans from competing countries.
Quote:
Oh, I've given plenty of reasons for why the World Cup is more important than the Olympics. It's an all-out celebration of the world's most popular sport and it has brought about peace and violence in an equal measure that the Olympics has so far never been able to even partially match. You yourself have chosen not to address these points and have instead made this debate primarily about numbers. Admittedly, though, I have no problem with this since the World Cup's numbers win out every time.
No you are the one who originally brought up the numbers and that has been the basis for your argument this entire time. The World Cup absolutely pales in comparison to the Olympics when it comes to promoting peace and bringing the world together.

This is what the Olympics promotes: http://www.peace.ca/peaceandtheolypmics.htm

This is what the World Cup brings about: http://www.articlesfactory.com/artic...ence-free.html Not to mention all of the controversy that already comes with the sport of football involving officiating, faking injuries, and corruption.

I'm not going to lie and say the Olympics are all peaceful and no incidents ever take place but major incidents have been very rare recently when it comes to the Summer Olympics. Violence always seems to follow the World Cup.

Quote:
Every measure of importance you've given shows that this isn't the case. More countries are represented? OK, then how does it follow that this makes the Olympics more important? How do you even know that most countries care about being represented in the Olympics?
And how do you know they don't? I can ask the exact same questions to you. How do you know the smaller countries that never make the World Cup enjoy their teams getting embarrassed? I highly doubt a country would be mad at the fact that their athletes were representing their country on a global scale competing against the best athletes in the world.

Quote:
Unlike you, I think it's the case that people are more passionate about a sport that they love than about national representation in competitions that they have little to no interest in.
And you can without any doubt in your mind tell me that all 204 countries (not counting the US) all love the sport of football and are more passionate about it then anything else. Even when for most of these countries their team never makes the actual World Cup tournament and gets to be represented.

Quote:
Firstly, this paragraph here is clearly about copyrights, not broadcasting rights. Secondly, look at the part I bolded: these restrictions that you're talking about primarily pertain to the redistribution of Olympic coverage over the Internet.

There were absolutely no territorial restrictions on what events could be shown in a country; if the US wanted to show all track & field events, it could have done so.
I know it's about copyrights and not being able to watch events or highlights over the internet is going to negatively affect some viewership and not allow the max amount of people to keep interest on every single thing that is going on.

I'm not discussing which events could be shown I'm talking about the fact that not every country had 24/7 Olympic coverage like the US so your point about the Olympics being shorter but still having equal coverage really doesn't hold weight.

Quote:
It's actually an excellent base since I've adjusted for reliability purposes at the beginning of this debate. Are you just now getting around to the article I posted in my first rebuttal?
I read it from the beginning. All your doing is making more estimations on top of other estimations. And once again ratings still aren't the best argument to have beacuse of the difference in length and the set up of the two events.
__________________
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-19-2011, 12:58 PM
Cena's Little Helper's Avatar
Cena's Little Helper Cena's Little Helper is offline
Registered User
WWE European Champion
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The DMV
Posts: 1,889
Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...Cena's Little Helper is an Intercontinental Champion...
Default

Closing Argument


I argued at the beginning of this debate that the World Cup was more important to the world than the Summer Olympics and I stand by that argument. Both quantitative and qualitative reasons support my argument. Quantitatively speaking, the World Cup is watched by more people than the Summer Olympics and just as many try countries try to qualify for the quadrennial football tournament. On the qualitative side of things, true stories abound about the effects that the World Cup has on people's behavior. From bringing about a ceasefire in a small, war-torn West African nation to precipitating the assassination of a Colombian footballer in his own country, the World Cup runs the gamut of passion. Although the Olympics is undoubtedly the better celebration of sport in general, no other sporting event in the world garners more interest or rouses people's emotions like the World Cup.
__________________
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-19-2011, 05:34 PM
Big Sexy's Avatar
Big Sexy Big Sexy is offline
Deadly Rap Cannibal
King of the Ring
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit
Age: 28
Posts: 3,212
Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...Big Sexy is going to make some noise in the draft...
Default

Closing Argument


I argued that the Summer Olympics was a more important event then the World Cup. One of my main reasons was that the Olympics offer something for everyone as opposed to the World Cup. Not only is football part of the Olympics, with the U23 rule attached, but other very popular international sports such as basketball, tennis, and boxing are involved as well. The other main reason was that the Olympics are a much more worldly event where every country around the world is involved. The World Cup has only 32 countries involved every 4 years while the Olympics has over 200 countries involved making it much more important on a global scale.

My main opposition in this debate focused on ratings more then anything else. He has tried to say that I was the one to make it a huge issue but he brought up that whole argument and he was the one who kept driving it home in each and every response making it the main focus of his debate. There are two reasons why this was not a good argument.

1. There is no undeniable way of knowing who had the better ratings. The two events are of different lengths and it's impossible to know the exact amount of coverage worldwide each receives in the time periods they take place. There are many estimated numbers out there but nothing official and nothing that can show how much of each event people got to see considering the differences in length.

2. My main opposition seemed to be using popularity as a way to measure importance. While popularity may play a part in importance it is only a small one and not the end all be all of what is more important. The Olympics offers every country a chance to compete and every fan a chance to show pride in their country. The benefits of the Olympics far outweighs the World Cup. If the World Cup ceased to exist then the Olympics just make a quick fix and get rid of the U23 rule for football. If the Olympics ceased to exist it would do far more damage.
__________________
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:33 PM.

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"
Contact Us - Clear Cookies - Lost Password - WrestleZone Forums - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Top - AdChoices