Week 4: SavageTaker -versus- Lariat

Discussion in 'Debator's League 2009' started by Mr. TM, Aug 23, 2009.

  1. Mr. TM

    Mr. TM Throwing a tantrum

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    998
    Should wrestlers use an agent?

    Lariat is the home debater, he gets to choose which side of the debate he is on first, but he has 24 hours.

    Remember to read the rules. This thread is only for the debaters.

    This round ends +2 hours after Friday 1:00 pm Pacific
     
    #1
  2. It's...Baylariat!

    It's...Baylariat! Team Finnley Baylor

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    964
    Likes Received:
    851
    I'll argue that wrestlers SHOULD use agents.

    I think wrestlers should use agents NOW, because the only legitimate game in town now is the WWE. It’s the major leagues of pro wrestling. The reasoning for this is simply if they become a big star, they can control how their name is used, how their products are marketed and control exactly how much money they can get from merchandise, royalties, and Pay-per-views. But the only way it would work is if the wrestler is an established star or has so much upside, that Vince McMahon is willing to negotiate with someone that has an agent. We’re talking the kind of talent that can change a company. A great example of someone who would have benefited immensely from an agent would be Jack Swagger.


    Jack Swagger has so much upside, it’s ridiculous. He’s Brock Lesnar with intelligence. He’s great on the mike despite a lisp, he’s a helluva athlete, and he’s someone who can be built to become a major impact player in the next few years. He’s someone you could build the WWE around. And Swagger is someone who needs an agent to get his name out there in pop culture. It’s not that the WWE won’t do it; it’s a matter of when and HOW the WWE does it.


    With an agent, a wrestler can control where he and how he promotes the product and on which stages. Of course it’s limited with the WWE’s flagship station, RAW, being on USA, which is owned by NBC Universal. So instead of just seeing a wrestler on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon or on the Today Show, you’d see them on other shows on other networks. The WWE limits the exposure of their wrestlers to simply promote the PPV or product that’s coming out at the time and that’s it. Other questions about real things and stuff that matters to them are limited if not completely avoided when on these shows. And also having an agent to negotiate with can prevent bitter ends to relationships when things go sour. If there’s an agreement already in place that was negotiated before things possibly go south, then no matter the circumstances, things are set in stone and understood.


    A good example of how this could have worked for someone is Mr. Kennedy. IF he was able to negotiate the terms of using his name and the like, he may have been able to keep the Kennedy moniker and still use the catchphrases. Now, he’s Mr. Anderson, which isn’t as catchy, and frankly, is unrecognized. If he negotiates a contract with conditions with an agent to market him, he’d be able to keep his name…and still manage to give a percentage to the WWE of whatever he makes off of the name. Instead, Kennedy’s stuck without his name and released.
    Of course, this would only work with the WWE, a company that has money and is able to negotiate this kind of thing. TNA doesn’t have the monetary resources to negotiate with an agent and will typically stay away from someone who has one. But the WWE is the money maker right now, and if I was a top tier pro wrestler, I’d hire an agent. It worked for Lex Luger.


    Yes, Luger was the FIRST known wrestler to hire an agent and lawyers to negotiate contracts and how he could use his name. It was unheard of to do such a thing because in the mid ‘80’s, a handshake agreement was as good as a contract. Not with Luger. It shook a lot of things up in the locker room mainly because Luger was unproven and had not wrestled very much at the time. He had the look, but was not very proven as a dependable main event caliber wrestler. But with an agent, he managed to get a solid contract with some great money in a time where it was not very common to do so.


    In conclusion, wrestlers nowadays need agents. They need them simply for money and marketing purposes. In a time where the economy is bad, wrestlers need someone to help them get the maximum dollar they can get for their talent. It also helps to negotiate terms while in good standing with a promotion, that way, when things go sour, you can always have things set in stone such as name usage and merchandise sales.
     
    #2
  3. SavageTaker

    SavageTaker Everybody Has A Price!

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2009
    Messages:
    1,097
    Likes Received:
    591
    First of all, I want to apologize for being a little bit tardy on this debate, but I do want to tell the judges that I told TM I would be tardy because I just started school so I wouldn’t be online as much. And second, I would like to wish my opponent the best of luck and I hope that we have a great debate. So without any more delays, I will start explaining why wrestlers don’t need an agent in the wrestling world we are currently living in.

    First let’s look at what exactly what the job of an agent is. My opponent did mention some of the things that agents do for wrestlers such as controlling how their names are used, how they are marketed, and they can control how much money they receive from various different things, such as pay per view buys, merchandise sales, e.t.c. So, now that we have established what the job of an agent actually is, let me explain why they aren’t needed anymore.

    My opponent mentioned that the WWE is the major leagues when it comes to wrestling, which I agree to, and that having an agent could have helped a few of the wrestlers that are no longer with the company and some that are currently with them. But he failed to point something out which I will gladly point out, Vince isn’t a fan of wrestlers having agents.

    Here is a link to the interview he said that in:


    In case some of the judges don’t want to read or look for the part he said that in, I will post it here:

    So, we have established that he (Vince McMahon) isn’t a fan of agents and that WWE is the major leagues in wrestling, therefore Vince isn’t going to like negotiating a contract with an agent. He wants to negotiate with the wrestlers themselves, so having an agent doesn’t help their chances of joining the company.

    The WWE is the biggest wrestling company in the world and it’s the promotion that a lot of wrestlers want to make it in. If it’s something that wrestlers really want to do (join WWE) then they aren’t going to jeopardize their chances of possibly joining the company. Having an agent will obviously not help them because Vince isn’t a fan of them. Bottom line is that wrestlers will do basically anything to get in the WWE and having an agent negotiating isn’t going to help their cases, so they shouldn’t have them in order to not have their chances of joining the company decrease.

    Then there’s also the fact, and I think this is something that I think my and opponent and I can agree on, that the wrestler back then were a lot different than a lot of the current crop of wrestlers. It’s well known that wrestlers back then had a much different lifestyle. Some wrestlers would even compare it to the rock ‘n’ roll lifestyle. Today’s wrestlers (and this was also stated in the interview I posted the link of) have a much different lifestyle. They rather not go out and party.

    What does this mean? It means that wrestlers today are smarter than a lot of wrestlers back in the 80’s and 90’s. They don’t need someone negotiating how much money they earn, because either ways they are still going to get a lot of money if they were to join a mainstream promotion. Back then, wrestlers needed agents to negotiate for them since they needed more money because of their lifestyles and all of the things they did. Today wrestlers don’t need more to try and get more money because they are preached about saving their money, using it wisely, and e.t.c., someone who is notorious for preaching to the wrestlers those things is Jim Ross.

    Jim is known for always talking to the younger talent and telling them so save their money so that they don’t need to be wrestling until they are old and past their primes. This wasn’t the case for the wrestlers back then. They didn’t have someone telling them those types of things and giving them advice when it comes to money. So ultimately, it’s always a good thing to make some more money than one usually makes, but wrestlers don’t need to do it because it’s way different today. They don’t need the extra money and they don’t need an agent trying to get them more money than they actually need.

    So overall, I don’t think wrestlers need agents because if they want to join a company like the WWE, it doesn’t help their chances since Vince isn’t a fan of the agents. He prefers doing the negotiating with the wrestlers themselves. The other reason wrestlers don’t need agents is because they don’t need them doing the things they do since they are already earning a lot of money, which is something an agent tries to get more of for the wrestlers.
     
    #3
    Mr. TM likes this.
  4. It's...Baylariat!

    It's...Baylariat! Team Finnley Baylor

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    964
    Likes Received:
    851
    This is a good argument with Vince not liking it and all; however, I still go to the fact that if someone’s off the charts good, Vince is known to swallow some pride on things. IF Mr. McMahon had a shot at signing a huge athlete that has an agent, I’m sure he’d work around it. It’s not often that someone comes along that could possibly change the game and to me, THAT is someone who has an agent. And to maximize said wrestler making so much money, he’d have to negotiate a deal that would work for him just in case he was injured or couldn’t wrestle due to some other issues.

    Vince isn’t a fan of a lot of things, yet they still stick around if they benefit him. Jim Ross is a great example of this. Vince HATES JR, yet knows that without Ross, how will anyone know how to tell a good story on TV and listen to direction on the headsets. Although he can’t stand him, he still gainfully employs him and puts him on TV once a week. So an agent isn’t a deal breaker for Vince, but merely a stumbling block at the most. If Kennedy had an agent, then I might see Vince telling him to go elsewhere, but if someone like Swagger or AJ Styles had an agent, I’d say McMahon would be willing to work things out as long as he can get said wrestler in the ring to make his product enjoyable and profitable.

    Some say Vince may not work with them. I say he’ll do what’s best for him and if that requires having to give in to a wrestler with an agent, you can guarantee that he’ll do it. He might put that wrestler on a short leash, but he’ll still work with him and that wrestler will have a good, sound contract that’s well written out and benefits both parties equally.
     
    #4
  5. Mr. TM

    Mr. TM Throwing a tantrum

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    998
    Sorry mates, this is the 4th time I have written this. This computer hates me. Great debate topic, with some great points being brought up. However, I notice Mick Foley's lack of history being brought up here.

    Clarity of debate- 1 point
    Great job as many of my debates put forth, but I feel Lariat did the better job of trimming the fat here.
    Punctuality- 1 point
    ST had an excuse for being late, but wished he'd given more. Lariat can't be faulted here, so he gets the point.

    Informative- 1 point
    The winning point really was ST's biggest point. Vince McMahon's thought on agents. Wasn't the best point possible, but it worked. ST FTPoint

    Emotionality- 1 point
    Lariat showed a little, ST showed a little. However, ST's dominance impressed me, so he gets this point.

    Persuasion- 1 point
    I came in thinking that Agents could be good, could be bad, depending on their use, and ST hit all my reasons why for both sides. He gets this point.

    TM rates this 3 points ST to 2 points Lariat.
     
    #5
  6. Cena's Little Helper

    Cena's Little Helper Mid-Card Championship Winner

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2008
    Messages:
    1,646
    Likes Received:
    1,498
    Clarity Of Debate - Lariat, you did a great job here of getting to the heart of the matter.

    Point: Lariat

    Punctuality - See TM's post.

    Point: Lariat

    Informative - A lot of information was not cited in this debate. SavageTaker, I'll give you the point here for making the effort to cite one of your pieces of evidence.

    Point: SavageTaker

    Emotionality - Not that much emotion in this debate, but I think this had more to do with the topic than with the debaters. Lariat, you seemed to speak from the heart, so I'll give the point to you.

    Point: Lariat

    Persuasion - I am actually torn here. Lariat, you showed me that agents can be quite beneficial to wrestlers, but you never really overcame SavageTaker's point that having an agent may preclude a wrestler from being hired by WWE. Ultimately, your argument made me believe that an agent is only beneficial to those wrestlers in WWE who want more leverage in negotiations over contract extensions or renewals. I'm going to split the point here.

    Point: Split

    tdigle's Score

    Lariat - 3.5
    SavageTaker - 1.5
     
    #6
  7. CH David

    CH David A Jock That Loves Pepsi

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Messages:
    896
    Likes Received:
    768
    Clarity: Lariat did a good job of explaining how it would be good and bad for wrestlers to have an agent, whereas ST said it would mainly be detrimental in Vince's eyes.

    Point: Lariat

    Punctuality: See TM's post.

    Point: Lariat

    Informative: I really think that the article ST used was one of the finer points of his argument, and Lariat couldn't really combat it that much.

    Point: SavageTaker

    Emotionality: Neither really stood out to me. I think ST's post had more of an against the opposition feel to it though.

    Point: SavageTaker

    Persuasion: I really feel that Lariat's debate can only be geared towards WWE, and he even admitted that I believe, even though the debate is geared as all wrestlers I would think. TM correct me if I am wrong on that front. ST did a good job saying how wrestlers with agents would probably turn Vince away from them, but may take smaller companies for more money than they deserve at the time.

    Point: SavageTaker

    CH David scores this SavageTaker 3, Lariat 2.
     
    #7
    Mr. TM likes this.
  8. BooCocky

    BooCocky On A Nature walk with Daniel Bryan

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2007
    Messages:
    1,536
    Likes Received:
    687
    Clarity Of Debate - See Tdigle and TM's post.

    Point: Lariat

    Punctuality - See TM's post.

    Point: Lariat

    Informative - The McMahon piece won this point for SavageTaker. He was the only one who tried to get a nice piece of information

    Point: SavageTaker

    Emotionality - I don't think either poster was into this topic, seeing as how the posts are somewhat small and there is a limited number of posts in this thread. SavageTaker had his back against the wall and prevailed.

    Point: SavageTaker

    Persuasion - I found myself agreeing with SavageTaker. Lariat did nothing to persuade me. SavageTaker gets the point.

    Point: SavageTaker

    Points

    SavageTaker-3
    Lariat-2
     
    #8
    Mr. TM likes this.
  9. Miko

    Miko WATCHA GONNA DO, BROTHER!?

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,240
    Likes Received:
    1,254
    Clarity Of Debate - Lariat gets the point for this one

    Point: Lariat

    Punctuality - TM's post and all that

    Point: Lariat

    Informative - SavageTaker bought more info to the table, so I guess he gets the point

    Point: SavageTaker

    Emotionality - Yeah split point

    Point: Split

    Persuasion - Found myself agreeing with that Lariat guy, even if he way overrates Jack Swagger. Point for that guy.

    Point: Lariat

    I score this round
    SavageTaker - 1.5
    Lariat - 3.5
     
    #9
    Mr. TM likes this.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"