| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Alex |
Posted - 01/20/2009 : 14:35:28
Debate officially over. ThorntonistheMAN advances. Good job both of you, it was a well fought debate! |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 02/15/2009 : 10:16:04
I must admit that ThortonistheMan did the better job of defending his position. He did the way of "non-stats" based arguement. Reeder challeged some of this by ways of quotes like (paraphrasing) "People in Canada only play hockey, no one plays the other sports."
Granted, Hockey is the most actively participated sport in Canada (by Males) however that 13%. That means that of the population that play sports, 87% of the males play sports other than hockey. This took me about 2 minutes to figure out.
So as I am a homework guy, I vote Thornton as I think he did his homework a little better.
Reeder, you did a fine job, and it was close. Nice debate both of you! |
| leafsfan_101 |
Posted - 02/15/2009 : 09:09:57
I'm going to give my vote to ThorntonistheMan. Although I think that Reeder made an extremely great argument for pro-fighting, I think that some of TISM's points were sometimes slightly stronger. No to say that Reeder had bad replys and convictions of his own, but TISM managed to get his points slightly better, especially in his last post. If Reeder's last post had been longer and a bit more attacking I could see him winning, but TISM was too strong at the end.
Great Debate guys. If this is the bar then it has been set very high, which bodes well for future debates.
Next up, Me Vs. Chriso88  |
| Leafs Rock Planet |
Posted - 02/15/2009 : 07:22:42
VOTE- ThorntonisTHEMAN |
| Porkchop73 |
Posted - 02/15/2009 : 04:43:45
I am also voting with ThortonisTHEMAN for the same reason as Fat Elvis. He took the tougher arguement and made a good debate out of it. After Reeders first post I thought there was no good reply but apparently there was.
Good Debate by both. |
| hanley6 |
Posted - 02/15/2009 : 01:04:24
quote:
Originally posted by fat_elvis_rocked
quote:
Originally posted by hanley6
I am pro fighting. I personally think it would be a mistake to take fighting out of hockey. That being said my vote goes to ThorntonisTHEMAN even knowing his debate is against fighting I just feel he did a better job on his posts not that Reeder did bad cause he didn't. I just think ThorntonisTHEMAN put his points across better
Uhh...I agree with Hanley ,I'll try not make a habit of it though. 
Just kidding bud.
I do agree with ThorntonisTHEMAN, as having put up the better debate, having to take the unpopular argument.
I vote for ThorntonisTHEMAN.
Kudos to Reeder...nicely done as well, especially the 1st post.
lmao its all good |
| Lunchbox |
Posted - 02/14/2009 : 22:47:11
I am aslo voting for ThorntonisTHEMAN. Good work to both of you, though. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 02/14/2009 : 21:59:31
quote:
Originally posted by hanley6
I am pro fighting. I personally think it would be a mistake to take fighting out of hockey. That being said my vote goes to ThorntonisTHEMAN even knowing his debate is against fighting I just feel he did a better job on his posts not that Reeder did bad cause he didn't. I just think ThorntonisTHEMAN put his points across better
Uhh...I agree with Hanley,I'll try not make a habit of it though.
Just kidding bud.
I do agree with ThorntonisTHEMAN, as having put up the better debate, having to take the unpopular argument.
I vote for ThorntonisTHEMAN.
Kudos to Reeder...nicely done as well, especially the 1st post.
|
| hanley6 |
Posted - 02/14/2009 : 17:05:50
I am pro fighting. I personally think it would be a mistake to take fighting out of hockey. That being said my vote goes to ThorntonisTHEMAN even knowing his debate is against fighting I just feel he did a better job on his posts not that Reeder did bad cause he didn't. I just think ThorntonisTHEMAN put his points across better |
| Alex |
Posted - 02/14/2009 : 15:58:35
quote:
Originally posted by DangleFest89
I vote for Pro Fighting
We aren't voting for a side here guys, we are voting for who debated their side better! It isn't fair to do it any other way. It isn't fair to the guys who spent the time to write three posts to have guys decide before the debate has already begun who the winner is.
Even though I'm unsure on the actual debate, I would probably lean towards pro-fighting. Nonetheless, in this debate, at least to me, ThorntonisTHEMAN is the winner. Reeder_17 seemed to rely too heavily on the classic pro-fighting rhetoric, and didn't really come up with his own arguments and shoot down those of his combatant as well as ThorntonisTHEMAN did. For that reason, my vote goes to ThorntonisTHEMAN.
On a separate note, voting will end on February 17th. All those who are members of the great debate must vote!
''Yes we can!'' -Obama |
| Avalanche_17 |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 19:48:36
i vote for Reeder 17 |
| DangleFest89 |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 13:32:38
I vote for Pro Fighting |
| ThorntonisTHEMAN |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 11:53:08
Why try and improve upon perfection? Well, perfection would mean that the NHL is in an extremely good position financially. I can name AT LEAST 6 teams that are not doing well financially. That means that there is room for improvement.
However, moving away from the ratings, my last post will be about safety. Should not the death of the late Don Sanderson teach us something? Hockey is an extremely exciting sport but it is also very dangerous! Big, grown men (or ladies, whatever the case may be) skating around on an 8 inch skate blade is dangerous. When you add some hard body checks and some run-ins with the boards, you add even more danger. Add the little black puck flying around and you have a high probability for a hockey player to get seriously hurt. So why should we add fighting in there just to increase the danger and increase the chance of someone getting seriously hurt?
During the coarse of a fight, a player's helmet often pops off, if the player doesn't first remove his helmet. This means that when a player goes down, his head can easily come smashing down onto the ice resulting in serious head injuries or, in the case of Mr. Sanderson, death.
There has been talk about not allowing a player to remove their helmet to fight and penalizing that. This is stupid. This way, a player would be punching another players helmet with his bare hands which can easily result in breaking one's hand. It would be much easier simply to suspend the fighters.
Nobody likes change. People didn't like when goalie's started wearing masks. People didn't like when players started where helmets. However, the players started wearing helmets and the goalies started wearing masks, simply because it was much safer. Now people don't want to get rid of fighting but maybe it's time to take a good, long look at it and decide to try and protect the players by banning fighting. It's not about "pussifying" the game. It's about making it safer for the players. Let's not wait until an NHL player has to die from a hockey fight to make a rule against it. Let's act now and continue to develop our sport as the best game on earth while making it safer for those that play it. |
| Guest9544 |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 11:07:57
even knowing i'm not in this debate I wanted to say they were both good |
| Guest9544 |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 11:06:52
my vote also goes to thorntonistheman |
| Guest9544 |
Posted - 02/13/2009 : 11:05:09
my vote goes to Reeder17 |
| Reeder17 |
Posted - 02/11/2009 : 13:03:47
So, I guess with the suggestions made lets make the game as Amercianized and appealing to the Americans to save ratings. So...no fighting, nets 2m wide, goalie equipment the size of shin guards and 15-13 goal games. Sounds like a fun time. Let's be realistic lets keep the game our fathers and their fathers before them watched. Fighting is the ball thrown at the batter, it is the hard tackle of football. If you take out fighting do we want these players to start throwing pucks instead of their original system of fighting? Don't think so.
I strongly dislike people that seriously think goals sell. Some of the best games ever in the history of the game were 1-0 wins. Intensity sells. Checking, hard hits and fighting is intensity. So if you really want the NHL to sell more seats the choice is simple keep the game the same.
Why try to improve on perfection?
Sorry it took a while. I just posted something quick so we can get going.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs. |
| ThorntonisTHEMAN |
Posted - 02/03/2009 : 17:05:01
First things first, I am not American. And you are right; hockey has much higher ratings than any other sport IN CANADA. However, the NHL is not just Canadian. Twenty-four NHL teams are located in the United States. Therefore, to try and enlarge the hockey market, you must create a product that appeals to the Americans. Apparently the product that the NHL has put out hasn’t done a real great job at this. When you’re product is failing, you must try to change it to make it more appealing to a larger population. Canadian fans love fighting. Nothing like a little dance to make our blood flow. However, the majority of Canadian hockey fans would not stop watching hockey if fighting resulted in a suspension. We like the hard hits, the big saves, the highlight goals, the quick passes, and the beer. Therefore, if the NHL wants to continue to be successful, it must make hockey more appealing to the Americans.
In the USA, hockey is at the bottom in the 5 major sports. Americans love watching basketball, baseball, football, and soccer. None of these sports have fighting. Does that mean there is no passion and no intensity and no violence? Of course not! However, violence is punished and this seems to appeal to the fans. In any of these sports, fighting results in a suspension. None of these sports want to lower the talent required for the sport to the point of hiring goons to “police” the field, diamond, court etc.
However, does that mean there is not policing in these sports? No! In baseball, if you slide into second with your cleats up, you better look out the next time you are at bat because the pitcher will be throwing at you! In football, if you make an unnecessarily hard tackle on the other team’s QB, you better keep your head up because the other team will be gunning for you. Same thing for soccer. You don’t need fighting to police the ice. Big hits will do that just fine and it would get rid of the caveman tendency that hockey players have with their thinking that a fight is required to solve all the world’s problems.
You say that people love to go to Calgary and watch Iggy. And I agree. Iginla is one of the most exciting players in the game. He can do it all! He can score, he can pass, he can hit and he can fight. He’s not afraid to stick up for his team-mates. However, I would much rather have Mr. Iginla on the ice where he is a threat to score every time he has the puck than in the box where he is sitting for 5 minutes for fighting. And you cannot tell me that fans would rather watch him fight than watch him score. If there are these fans, they should be watching boxing. And this doesn’t just apply to the stars! If you take away the goons, each team would be able to ice another quality forward that is quite capable of scoring and helping your team win the game which is the ultimate goal. Fans love goals. That’s why the NHL keeps trying to shrink the goalie’s equipment. Goals are what sells, not fights. Therefore we should concentrate more on goals and good hockey and less on fights.
|
| Reeder17 |
Posted - 01/29/2009 : 14:03:47
Fighting..increases...ratings. You say "How many times do you hear someone say I’m going to a Tampa Bay vs. Chicago game. Gee, I hope there are some good fights!”
You are right you do not hear a single person say this. Reason: No one goes to these games. Tampa Bay is one of the worst financial teams in the league. Fans would rather go up to Calgary to see one of the best captains in the game in Iggy take on one of the Oliers in a heated, passionate rivalry bout.
Not to go after you, and I mean nothing personally about it, but you are American are you not? I really would like to see the Canadian ratings for the top 5 sports in North America. The place where all of hockey draws its support is in Canada. Unless you are in B.C baseball is no way more played. Soccer...soccer is a summer sport played in Canada by very few. Basketball in Canada is an utter joke. High school and college teams are jokes, our national team and NBA team is a joke. To say their is more support, you have wrong evidence. And finally football, have you not heard of the CFL. The league with some much financial problems the salary cap is around 3 million. The same amount a minor player is payed in the NFL.
To say it is the lowest of the five in all of North America is just wrong. Hockey is the only one of these sports that allows and almost encourages fighting. Coincidentally, hockey is religion in Canada. It would seem that hockey does quite a bit to attract attention and support.
Regardless of ratings, fighting is still a huge part of the game. It has existed since the very beginning. It helps police the game, it severely reduces cheap shots not to mention frees up the game and makes it fast-paced, high skilled hockey.
To take something so prestigious, so original and so pure hockey out of the game, is the equivalent to taking slam dunks out of basketball, penalty shots out of soccer, field goals out of football and home runs out of baseball. Excitement is what keeps a sport alive, and excitement is what you get from a hockey fight.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs. |
| ThorntonisTHEMAN |
Posted - 01/24/2009 : 06:30:30
Picture this with me. Your team, the Heidelburg Hornets, is down by 2 goals with 5 minutes left in the game. Your coach decides to send out John Smith, the toughest guy on your team. Smith jumps on the ice and immediately picks a fight with the other team’s toughest guy who happens to be 2 feet taller than Smith. They go toe to toe but Smith eventually loses the fight. However, his heart and courage gives your team so much motivation that you guys go and score 2 goals to tie it up and then win in overtime. A touching story, isn’t it? Unfortunately this is not how most fights work.
It is very nice to believe that most hockey fights only occur when your star player is being harassed. However, the majority of fights occur simply out of frustration. Your team is losing and you get mad so you pick a fight. One of your teammates just got crushed with very legal bodycheck, you pick a fight. Someone was standing too close to your goalie, you pick a fight. I’m not saying that there aren’t fights that are fought simply to protect your stars. However, I am saying that frustration is much more often the main factor in starting a fight. I believe that most fights occur because grown men haven’t learned to curb their frustration into something positive (ie. Scoring a goal) but rather would like to pound someone.
You say that “fighting increases ratings”. How many times do you hear someone say “I’m going to a Tampa Bay vs. Chicago game. Gee, I hope there are some good fights!” No, the majority of fans would much rather watch Vinny Lecavalier or Marty St.Louis or Patrick Kane or Jonathon Toews score a pretty goal. If people want to watch a good fight, they will go to a boxing match.
Hockey is one of 5 major sports in North America. These sports would be soccer, basketball, football, baseball, and the aforementioned hockey. Hockey is the only one of these sports that allows and almost encourages fighting. Coincidently enough, it is also the least popular sport and has the lowest ratings. It seems like the fighting idea isn’t working too well to draw fans. Fans want to watch good, fast-paced, high skilled hockey. And by taking away fighting, you replace the one (or two) goons on your team with more young speedsters making the game much higher quality. You keep the big hits which do just as much, maybe more to “police” the ice, yet you can clean up the barbaric side of hockey simply by following other sports examples and making fighting an automatic suspension.
|
| Reeder17 |
Posted - 01/22/2009 : 18:30:40
Boxing on ice, barbarians on ice, all commonly used terms to describe fighting in the NHL. However, this small percentage of fans and anti-fighting people could not be further from the truth. They do not realize that there is in fact a “method to the madness.” (Morrison 1).
Reasons for fighting:
A way of self governing between the players
Reduce cheap shots
Increases ratings and financial gain
Protect skill players
Self Governing & Reducing Cheap Shots
Any sports fan and/or hockey player knows a referee can not see everything. The referee follows the play and before you know it a spear in the gut, or a sucker punch. It happens. What most fans do not know is how cheap shots have significantly decreased since the idea of an “enforce” or “protector”. A player with less skill playing for the sole reason to govern the play behind the scenes. These players skate four to eight minutes each night on patrol. A mere eight minutes is all it takes for one player to keep the ice clear of petty cheap shot taking “criminals”. These “criminals” afraid by the presence of the self-governing players play the game of hockey, rather than reducing themselves to petty cheap shots, injuring other players, potentially taking themselves out of the game and portraying the game as a barbaric game rather than the grand of all sports.
Increases Ratings & Financial Gain For The League
As afraid as most people and NHL executives are to admit it fighting is a classic part of the game. Two great players, in the heat of battle along the boards decide to drop their “mitts” and settle their differences in one of the biggest parts of the game NHL fans, especially Canadians love. It spurs a great rivalry between players and most importantly teams. Where would the league be today without the “Battle of Ontario”, the old Nordique-Canadians rivalry, the Toronto-Montreal rivalry and the many others. Toronto and Montreal is actually a great example. Two of the most financially solid teams in the league. Throughout the years the two have been “at each others throats”, fighting, hard hit’s, the games could almost go without scoring. No fighting in the NHL, or even severely reduced fighting would tear this great game apart, lose ratings and most importantly lose “boat loads” of cash. Increasingly bad with the approaching recession in North America.
Protect Skill Players
Quite possibly the most important of all points is the protection of skilled players through fighting. Skilled players, usually shorter and lighter (such as Kariya, Crosby and Bure) often have a problem with the 6’4’’ defence-man that get overly upset when the opposing forward “dangles” around him for the goal. Seeking retribution it is not uncommon for that angered player to take a cheap shot. The best example of this, common in most pro-fighting speeches, is the Selanne and Kariya seasons of 97-98 and 98-99. In 1997-98 Selanne missed most of the season to a debatable injury, Kariya missing most of the season to injury, due to a cross check to the face. The next season the management picked up fighter/enforcer Stu Grimson. In the next season with the presence and protection of Grimson, Kariya and Selanne ranked #2 and #3 in scoring only falling short to the great Jaromir Jagr.
As we see the league grow into a faster and more high scoring game fighting must remain a big part. It is not barbaric, players do not try and kill each other. It has a purpose. It produces higher ratings and higher revenue. It allows the league to be governed as the referees do not have more than two eyes and most importantly it protects the one hundred point a season players not big or tough enough to protect themselves.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs. |
| Reeder17 |
Posted - 01/21/2009 : 08:07:44
quote:
Originally posted by ThorntonisTHEMAN
quote:
Originally posted by Reeder17
quote:
[i].
Good luck! I'm busy tonight but I should find time tommorow to start.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs.
Ah yes, and best of luck to you my buffaslug loving friend. You can start whenever it works for you, no need to rush it. Perfection takes time! 
"I'm not dumb enough to be a goalie."
Brett Hull.
Haha I am going to enjoy this. I wish I could take a break and start but I'm busy with exams.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs. |
| ThorntonisTHEMAN |
Posted - 01/21/2009 : 05:06:50
quote:
Originally posted by Reeder17
quote:
[i].
Good luck! I'm busy tonight but I should find time tommorow to start.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs.
Ah yes, and best of luck to you my buffaslug loving friend. You can start whenever it works for you, no need to rush it. Perfection takes time!
"I'm not dumb enough to be a goalie."
Brett Hull. |
| Reeder17 |
Posted - 01/20/2009 : 21:24:42
quote:
Originally posted by ThorntonisTHEMAN
well I will take the anti-fighting side. and I can go second. The gloves are on!
"I'm not dumb enough to be a goalie."
Brett Hull.
Good luck! I'm busy tonight but I should find time tommorow to start.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs. |
| ThorntonisTHEMAN |
Posted - 01/20/2009 : 16:16:46
well I will take the anti-fighting side. and I can go second. The gloves are on!
"I'm not dumb enough to be a goalie."
Brett Hull. |
| Reeder17 |
Posted - 01/20/2009 : 15:02:19
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
Information:
Reeder_17 -vs.- ThorntonisTHEMAN
Debate topic: The Role of Fighting in Hockey
Please both post your preferences for this debate in the following manner:
Post order: 1st (or 2nd or indifferent)
Debate side: Supporting fighting (or against fighting or indifferent)
In case you both want the same:
Reeder_17 gets his choice of order
ThorntonisTHEMAN gets his choice of debate topic.
In case you both select indifferent:
Reeder_17 will be posting 1st and will be pro-fighting
ThorntonisTHEMAN will be posting 2nd and will be anti-fighting.
Let the games begin!
I'm fine with 1st and pro fighting.
Crosby is not the Jesus Lord & Savior of the NHL, get over yourself McGuire.
Gretzky has never once high-sticked a member of the Toronto Maple Leafs. |
|
|
