The Redskins ought to lose games and play for a 1st round draft pick.

====== His Case ====== Contention 1: Jim Zorn and staff will likely be fired at the end of the season. ---- I would like to contend the contrary. 1. Zorn has continually risen in the ranks. He is likely to continue to rise. -He started as a professional quarterback for the Seattle Sea hawks, then Green Bay's Packers, and finally the Tampa Buccs, giving him actual experience in what Pro football is like from a player's perspective. (1976-1987) -He then moved up to multiple different college coaching positions. (1988-1996) -After that, he became a professional coaching assistant. (1997-2007) -That leaves him where he is today, coaching Washington. (. http://en.wikipedia.org...) 2. The Washington Redskins' record isn't dreadful. There are currently multiple teams doing worse than the Red Skins. They've won 33% of their games this year and one half of their games last year. While this isn't great, it is early enough on in the season to pull out of. 1 bad year that isn't even half over isn't enough to condemn this coach to failure. My opponent is going to need some real evidence to support his claim. ==== Contention 2: This team has no reliable offense, and the defense cannot pitch shutouts. ---- There is nothing to say that the offense isn't reliable. My opponent will need to prove this. The same applies to the defense's ability to 'pitch shutouts', though it doesn't really matter anyway: There have been 79 shutouts in 1,168 regular-season games this decade. That's about one shutout every 15 games. It's not a common or necessary ability of the defense. After 6 games, we wouldn't know anyway, as it is 15 games on average per shut out. . http://en.wikipedia.org... ==== Contention 3: If the 'Skins win any more games it will drop them in the draft. ---- Yep. So should all teams do their best to lose? You're not drawing any conclusions here. ==== "The NFL would go ballistic and the fans would have kittens, but this is clearly the best way to get a better offense. " ---- My opponent even admits the major negative consequences. Cats are already overpopulated already; we can't handle more kittens. (. http://www.hsus.org...) The question is, where does he get the idea that "this is clearly the best way to get a better offense? " His contentions certainly don't say that. =========================================================================== ====== My Case ====== Contention One: The Redskins should show good sportsmanship. It would be unsportsmanlike to be sore losers and just give up halfway through the season as my opponent suggests. One of the key parts of sports is participating even when the chips aren't stacked in your favor. This is made doubly true in Pro football. These athletes are the role models for children all across America. It would be in very poor taste to something as unsportsmanlike as what my opponent suggests. Contention Two: Losing on purpose will unfairly alter the NFL draft. There is a reason why the draft gives the worst teams 1st pick. It is to equalize the playing field more the next season. By intentionally altering the scores, my opponent throws off this equilibrium. The Redskins might get better players, but it would be players that they don't deserve. They would also be short changing other teams of the players they need. This deliberate draft altering would throw off the entertainment value of pro football. Contention Three: This will anger Redskins fans. My opponent concedes this in the last sentence of his case. The Redskins' goal is to garner attention and attract a crowd to their games. They won't be doing that if they lose on purpose, they will scorn their fans and their ratings will tank. Unfairly getting good players next season, if anything, would add to this resentment.