The Cleveland Show is a terrible idea

Thanks to my opponent for his reply. Well...I guess I'll dive right in: My opponent's first contention is that the Cleveland Show is a bad idea because he thinks it's a "rip off" of the show it's a spin off of -- Family Guy. My rebuttal is that just because a show is a rip off doesn't at all mean it's a bad idea; many rip offs have attained some level of success; therefore, this show being a rip off, in and of itself, isn't a valid reason to claim it's a "terrible idea." In fact, it can be argued that Family Guy is an example of a television show that rips off another show, but, despite that, has been successful. The video I provided shows numerous examples of how Family Guy is oddly alike the Simpsons (bear with me -- most of the videos that show this have been taken down, so all that's left is a boring one that only features pictures of characters and some words. Not the most creative video ever, but it'll suffice for this debate.) http://www.youtube.com... The following articles show comic book characters (some of which have had success on TV/movies) that are clearly look to be rip offs, but have done rather well: http://www.cracked.com... http://www.cracked.com... Clearly, being a "rip off" doesn't necessarily mean a show won't attain a level of success. Secondly, my opponent contends that everyone will see it as a "black version of Family Guy" -- but I don't see this as a viable rationale to support the resolution. See, if it *is* like a "black Family Guy," then it could very well have a relatively significant appeal to Family Guy fans -- since it has already established that they're fans of Family Guy, a show with the same type of humor would obviously be something that would be enjoyable to them. Indeed, Family Guy fans are very likely the target audience for this show. And, considering Family Guy has a large following, I wouldn't be at all surprised if this show catches on with them due to the similarities. Furthermore, if this show ends up being like a "black Family Guy," as my opponent put it, then that means this show could possibly intrigue some black folks who mightn't have even been too familiar with the Family Guy program. In short, the Cleveland Show's similarity to Family Guy means it's feasible that the Cleveland Show could pick up a decent portion of Family Guy's fan base, and incorporating elements that look to appeal to black people means the Cleveland Show could tap into a new audience of blacks that didn't catch on to the Family Guy television program. So my opponent's second contention doesn't at all mean the Cleveland Show is a "terrible idea." As for my opponent's third contention, I think he has been misinformed about the supposed "hole" he claims isn't covered -- Cleveland, did, indeed, have a son in the Family Guy television show -- furthermore, his son in the Cleveland Show appears to be the same son he had in Family guy; two character biographies claim this: From the biography of the character Cleveland Brown: <"Everyone's favorite soft-spoken neighbor CLEVELAND BROWN moves to his hometown in Virginia with his 14-year old son, CLEVELAND JR."> From the biography of Cleveland, Jr: <"Cleveland's 14-year-old son who moves with his dad to Virgina "> Both of these biographies are available on this site: http://www.fox.com... Cleveland's son apparently lived with him before he moved, and has the same name as his son from Family Guy. Thus, it appears clear to me that they're the same character -- it's just that the character has changed. My opponent again cites lack of originality in his third contention -- but I've clearly already shown why being similar, or even a rip off, doesn't mean the show is a "terrible idea," so that part of his contention has been addressed extensively. To finish my rebuttals to these contentions, my opponent has also claimed that there's "no effort," and his basis for this is that the Cleveland Show has "holes," and it's lacking in originality. Well, as I've clearly shown, lacking creativity, originality, whatever, doesn't necessarily mean a show is a "bad idea"; it can still do pretty well and have success, which would mean it isn't a bad idea. And as for the "holes," the one my opponent chose to cite was simply a misunderstanding on his part. My opponent's conclusion reads as follows: <"The Cleveland Show was poorly made and it will not meet the success Family Guy did. It also will not be as much of a profit to Mcfarlane."> However, my opponent must realize that just because it mightn't "meet the success Family Guy did" doesn't mean it won't be successful. He makes it seem as if the only options are reaching the levels Family Guy has, or failure -- but I see no reason for it to be so black and white. The Cleveland Show can still have good ratings, make money, and have a decently sized fan base, which would, in this context, constitute success, without beating out Family Guy's success. Anyway, that's it for my argument. The resolution has been negated.