American football is vastly superior to soccer in every conceivable way

C1 and C2 )Pro makes an assertion that football requires more cardiovascular training than soccer. Which is false. Cardiovascular exercise - uses large muscle movement over a sustained period of time keeping your heart rate to at least 50% of its maximum level.It literally means to run for extended periods of times without breaks. Not even run but use use large amounts of muscle movement without getting much of a break (50 percent of its own level). Running by far is considered to be the most viable form of cardiovascular exercise. Anywhere you look running is considered to be the most viable type of cardio [1]. Coming from an 8 year workout buff myself I can attest this. Running is the best way to build up a great cardiovascular track. From there it's only logical as to which sport is better. Football you have breaks and pauses in between plays, breaks when the ball switches hands from defense to offense. Football requires more power but not near the amount of energy that soccer requires. Soccer participates run down the field without breaks for 15 - 30 mins sometimes, just with brief pauses to get the ball back in play. This is supported by sources in the past round but soccer is considered by most one of the hardest cardio sports that there is. Cardio is one way soccer is conceivably better than football, and one which my adversary failed to refute. This point is literally uncontested other than my adversary making bare assertions without proof. C3) OlympicsPro literally drops the intention behind my point and dries to bring up money. That is not even the point I was making. Olympics tie in with my global reach point to show that soccer is adored by fans all over the world while football is generally speaking, an american sport. C4) Global ReachHe uses an ad populum (Which I don't even think he's aware he made this point) to address my global reach argument. Basically asserting that just because a great many people like something, does not make it good. Population =/= value is the primary argument. Which fails to address the key point. This is true in a lot of scenarios but not when the contention itself is derived from preference. I am essentially asking which sport is preferred by the high majority, and the answer to that is soccer. So while this may seem like a question an ad pop can answer, it really doesn't because it is actually provoking preference and the majority which is what an ad pop relies on. A majority of people support and like soccer in all types of countries while football is strictly an american thing. C5) Less strain on bodyHe fails once again to address this point. This point is based on health impacts. Football has a high strain rate on the body and has one of the highest injury rates in sports. View this graph [2] At first glance it seems like other sports have more injuries but you have to compare the actual number of people playing the sport. When you break this down on a per 100 level, football nearly double the amount of injuries soccer has. Injuries occur on a more regular basis in football than soccer [2]. Which once again pro has failed to contest ConclusionPro fails to affirm the resolution because I have provided 5 ways in which soccer is conceivably better than football. Res negated. [1] http://exercise.about.com...[2] http://www.familiesafield.org...