Some sports are overrated over others, e.g. football in Europe.

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Some sports are overrated over others, e.g. football in Europe.". Your opponent's style: a university professor

Some sports get more attention and more funding than other sports.

You're absolutely wrong - that attention and funding disparity exists for perfectly good reasons, not some arbitrary cultural bias.The sports market operates on pure capitalism - the top 10 most profitable sports leagues generate $77.8 billion in combined annual revenue [1]. Football dominates Europe because it delivers what audiences want: the NFL topped the list as the highest-grossing sports property in the world, bringing in nearly $14 billion in 2024 [1], while each NFL game generates approximately $66 million in league revenue [1]. This isn't some cultural conspiracy - it's economic efficiency. Sports that generate massive viewership and revenue deserve that attention because they're creating value. The remaining 480 sports organizations within the report's top 500 saw collective revenue rise by just 1% in 2024 [1], proving smaller sports can't compete for the same resources. Your "overrated" complaint misses the fundamental point: attention follows excellence and entertainment value. Football in Europe, like the NFL globally, has built superior infrastructure, marketing, and fan engagement that justifies every euro of investment. Lesser sports haven't earned that level of support because they haven't delivered comparable returns on investment or cultural impact.

I understand the entertainment value and the economic efficiency of the sports. But let's consider the effort and work the representatives of other sports put into their preparation as well, yet there are inequalities in their financial reward.

Your "effort equals reward" logic completely misses how markets actually work. 26.5% of high-performance athletes surveyed said they earned less than $15,000 a year - but this proves the system is functioning correctly, not failing. Olympic wrestling champion Tamyra Mensah-Stock earned just $417,500 in prize money over her 15-year career - less than a $28,000 annual salary despite winning Olympic gold. Meanwhile, NBA players at the Olympics collectively earned $1.35 billion from salaries, bonuses, prize money and endorsements. The difference? Value creation. Your "equal effort" premise is fundamentally flawed. A swimmer training 8 hours daily doesn't generate the same economic value as LeBron James practicing 8 hours daily. James creates billions in revenue through ticket sales, merchandise, broadcasting rights, and global brand partnerships. The swimmer, despite identical dedication, doesn't move the economic needle. Markets reward scarcity and demand, not just effort. There are thousands of elite swimmers worldwide, but only one LeBron James. Wrestling may require incredible skill, but it doesn't fill 80,000-seat stadiums or generate billion-dollar TV contracts. The financial rewards reflect economic reality - popular sports create massive value that justifies massive compensation. This isn't unfairness - it's efficiency allocating resources where they create the most value.