Dear students,
For your final blog posts, you will write a persuasive paragraph in a series called "Would You Rather." In each post, I will give you a scenario, and you will have to defend your answer using the following criteria:
- A topic sentence stating your opinion
- At least 3 supporting sentences defending your opinion
- One counter argument
- A concluding sentence summarizing your writing
Here is your "Would You Rather" for today:
Would you rather be the best player on a losing team or the worst player on a winning team?
Please remember to check for mistakes by reading aloud your post to yourself before you publish it. I cannot wait to see what you write!
Your teacher,
Mrs. Braddy
If I was asked between being the worst player on a winning team or the best player on a losing team I would pick being the best player on the losing team. First, you get the attention. Second, You could score all the goals. Finally you could get awards. However, being on a winning team could be fun because you would win, but I prefer being the best player on a losing team.
ReplyDeleteI would rather be the best player on the losing team. First, you can have the most spotmenship. Second, I could get the ball puck any thing else more often. Third, you can help your teammates with anything they need help with. However, some may say being the worst player on the team is better because you can get better and better. Thats why I choose being the best player on the team.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose between being the best player on a winning team or a worst player on a winning team. I would rather be the worst player on a winning team. I would be this because I would not want to brag to people that I'm the best, I also wouldn't want to be on the losing team because who wants to lose? One last reason I choose this is because I would want to be the worst player so my teammates could teach me. Although some may argue that being the best player is better because you get bragging rights and you get to be the best person around bad people. I don't want to do this. That's why I choose to be the worst player on a loosing team.
ReplyDeleteIf I was either the worst player on a losing team, or the best player on a winning team, I would be the worst on a winning team. Here are my reasons why. First, you would probably be better than the best player on the losing team. (If you team wins, you are probably better than the team that lost.) Second, I would have something to work up to. If I didn't do well, I would tell myself, That is why I practice. To be a better player. If I work harder like the best player on the team, I'll surely get better. Third, you are on the winning team! It doesn't matter if you are the worst or the best, it just matters if you played your hardest! (Winning also feels good sometimes.) Although I would think being the worst player on the best team is better, some may argue that being the best player on the worst team is better. If you are the best player, other people look up to you and think you are great. But, you would still be worse than all the other players on all the other teams. That is why I think being the worst player on the best team is better.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose between being the best player on the losing team or the worst player on the winning team, I would choose the worst player on the winning team. First, you tried your best. Second, you can feel good about yourself and your team for winning the game. Finally, you may be the worst player, but you probably did something to help your team win. However, some people prefer to be the best player on the losing team. You can show off your skills, you can help your team by getting home runs, and it is not always about winning. I prefer to be the worst player on the winning team.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose between being the best player on the losing team or the worst player on the winning team I would rather be the worst player on the winning team. For example, you could ask a player to teach you some tips on how to be better. Also, you could cheer everybody on when you are sitting out so people will like you and know your nice even if you do not play well. Lastly, I would be the worst player on the losing team because If I was the only good player on the losing team I would have to teach everybody somethings. However, others may say that being the best player would mean more attention from the crowd.
ReplyDeleteIf I had a choice to be the best player on a loosing team or the worst player on a winning team ,I would choose being the best player on a loosing team .First, My teammates would look up to me . Second, It would be fun to help people learn new tricks and skills .Third,It would be great to get the ball more often.Some may argue that being the worst player on a winning team because your team always wins ,but in my opinion I think everybody should have a goal and achieve the goal .That's why I think being on a loosing team ,but being on a loosing team is better.
ReplyDeleteIf I could between being the best player on the losing team or the worst player on a winning team I would be the best player on a losing team. First, You get all of the glory and fame. Second,You get to be the best player on the team and you feel great. Finally, You could have a major amount of fans for being the best player on a losing team. However, some may argue that being the worst player on the best team would be better because you would win all the time ,but I would still prefer being the best player on a losing team.
ReplyDeleteIf I could be the best player on a losing team or the worst player on a winning team, I would chose to be the worst player on a winning team. First, if I were on a winning team, I would probably be ok. Second, I would still be a part of a winning team. Finally, my team would win. However, some people might like to be the best player on a losing team. Their reasons might be you would feel good about yourself, you can have more chances to score, and you can help your teammates get better. That might be appealing to some people, but not to me. That is why I would rather be the worst player on a winning team.
ReplyDeleteI would be the best player on a losing team because I would be good at the sport and actually put some effort into the game.I would also be loved by all of my adoring fans.However,some people might want to be the worst player on a losing team because they would get all the glory and would win lots of championships.Overall,I think being on a losing team but being the best player is better.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose between being the worst player on the best team or being the best player on the worst team, I would go with being the best player on the worst team. Here are some reasons why. First, I could try my best to make my team better. Second, I could try and win the game myself. Finally, If all else fails I could swap teams although, winning is fun, I would still want to be the best player on the worst team.
ReplyDeleteI would choose the best player on a losing team then the worst player on a winning team. First, you can teach the other people on your team to get better. Second, you can be a good sportmenship to someone on your team. Finally, you can get the ball more often and make shots for your team. However some people may choose worst player on a winning team because you win. This is why I chose the best player on a losing team.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose between being the best player on the losing team or the worst player on the winning team, I would choose being the best player on the losing team. First, I get the all the attention. Second, The other players will look up to me. Finally, I will have a lot of friends. Some might say being the worst player on the winning team is better because you won, but everyone wants to talk to the best player on the team. That's why I would rather be the best player on the losing team.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose I would be the worst player on the best team here is why
ReplyDeleteFirst: If you are the best team that means If we win the whole thing I could get a trophie
Second:If I play on the best team you could get a lot of money
Third:If I was the worst player I could get better and become the best player.
I would choose to be the best on a losing team because I can be the only person who hits doubles, triples, and Home Runs. I would always get on base and steal every time I'm on base. It would be great. Some people might say that being the worst on the best team is good because you can go undefeated every year which wouldn't be fun because some time you have to lose to learn a lesson that everybody losses sometimes. So in conclusion being the best on the worst team is better
ReplyDeleteI would choose to be the worst on the winning team rather than be the best on the losing team. First, I chose this because people wouldn't think you are bad if you are on the winning team. Second, I would want my team to win and I don't care if I am the worst. Finally, People wouldn't recognize you if you were on the losing team. Some people may argue and may want to be the best player on the losing team because they could get all the attention on their team. I chose to be the worst on the winning team over being the best on a losing team.
ReplyDeleteIf I had the choice of being the best player on a losing team or the worst player on a winning team,I woulds want to be the best player on a winning team. I think that would be fun to be the best player on a losing team because it would teach me that it isn't all about winning and that it is about having fun. Although some may think it is better to be on a winning team but be the worst player,I still think it would be better to be on a losing team and be very good.
ReplyDeleteI would rather be good on a losing team than being bad on a winning team. First, you would be amazing and people would think you should be on another team. Second, Every team has someone good and you could teach the bad people on your team. Third, Some good team would ask you if you could be on their team. Some people would say that they want to be on the winning team, but I would not want to not play and people not like you since you stink. That's why I would rather be on the losing team and be good instead of being on a winning team and bad.
ReplyDeleteI would be the best on the losing team because you're the best on that team. It could be a close game. In hockey the preds were the worst team in the playoffs and they and in the elite eight. If you're the worst you don't get paid as much.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to choose between being the best on a losing team or the worst on a winning team, I would choose being the best on a losing team. First, You could be transferred to the winning team and play there. second, You could be the best on the losing. Third, you can be better that everyone. However, some people may argue that they would rather be the worst on winning team because they could travel to different places and have a good coach.
ReplyDeleteI would rather be the best player on the worst team than the worst player on the best team because... First, you would get attention. Second, you could win the MVP of the NFL. Third, you can get payed a bunch. Last, you can just be a free agent and go to any team. That is why I choose this.
ReplyDeleteI think that I would rather be the best player on the losing team rather than the worst player on the winning team. First, I would probably get a lot of attention. Second, I would be actually good at something. Finally, I might be picked as the team captain, which is really good. However, I would understand if you would want to be the worst player on the winning team because you would be happy and you would get to celebrate. Those are my reasons why I would rather be the best player on the worst team.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to be the best player on a losing team, or the worst player on the winning team. I would want to be the worst player on the winning team because you will get a lot of publicity and would be with the best people on your team. Second, you can improve throughout the season to get better. Third, you will get paid more because your team is sooo good! But others may argue that you could get all of the goals and could always be on the field. But there is no I in team. That is why I would be the worst player on the best team!
ReplyDeleteI would rather be the best player on the worst team, because you could be sent to a better team. Also people would like you if you were the best on the team than everyone would love you because you were the best on the team. You could make good playa and then everyone would be happy because of you. Although some people may argue that they would rather be the worst player on the best team, but no one would celebrate you when you do something good because you wouldn't.
ReplyDeleteI would be the worst player on a winning team rather than be the best player on a losing team. First, if you were on a soccer team, you would still get paid A LOT. Second, what if the rest of the players were really good, but you were not AS good as them. However, Some may argue that Being the best player would be better, because you can win awards. Overall, I would be the worst player on a good team.
ReplyDelete