So I gave both submissions a once over and I am currently leaning more towards Team A. They put more material into their arguments, resulting in both a longer block of text (without it becoming rambling and incoherent), hit on several points but focused on one and used much more professional writing voice. Team B, while not bad by any means, used 2nd person voice at the end of the argument, inserted internet slang and then proceeded to illustrate why internet slang was bad, and really only touched on one point in their argument. It's definitely a close race, but Team A's argument ultimately has more meat to it and is more capably executed. Obviously this is just the opinion of one person, but that's my two cents at the moment.

There are a couple run-on sentences but otherwise I like it