| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 3/19/2007 12:54:18 PM | I'm going to go with no. The players are trained and toned to their sport, I think some of the American football players who sit with oxygen tanks to get more pure oxygen into their system to run faster, would have a hard time playing rugby, where they don't stop ever 30 seconds.
And then there's the whole padding debate. Having never played football, but played rugby, I don't think the pro's could go from padding to no padding. They wouldn't be used to the hits, or the rules and formations depending on their position. Let alone the scrum. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 3/20/2007 10:08:50 AM | yes that is exactly what i was trying to say.
any NFL player who is used to wearing padding and helmets would surely feel "naked and unsure" without it and would not resist great hits and impacts playing rugby at professional level | |
|
| |
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/3/2007 3:59:13 PM | Cavilier you are probably correct that speed and mass make football collisions more forceful. But the difference is that American Football ( not REAL Football) is full of specialized players who only train to do that specific job. No one plays offence and defence and even then only run or pass for lots of them thus the 80 players on a team. Rugby players must play 80 mins of both offence and defence constantly switching. English Lion made a great point that you totally missed regarding respect for your opponent. Rugby players try to win the game not intentionally hurt the opposition and the winners applaud the losers off the field. NFL players such as defensive player of the year and steriod freak Shawn Merriman try to hurt the oppositon and don't respect the opposition. They are all about"ME" and get me on Sportscenter.
Having seen both at the top level (NFL Lions, Rugby All Blacks) I feel fairly confident in saying that yes American Football is more violent but Rugby players are tougher !!! | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/3/2007 4:53:00 PM | I absolutely believe NFL players could hack it playing rugby and playing both offense and defense. Both sports require strength, stamina and speed. Utilizing each attribute is different for each sport so it makes the comparison difficult. Both sports definitely have people who love to compete...why else would they knock the crap out of each other so readily.
As for who's tougher...this is just another "my dad can beat up your dad" debate. The answer is moot!
I never played rugby so I can't disrespect those who have. At the same time I know what it takes to play football. Don't let the pads detract from the physicality of the game. The reason they introduced pads in the first place is because the game was so rough that people in some instances died from the hits they took.
It would be silly to think there haven't been brutal hits in rugby comparable to hits in the NFL. However, I think a NFL football player would be able to learn the game of rugby faster than a rugby player could learn football. Whether either could master the others sport is something else. | |
|
| |
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/4/2007 12:09:30 PM | "respect the opposition"
You've got to be kidding me.
"poor sportsmanship in rugby"
Just plug that phrase into Google and see how many different articles you can find about this topic....you guys are so full of yourselves and so convinced of your superiority to anything American, it's laughable.
Single out Merriman and that's your point? I suppose no rugby player ever got suspended(false...see Google ref. above). There is nothing inherently better about either game. You think rugby's tougher...we think American football is tougher. What cannot be disputed is that probably half of every NFL team is more than fit enough to play rugby at the highest level. Almost NO pro rugby player possess the physical size needed to play lineman....NO pro Rugby player has Olympic sprinter speed like every wide reciever on an NFL team. The physical demands are too much for normal sized humans and the speed must be off the charts...for all positions.
Who you think is tougher is a function of your background........who has the physical tools to survive the rigors of the NFL cannot be disputed. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/4/2007 12:34:24 PM | Cavalier my friend,
a NFL player would not survive or resist playing rugby, let us think please: american football is a sport with a lot of players changing, usually a player is not on the pitch more than 10 minutes and his duty is to be a wall.
a rugger player is totally different, he may play more than 1 hour without stopping, attacking and defending, ending up with a broken nose, bloodstained face, etc
as soupy said, NFL may be more violent (i do not agree) but rugger players are a lot tougher | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/4/2007 1:12:58 PM | "a NFL player would not survive or resist playing rugby"
Ridiculous statement...the cardiovascualar needed could be gained in a short time with training. In fact....with fitness being equal many NFL players would phyically dominate their rugby counterparts....as flthy said...bigger stronger faster
"usually a player is not on the pitch more than 10 minutes"
There is a grain of truth here....but the down time between plays doesn't make a NFL player weak....give me a break. A boxing match is only three minute rounds with breaks between each....I don't think anyone would question a boxer's toughness and believe me....fighting a 300 lb. "wall" 60 or 70 times over the course of a game will leave you with much worse than a broken nose or a little bloodstain.
Why do I bother...........you'll just say again how rugby and futbol are Sooooooooo much better despite having never seen a game of American football. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/4/2007 4:30:17 PM | American Football is a specialised sport where an individual player has a role to fulfil. This isn't necessarily true of Rugby. Arguments about how an American Football player wouldn't be able to play Rugby are nonesense as well, but you have to look at it realistically. In Rugby 'bigger, stronger, faster' doesn't mean 'better'. NFL players would struggle to come to terms with the flow of Rugby and the fast paced tactical nature of the game. I imagine in time NFL running backs could become good Wingers and Centers. Likewise some Rugby players would make great linebackers and Jason Robinson would have been an awesome kick returner:D
There is no need to argue which is the better sport, enjoy them both, or enjoy one of them. They aren't competing against each other so the existence of NFL has no bearing on the world of Rugby and vice versa.
They are two different sports, played by different types of athlete who both deserve respect. Get over it. | |
|
| |
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/5/2007 7:12:46 AM | | only issue with rugdaves post , is the idea that football players would struggle with the tactical nature of that other game. i don't think there is a game more tactical than football. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/5/2007 8:31:26 AM | Probably right flthy, though I think he meant rugby tactics must be divised or implemented on the fly rather than through play calling in the huddle.
I would also wonder about rugby players making good linebackers. I think their stamina and sideline to sideline range would be an asset....but at the NFL level I doubt any of them has the size for linebacker. Your average NFL linebacker probably goes at 250-260 lbs and the speed now for guys that size(like Jason Taylor or Freeny or Urlacher) is frightening.
Novices to the game also don't recognize the complexity of NFL play calling either. Hot reads on blitzes, audibles, disguised coverages...decisions on all these things must be made in a second or two pre-snap.
I'd love to go see a high level rugby match(not old guys my age on a club team)but there is really almost no interest in it in my neck of the woods. There are probably club teams at UVa and Va. Tech but I doubt they play at anywhere near the level of a European or Austrailian club. But I'm willing to learn the game....can Pedro or any other American football haters say the same. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/5/2007 10:50:14 AM | Cavalier,
i never said that an NFL player playing only 10 minutes makes him weak , what i say is that a rugby player is tougher, more mobile and versatile as he is able to play more than 1 hour without stopping, whereas an NFL player would suffer a lot to resist the heavy and hard pace/rhythm of rugby.
your comment about a boxer puts you down and it confirms my opinion. yes a boxer, say, Tyson,Ali, etc would knock and destroy any rugby player with his fist, however, does Tyson's toughness (fist) make him able to play rugby??? no it does not, Tyson would be "killed" by any rugby or NFL player once he appeared on the pitch as Tyson's fist would not allow/help/save him to play both sports.
well if you want to learn rugger you can watch matches on TV i think , the best ones are those of the Six Nations and the World Cup. also i agree that rugby is not followed in USA,however, i have "seen" some Americans ending up loving rugby once they tried and learnt it, just the same Americans who used to practice/ play american football as rugby is more a team sport.
by the way, i am not a NFL hater and never have nor have i said that rugby is better or not. i only talk about players' physical and mental toughness. in fact i am not a rugby fan. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/5/2007 10:58:14 AM | "your comment about a boxer puts you down and it confirms my opinion."
No Pedro, it doesn't....I mentioned boxing to show you that just because there are momentary breaks in a sport that does not make it's competitors less tough. You implied NFL players could not handle rugby because there are no breaks in rugby(which isn't exactly true)....that's nonsense.
"well if you want to learn rugger you can watch matches on TV i think"
I have a dozen sports channels on my satellite dish.....no rugby on at all or extremely rarely...and certainly not paying for a pay-per-view for rugby.
"rugby is more a team sport."
Why? What is your basis for this conclusion?
"i only talk about players' physical and mental toughness. in fact i am not a rugby fan."
So you are authority on the mental and physical toughness on one sport(rugby) you are not a fan of....and on another sport(gridiron)you've only seen in movies and have never attempted to play yourself. How can you possibly think you have any valid opinions on a sport you've never seen or played? | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/5/2007 12:08:06 PM | what i have said is NFL players would find difficult to resist the heavy and hard pace in rugby as they are used to playing only for a short period of time. your players would need time to feel fine into rugger. just like the famous and specialised 100 metres runner Carl Lewis (who used to run for 10 seconds and no more) would find quite difficult to resist 5000 metres as he would get tired and exhausted for being used to running 100 metres only (of course he would never win). hope you understand me Cavalier.
because i am not a rugger fan does not mean that i do not know it. here in Europe everyone knows it together with football, just like everyone in USA knows baseball together with american football or basketball.
american football surely is a great sport but let me tell you a secret my friend: your sport has a bad press in Europe because of the helmets and pads, that is the reason. if i played it i would surely need helmets and pads as i am not strong but do you really think your strong ang big players really need it??? do you really think Joe Montana really needed it??? he is the only american football player that i have ever recognised. never saw him playing but he must have been very good as i remember spanish sporting newspapers talking about him years ago. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/5/2007 12:34:53 PM | I understand your analogy with Carl lewis.....however cardiovascular fitness can be attained with a couple months training. The size and power of NFL players cannot be taught.
It's no secret that European press is bad in regards to American football...but does anything "American" get good press in Europe these days? Even so.......European reporters and papers have no more knowledge of American football than you do, so I pay little attention to it. Much the same way you would disregard the comments of an American reporter writing about futbol.
The helmets and pads, as I've stated before, evolved slowly.....as a necessity. As the players became bigger stronger and faster, the impact of their tackles and hits became harder and harder. Rugby tackles, for the most part, are wrapping up the ball carrier and bringing him to the ground. NFL tackles are designed to: a)stop the progress of the ball carrier, and b) hit him so hard he will be tenetive when the ball is in his hands again. Tackles and hitting in the NFL are about instilling fear in and intimidating your opponent.
Joe Montana was indeed a great player....but he was about 1.8 meters in height and about 86kg. The guys trying to tackle and hit him range from 113 kg to 136 kg and running full-speed. The game is such that often QB's, like Montana, are hit by players outside his field of vision. If it weren't for the pads and helment.....we would be talking about the deceased Joe Montana.
Look at this Pedro:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qAS5fMSgWHo
Some big hits in past NFL games....I think the third or fourth one is our pal Joe Montana getting hit very hard. Please watch this give your opinion after about whether or not you think the pads and helmet are necessary. Watch their heads snap back as they are hit.....and most of this video is 10-20 years old.....the players now are.........once again...bigger stronger and faster | |
|
| |
| |
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/6/2007 3:09:09 AM | | Big hit's exist in rugby too, but there are rules about tackles that mean the tackles you see in American Football would lead to a rather long suspension in Rugby. Certainly Rugby is about intimidation, look at the All Blacks Haka for instance, but it is also a game where skill ultimately wins. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/6/2007 5:17:47 AM | Cavalier,
thanks for the link, i shall watch it and perhaps my opinion will change, even if i have never said that american football is not hard. thanks
now i have got this for you: when it comes to american football most of players' duty is to stop the rival acting like a wall, yes or not??? then if one player is used to it, how the hell would he resist the heavy and hard pace in rugby with almost no break??? they would need time to be used to it, would they not???
on the other hand rugger players would find easier to play NFL acting like a strong wall to stop the rival.
also i am absolutely sure that none rugby player would feel happy being replaced after having played for only 5 0r 10 minutes as it is common in NFL.
another question for you: you replace your players so quick because they are exhausted or because they are playing badly??? exhausted for 5 or 10 minutes??? i doubt it. in rugby or football if a player is playing well he is not replaced even if he plays the whole match.
finally i only talk to you as your mates Dali and Flthy have no opinion uopn this matter save for silly comments, lol | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/6/2007 6:39:29 AM | Never played either on an organized level, but intimately acquainted with the fundamentals of American football and passingly acquainted with rugby. I appreciate both sports.
The pad versus no pad debate has so far missed some fundamental differences between the two games. First, in American football the action is concentrated inside of 20 yards fairly often, whereas rugby squads are usually spread out over the pitch in less concentration. More bodies in a finite area leads to greater propensity for gang tackling and heavy bodies falling on one another. NFL players are on average a little heavier than rugby players - even the average NFL corner or safety, typically the lightest guy on the team, average about 205 lbs. The most specialized players, place kickers, have frequently been 240 lbs monsters. Furthermore, the primary tacklers in American football are defensive linemen, ends, and linebackers. 225 lbs is a "light" linebacker. Line brawlers on offense and defense are usually 290 lbs and up. Whats more, on every play someone is always engaged by another player, blocking or tackling, or a target for tackling. If I understand rugby, a player without the ball cannot be engaged by an opponent.
Darryl Stingley, formerly a WR with the Patriots, died just the other day. He was paralyzed for life after a crushing hit from Jack Tatum in 1978. Not even full pads could prevent the broken neck he suffered.
Tactically and strategically NFL ball is perhaps the most elaborate sport, but its not primarily a stamina sport (although stamina plays a part) like in basketball or rugby. | |
|
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/6/2007 6:56:43 AM | Pedro,
The defenders duty is to stop the rival, but it is more than just acting like a wall. The front line of defenders act in that capacity but since the forward pass is legal in gridiron, the second and third lines of defense must possess more speed and agility to cover the offensive players downfield. Think a long high pass in futbol to a forward streaking towards the goal....the defender must keep pace with the forward to prevent a goal....same in gridiron.
Players are replaced in football not for fatigue, but because the specialization required for the various positions dictates many substitutions. Up until the 1950's, many NFL players played both offense and defense and never left the field. There have only been a handful of players who have done so in recent years. Coaches found that since the rules dictate the 30-40 second break between plays....you could try to create matchups that favor your players by substituting. If you thought your opponent would run the ball...you put bigger stronger players in to stop the offense. If you thought your opponent would try a forward pass.....you would substitute swifter, more agile players.
I honestly don't know why gridiron evolved to have stoppages in play, unlike rugby. My suspicion is that gridiron plays(or set pieces if you prefer)became so complex that the break was necessary to relay each players assignment. NFL playbooks may have hundreds of pages....each play designed to attack defenses in a different way. There are dozens of formations from which plays can be run.
There's no doubt rugby players and futbol players have more stamina....but I don't think the gap between them is as large as you think it is. And as I said....it's only 35 seconds between plays......a futbol team whose attacking players are controlling the pitch may have defenders standing around for much longer than that, even though the clock is running.
Rugby players may find the endurance part of the game easier in the NFL and many would probably be suited for the NFL positions that don't require enormous size and strength, but they would have difficulty with those positions that do. They may be more fit....but they would be manhandled by lineman from either the offense or defense. Those positions are played monstrous men with incredible strength.
I read last night....can't remember where....that some rugby leagues are considering making some sort of padding a requirement. Seems the injuries are taking their toll on teams. Imagine you are the owner of a professional rugby team. You can help insure your best players will be healthy all season if some padding or helmets are used. You'd agree to it in a minute because you are protecting your investment. | |
|
| |
| American Football to Rugby: Your Thoughts
Posted: 4/6/2007 12:07:47 PM | "the break was necessary to relay each players assignment" and "gridiron plays or set pieces became so complex"
now you hit the nail my friend. that is just the reason why NFL players would not feel fine or resist playing rugby at high level as rugger has a heavy and hard pace which has nothing to do with "set pieces" or "strict assignments". it sounds as if NFL were more a military force where everyone has its duty on a part of the pitch and lacking of freedom of movement.
rugby is more a "free" sport where a player can play more than 1 hour moving around and without those forced set pieces or chess pieces.
"the defender must keep pace with the forward to prevent a goal....same in gridiron" yes but we have the offside rule which avoids any striker being beyond the last defender since the ball is passed to him. this rule is quite good as defenders are not always forced to be body to body with the rival.
talking about the protection i admit that some rugby players wear something similar to a helmet, it has nothing to do with your helmets in NFL. it is more a "leather cover" similar to those used in the early years of the game. but players wearing them are a tiny minority | |
|
Home
login 
