Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply puritysourcelabs US-PHARMACIES
UGL OZ Raptor Labs UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAKUS-PHARMACIESRaptor Labs

NFL versus Rugby

B

bits

New member
Which of these 2 sports have the superior atheletes.
Overall, I think American football players are way superior.
They tend to be bigger, faster, STRONGER than the average rugby player.

Why is it like this though?
Why cant rugby players get bigger?
I dont think they're pushed hard enough.
 
I'm a rugby player and am about 6'3 and 320, so some of us are big. For rugby you need to be very fit. Go to a decent rugby club and ask to join one of their fitness sessions and see if they are pushed hard or not.
 
Its a completely different game and consequently the athletes are very different too. Comparisons aren't fair in that regard. If they all played the same sport you'd find that they were similar in the attributes you mentioned.
 
I play rugby aswell buddy. We had this NFL vs Rugby discussion on another board.

After you're done putting forward your subjective views, you'll find it's just a case of apples vs oranges.
 
Fucking ridiculous comparison bits.

Rugby you are being pounded for 80 mins. No pads, no time outs (except half time). You take a hit, get up, run, take another hit etc. The pro's are big, but functionally bit, with endurance to boot.

NFL is effectively (according to my limited knowledge) up to 5 short sprints, then you are off the field while your buddies take over. This means they can be bigger and potentially stronger, but believe me, not many NFL pro's would last a whole Rugby game.
 
They are two totally different games, I have never played American Football but I watch it all the time.

As soon as I start getting into a game, they cut away for a commercial break or back to the studio for so more analysis.

American Football players can be heavy 300lbs+ because they don't have to worry about carrying it for a long period of time, sure the tight-ends/wide recievers etc are leaner and faster but they still only have to concentrate on a play that will last a maximum of 30 seconds.

Rugby players have to be aerobically fit, to last 80 minutes, the anaerobic capacity to sprint fast for varying distances while having the functional strength and power to take big hits.

I believe rugby is a harder game to play because players do not get the rests/breaks/stoppages that Football players enjoy.

RugbyNut.
 
Football players have more than short bursts of power, they have to go all out on every play, running, swim moves, spins, scratching, fighting, punching, diving, running some more, then huddle for a few seconds and do it again 50+ times a game...they do have remarkable endurance as well as power and agility.

To say football players only have short bursts of power is not accurate; and would only be stated by someone who never played football.

Now, the question is which sport has the "Superior Athletes", Football or Rugby?

If you play Rugby you think you are superior because you run the whole time with no break.

If you play ball then you think you are stronger and more athletic, just because rugby players do not dish and receive BIG TIME HITS as in football.

I know they hit, but not like a line backer blind-side a QB with a 15 yard sprint, (lawerence Taylor vs Joe Theisman) or a punt returner who catches the ball and gets his ass knocked out by a Special Teams Missle.

Obviously, I am partial to football players, but both Rugby and Football have Superb Athletes. The games are different and the games are similar, but neither can say they are superior... IF I HAVE to pick ONE...
I go FOOTBALL!

my2cc
 
Man, I have to give props to rugby players. I have a great deal of respect for NFL players too. I'd rather watch NFL than any other sport there is (except amateur wrestling). But I think it takes nuts to play rugby, knowing that you are gonna get pounded given the lack of pads and all.
 
Football is a much better sport than rugby. There is no comparison. Rugby players are very fast but football players are much stronger. Also football players get hit so much harder than rugby players. I seriously think if football players didn't wear helmets and stuff there would be deaths every year. They go helmet to helmet so hard.
 
dood said:
Football is a much better sport than rugby. There is no comparison. Rugby players are very fast but football players are much stronger. Also football players get hit so much harder than rugby players. I seriously think if football players didn't wear helmets and stuff there would be deaths every year. They go helmet to helmet so hard.
Click to expand...


-Rugby is better

- Andy Sheridan is a 700# squatter

-They go helmet to helmet because theyt are wearing them. They would not do it if they didn't wear them.








In conclusion; rugby is better.
 
It is imposible to take a harder hit than you do in Rugby without pads. Have you seen the number of blood injuries there are?

PS Im going to Cardif for England V Wales on Sat, cant wait for that one!
 
FatRat said:
It is imposible to take a harder hit than you do in Rugby without pads. Have you seen the number of blood injuries there are?

PS Im going to Cardif for England V Wales on Sat, cant wait for that one!
Click to expand...

how fun!! I got to see Wales play New Zealand... great game :)
 
I like both sports, they are both physical, brutal games. I prefer the NFL, the pads and the hard hits. Rugby runs a close second, but the hits are not as ferocious as NFL. They have to wear pads to hit that hard, and because they wear pads they are able to hit harder. I like the tough, brutal, physicality of both sports, I live in US, I prefer footbal, and I beieve the NFL athletes are superiorl.
 
This could go on forever........

'NFL players probably hit harder' very true, they are conditioned to do so, but rugby players (to varying degrees related to position) are collision athletes, they have to have a lot of aerobic endurance.

A 300lb+ lineman wouldn't last 5 mins in a decent-grade rugby match, simply because his conditioning is geared towards Football.

Then again........vice versa applies, most rugby players wouldn't be able to cope with the forces of collision at a line of scrimmage and would be bowled over.

Both great games though,

peace, RugbyNut.
 
It is impossible to compare the two sports because there are different types of athletes on the field. You can't say football is better in general or vice versa.

I can compare what I do and that is play defensive tackle. The endurance in defensive lineplay is tremendous but not in a strict aerobic sense. I have to use my entire body at full muscular capacity for bursts of up to 15 seconds. That is not just running, that is driving a 300+ pound man backwards while manipulating his upperbody with all my upperbody strength and power, throwing him off me and redirecting to catch and tackle a much smaller and faster athlete than myself. Get up and do it again in 20-30 seconds. This usually goes for 10 plays or so. This is anaerobic endurance at its toughest. Try doing a 4 rep max clean and press, put it down and do it again 30 seconds later, for 10 sets. That is what it feels like to play interior line.

As far as rugby goes, I wouldn't last 5 minutes running all over that huge fucking field, I weigh 320 pounds, i am not built for it. There aren't many rugby players that could go 13 plays against a bigger opponent with out getting blown up. Both sports are collision sports and I am in awe of some of the hits rugby players take w/ no pads. I know for a fact that they are tougher athletes, in that respect.

The only case I make for the NFL having better athletes is an economic one, the NFL minnimum salary is 250 grand american a year. The competition to play in the NFL is unbeliveable. I don't know how rugby compares in that respect, but in America the best all around athletes play football...
 
IronLion said:



The only case I make for the NFL having better athletes is an economic one, the NFL minnimum salary is 250 grand american a year. The competition to play in the NFL is unbeliveable. I don't know how rugby compares in that respect, but in America the best all around athletes play football...
Click to expand...


That is down to demand for merchendise/television rights/financial backers. Rugby is getting better in that respect, but it is hard to compete financially in Britain with football (soccer for you yanks). In the past five years the conditioning of rugby players has improved massivley, you would be surprised if you thought you could man-handle one of them. Thereare a lot of lean 280 pounders these days.
 
Yes, if we debate the money and salaries and TV contracts it really is no debate. NFL is the biggest $making$ sport in the world. Not necessarily for all of its athletes, but as a sport in whole.
 
As a rugby player, I'm not sure if I can say that one is "better" than the other. Both definately have their attributes and I think overall the hits are almost the same (considering with and without pads).

I think that the matter of salaries in NFL is different as there are so many tv and sponsorships. Rugby only became a professional sport in the mid 90's, so I think after this World Cup, the salaries and sponsorships will skyrocket.

I do think that it takes far more skill to play rugby, as we need to be good at attacking and defensive - we don't have 2 teams to do their own job.
 
rugby is so much better-- youve got alot of sweat-soaked muscular guys w/ naked thighs & calves moving the ball down the field-- all grunting, yelling & cussing-- its like FB- but alot more sexy :)
 
I've played both, and agree it's apples and oranges. But I will say this....football is the tougher game physically, based on punishment. NOTHING feels like being hit or delivering a hit on special teams. Not even a sick open-ice hit in hockey...NOTHING.
 
canadianhitman said:
I've played both, and agree it's apples and oranges. But I will say this....football is the tougher game physically, based on punishment. NOTHING feels like being hit or delivering a hit on special teams. Not even a sick open-ice hit in hockey...NOTHING.
Click to expand...

Try being in the front row at a decent level of rugby, you have 8 huge people delivering a hit at once.:)
 
What about having your face stomped on repeatedly? Lifting in the lineouts? pushing in the scrums? sprinting across the field? keeping up with play and making tackles?

Rugby crosses more fitness boundaries than football, thats why it's a tougher game.

RugbyNut
 
Rugby is more high paced ,its better because the lack of stop and go makes for more entertainment, from a player standpoint(I flank) and all I do is hit hit hit ,I have also played football and its nothing compaired to rugby. I had a mole almost removed off my back from being racked by metal cleats not those damned rubber ones football players use.

I challange anyone who thinks football is better to flank in a rugby game even for a half, its brutal the running never stops
 
rugby players play for 45, have a ten minute break then another 45 min. then you forgot that that lifting 18 stone locks in line outs and then battling out in a scrum. no american football player could take a hit from a rugby player without pads on. the reason why nfl hits are harder is cause they got nothing to worry bout, covered in padding sorted.
in rugby when you get tackled the game doesnt stop, you have to get up off your feet, ruck for the ball in a massive pile up, just to run again. did i mention mauls, about 8 vs 8 mauls pushing and when it collapses, its chaos.
the problem with you yanks is that you have this idea your amazing at everything,
cause ur fucking amazing at everything, you fucking made up some sports that no one else plays just so you can be amazing.
give us a ring when you grow some balls
 
I have not played either of the two but, It's very hard to compare it. I just see that football has a more physical game than rugby. :)
 
Apples and oranges.

NFL allows stronger / powerful, heavier players in certain positions because those guys don't have to develop a high level of aerobic fitness as a front 5 rugby player does as well. Plenty of guys in both sports running <11 second 100m sprints.

US rugby team is mediocre because - understandably - all the best collegiate players who like contact sports go NFL where they can make millions a season & earn fame across North America. No contest really, whereas our soccer players most of them don't have a physique that allows them to choose between either sport to a high level.
 
As it was said, apples to oranges... There are some great athletes in Rugby (Sonny Bill Williams, Matt Giteau, Dan Carter). As there is in Football. Football is an explosive sport, where as Rugby players need no pads and have to run a 12
+ on the dreaded beep test.
 
I played MLB in Highschool and transitioned to flanker in college. The demands of rugby overall when you consider both conditioning and strength are far greater than in football. At the professional level, NFL players typically need to be active for about 12 minutes per game. With Rugby, that number is closer to 60 minutes.

Additionally, both of the positions i played for football and the one I currently play for rugby typically rack up the most tackles per game. I was a very good MLB and averaged about 8 tackles per game. In rugby I was averaging 15 or so tackles per game. The top recruited highschool linebackers may have around 15 tackles per game... if they're lucky.

In hs football i suffered no major injuries and only the occasional sprain, strain, or pulled muscle.

In Rugby I come home and sit in an ice bath every day. I have broken my nose several times, been in 10+ fights/brawls on the field, broken arm, ribs, had 15 stitches down my arm, been cleated in the face, and kneed in rucks more times than I can count.

The best way to describe rugby to a non-player would be to imagine placing 30 men on a field and telling them to beat the shit out of eachother.
 
I play Rugby for my college. We don't have a football team, so on our campus we are the biggest, fastest, and strongest guys. Most of the players are ex-football players, that had never been introduced to Rugby before, and most of us like it just as much as we did football (as I played football all through HS too). It is a different sport though... rugby players should not be as big (and thereby as strong) as football players, but they should be just as fast in sprint speed (though we measure by the 50 meter), and should be MUCH faster in long distance speed and be able to complete more body weight excercise reps.

Forwards (the bigger guys on the field) are usually linebacker size, there is no need for OLine/DLine sized guys on a rugby field.

I'd say Professional Football has better athletes, but not by the margin I bet most people in America would believe, and this is only due to there being more money in football.

It takes a special person to play Rugby though... Football is a tough sport, but no where near the toughness of Rugby. Imagine running at a college linebacker with no pads expecting to make the big hit, welcome to Rugby. I'd say its closer to MMA and Boxing than football in that regard.
 
Anyone with a brain in their head is gonna say Calvin Johnson is a better athlete than any rugby player who ever lived. If you were to take an NFL offensive line and Adrian Peterson and teach them rugby for a year they'd be the best team in the world. Football players have to be faster, bigger, stronger, and quicker, not to mention ballsier, rugby is a contact football is a collision sport.
 
My opinion rugby takes more out the body and takes a higher requirement from the body I've played both and being honest with all the padding it takes away alot of the hit power in american, Rugby there's no real type of protection some wear minor padding but nothing the same as American football. Also there's alot of breaks between plays in American, rugby is more fluid so you have less time to recover. we have American football players come to the uk on tour to our rugby club. When I chatted to them about it they also agreed American is soft compared to rugby.
I play a high standard in rugby and get paid to do so I can tell you they push you that hard in training the body probly couldn't take any more lol
I general play the full 80mins every game with no breaks apart from half time I find American gets head doing with the stop start
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

eazy_
The Biological Reason Some Fat Is Harder to Lose
Replies
1
Views
137
eazy_
eazy_
FishyAnchovy
Approved Log My Orals-Only Pre-Cycle LOG
Replies
21
Views
4K
MUSTANG_18
MUSTANG_18
alcatraz1662
I’m back back
Replies
27
Views
4K
RoySimpson
RoySimpson
~Vision~
PSL Sale EP Turinabol stacked with EP sust250 (Divine combination - Harmony in unison)
Replies
7
Views
232
Macedog24
Macedog24
GetToDaChoppa!
Approved Log Pre-Gear Training Log, Cardarine then Testosterone
2
Replies
169
Views
22K
Noah Wixx
Noah Wixx
Top Bottom