There are 128 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

11 Minutes of Action in Typical NFL Game

Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by KB94605NINERS:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by KB94605NINERS:
Who makes more money… the best Rugby Player or football players? The reason why I ask is because if a rugby player can make substantially more playing football than they could in rugby you would think more would make the transition to football yet we don’t see it. The reason we don’t see it is because they usually don’t make it in the NFL. Look what’s going on in Samoa for example, their best athletes are turning to American football not Rugby. I have the similar theory with the heavy weights in boxing. People say the US heavy weight division is dead. All the would-be great heavy weights from the US are following the money which is in the NFL and NBA. Now the heavy weights are left with B class athletes.

My belief is the best athletes go where they can make the most money. I feel the NBA has the best athletes. just my 2 cents...

You mean American Samoa, the same country that has 93% of its population overweight. Samoa is a rugby nation and it will forever be a Rugby nation. There are talks from the Rugby world that the NFL is an option AFTER rugby, where they can retire from contact and just become a punter or kicker.

In the US its ALL about money, no doubt there. However alot of athletes around the world dream of playing for their country, something that is not as big here in the US. So for you to assume that athletes have the same values as US athletes is a fail on your part. Not saying foreigner players don't wan money BUT its not the means to decide which sport they are going to play.

The NFL has lots of cash and is always looking for new talent. Tell us why the NFL does not go after Rugby players? They go after track athletes. I am not trying to knock Rugby at all. It is an amazing sport. However if the NFL felt they could get better talent from Rugby players they would be on the first plane to S.A. or AUS or the UK and offering boat loads of cash to rugby players to come to the NFL however they don’t.

The NFL game goes against a lot of rugby standards. To train a Rugby player to become a NFL player would have to unlearn everything they have been taught to do or not to do.

A track athlete only runs, so its easy to teach from scratch than breaking down a player and teach from scratch.

Back after the 95 Rugby World Cup Jonah Lomu was heavily sort after by some NFL teams, he turned the money down to stay where his heart belonged, in New Zealand Rugby. BTW there are NFL training schools in Australia, but non of the top athletes are interested.

I would like to watch some rugby sometime, anyway to watch it from US? From the net I guess?
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by KB94605NINERS:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by KB94605NINERS:
Who makes more money… the best Rugby Player or football players? The reason why I ask is because if a rugby player can make substantially more playing football than they could in rugby you would think more would make the transition to football yet we don’t see it. The reason we don’t see it is because they usually don’t make it in the NFL. Look what’s going on in Samoa for example, their best athletes are turning to American football not Rugby. I have the similar theory with the heavy weights in boxing. People say the US heavy weight division is dead. All the would-be great heavy weights from the US are following the money which is in the NFL and NBA. Now the heavy weights are left with B class athletes.

My belief is the best athletes go where they can make the most money. I feel the NBA has the best athletes. just my 2 cents...

You mean American Samoa, the same country that has 93% of its population overweight. Samoa is a rugby nation and it will forever be a Rugby nation. There are talks from the Rugby world that the NFL is an option AFTER rugby, where they can retire from contact and just become a punter or kicker.

In the US its ALL about money, no doubt there. However alot of athletes around the world dream of playing for their country, something that is not as big here in the US. So for you to assume that athletes have the same values as US athletes is a fail on your part. Not saying foreigner players don't wan money BUT its not the means to decide which sport they are going to play.

The NFL has lots of cash and is always looking for new talent. Tell us why the NFL does not go after Rugby players? They go after track athletes. I am not trying to knock Rugby at all. It is an amazing sport. However if the NFL felt they could get better talent from Rugby players they would be on the first plane to S.A. or AUS or the UK and offering boat loads of cash to rugby players to come to the NFL however they don’t.

The NFL game goes against a lot of rugby standards. To train a Rugby player to become a NFL player would have to unlearn everything they have been taught to do or not to do.

A track athlete only runs, so its easy to teach from scratch than breaking down a player and teach from scratch.

Back after the 95 Rugby World Cup Jonah Lomu was heavily sort after by some NFL teams, he turned the money down to stay where his heart belonged, in New Zealand Rugby. BTW there are NFL training schools in Australia, but non of the top athletes are interested.

I would like to watch some rugby sometime, anyway to watch it from US? From the net I guess?

When I was in South Africa last year I got to watch the Springboks play against a team from the UK at a bar outside of Cape Town. The rugby fans are extremely passionate. It was awesome. I have been searching for Rugby on TV or the web since and I can’t find it. I know there are some local leauges in the Bay Area.
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by KB94605NINERS:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by KB94605NINERS:
Who makes more money… the best Rugby Player or football players? The reason why I ask is because if a rugby player can make substantially more playing football than they could in rugby you would think more would make the transition to football yet we don’t see it. The reason we don’t see it is because they usually don’t make it in the NFL. Look what’s going on in Samoa for example, their best athletes are turning to American football not Rugby. I have the similar theory with the heavy weights in boxing. People say the US heavy weight division is dead. All the would-be great heavy weights from the US are following the money which is in the NFL and NBA. Now the heavy weights are left with B class athletes.

My belief is the best athletes go where they can make the most money. I feel the NBA has the best athletes. just my 2 cents...

You mean American Samoa, the same country that has 93% of its population overweight. Samoa is a rugby nation and it will forever be a Rugby nation. There are talks from the Rugby world that the NFL is an option AFTER rugby, where they can retire from contact and just become a punter or kicker.

In the US its ALL about money, no doubt there. However alot of athletes around the world dream of playing for their country, something that is not as big here in the US. So for you to assume that athletes have the same values as US athletes is a fail on your part. Not saying foreigner players don't wan money BUT its not the means to decide which sport they are going to play.

The NFL has lots of cash and is always looking for new talent. Tell us why the NFL does not go after Rugby players? They go after track athletes. I am not trying to knock Rugby at all. It is an amazing sport. However if the NFL felt they could get better talent from Rugby players they would be on the first plane to S.A. or AUS or the UK and offering boat loads of cash to rugby players to come to the NFL however they don’t.

The NFL game goes against a lot of rugby standards. To train a Rugby player to become a NFL player would have to unlearn everything they have been taught to do or not to do.

A track athlete only runs, so its easy to teach from scratch than breaking down a player and teach from scratch.

Back after the 95 Rugby World Cup Jonah Lomu was heavily sort after by some NFL teams, he turned the money down to stay where his heart belonged, in New Zealand Rugby. BTW there are NFL training schools in Australia, but non of the top athletes are interested.

I would like to watch some rugby sometime, anyway to watch it from US? From the net I guess?

Dish or Direct has Setanta Sports, Super 14 (Top Club Rugby) starts tonight. You can watch Setenta online too but have to pay as well.
Thanks Aussie and KB, I will check it out further.
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
How the hell can someone seriously argue that all NFL players are automatically disqualified as elite athletes?

Because someone obviously doesn't appreciate how rare it is for a 275 pound man to run 40 yards in under 4.8 seconds, yet still have the strength to squat over 500 pounds, and the explosiveness to achieve a vertical jump in excess of 20".

Football FTW.

Even if this "beast" plays 5mins of a game. Yes that is truly amazing. You aren't a great athlete if you are not on the field.

Christ on a godd@mn cracker!

If you want to say NFL players aren't elite, that's on you. Its a short sighted, unsupportable, completely subjective argument, and it shows how little you know about the game.

Football and rugby are completely different sports, so likening the two is pointless.

The fact is, many football players are multi sport athletes...most WRs, RBs and DBs have a track background. Many linemen have been competitive field or lifting athletes (in fact...one former standouts on the line of the 49ers was a silver medalist in the 1984 summer games...bonus points if you can figure out who he was and what event he competed in). It isn't unusual for football players to have played basketball at the collegiate level.

If your next assertion is that sprinters, basketball players, power lifters and field athletes aren't elite athletes, then you'll have proven what I already suspect: that you are playing the role of "homer" in this thread, and haven't the faintest notion about the dedication required to excel at any sport other than rugby.

NFL players aren't run of the mill...they are not average. These are world class athletes that combine strength, speed, and explosiveness in a way that is unique to football. That does not make them any less "special" than your typical rugby player.
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
Isn't rugby the "sport" where a bunch of dudes hug each other for an uncomfortable amount of time until the ball pops out?

Yeah, American Football is better.

Not really the best argument

I'll decide what the best argument is or isn't. But since you're being a girl about it...

The two sports aren't comparable because the players train to achieve different objectives. Rugby players train to last so stamina is very important. American Football players play only a limited amount of time but on each given play they give it their all, an all out sprint off the line. There's no jogging or taking it easy during a Football play. And while Rugby players may have more endurance, there's no arguing that Football players are much stronger and play with much more speed. There's a reason they wear all that padding and it has nothing to do with preventing pain. It's to prevent death. You can't expect them to make the hits they make every game non-stop the way Rugby players do.

Sports Science did a show on the impact of a hit off of a Rugby player and from a Football player.

By the way, Dhani Jones of the Bengals played with Blackheath a couple of years back.

"I think it would be harder for a rugby player to come and play American football. Rugby is a game of power and leverage where as football is a game of impact and speed."

His words.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/7226539.stm

I think it's safe to say that he wouldn't have been able to make the transition if he wasn't such a great athlete.

Yes, I've seen that sports science. It didn't really prove anything but hitting power. However still leaves the argument of which is worse, a bigger hit spread over the body and a percentage absorbed by padding or a concentrated hit on muscle and bone. I won't argue this because there would be no use, automatically you'll take the total amount. BTW - Great that they use amateur rugby players while using pro NFL players, but that is neither here nor there. LA Rugby club? The USA National team is considered an amateur that have full time jobs, LA Rugby Club are like YMCA basketballers.

Take those totals, 6 tackles a game vs 18. Thats with a NFL DB vs Rugby Center, both aren't top tackling positions. A Flanker for rugby makes twice as many tackles as a center as well as a linebacker for the NFL. HOWEVER!!!!!! A rugby player plays anywhere from 25 to 35 games a year. Plus practice, vs 16 to 23 for a
NFL player plus practice too. Not to mention that Rugby players hit and get hit as much as each other. I bet Jammer doesn't cop anywhere near that much punishment himself.

On for Dhani Jones, I was wondering when someone will bring up this guy. Blackheath Rugby Club, is a division 3 (yes 3) English Rugby club, and a very bad one at that. Meaning there are anywhere from 60-80 Teams (In England alone) better than that one. Not to mention New Zealand, Australia, France, South African etc etc clubs around the world, so we might be getting into the 200-300's of teams BETTER than that one. Oh yeah, he got a run with them in the final 10mins. Do you know what the score of that game was? 61-15 in a losing effort. That would be like an Australian saying US basketball isn't hard because they torn it up in the NCAA division 2 college ranks.

So basically your argument amounts to "ALALALALALA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU, ALALALALALA!!!" and "I'm so insecure about my nation's masculinity I feel the need to undermine America's superior version of our sport".

Get a grip, man! American men aren't more well endowed than Australian men...

...by much.
Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
Originally posted by GhostofJimmyDean:
Isn't rugby the "sport" where a bunch of dudes hug each other for an uncomfortable amount of time until the ball pops out?

Yeah, American Football is better.

Not really the best argument

I'll decide what the best argument is or isn't. But since you're being a girl about it...

The two sports aren't comparable because the players train to achieve different objectives. Rugby players train to last so stamina is very important. American Football players play only a limited amount of time but on each given play they give it their all, an all out sprint off the line. There's no jogging or taking it easy during a Football play. And while Rugby players may have more endurance, there's no arguing that Football players are much stronger and play with much more speed. There's a reason they wear all that padding and it has nothing to do with preventing pain. It's to prevent death. You can't expect them to make the hits they make every game non-stop the way Rugby players do.

Sports Science did a show on the impact of a hit off of a Rugby player and from a Football player.

By the way, Dhani Jones of the Bengals played with Blackheath a couple of years back.

"I think it would be harder for a rugby player to come and play American football. Rugby is a game of power and leverage where as football is a game of impact and speed."

His words.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/7226539.stm

I think it's safe to say that he wouldn't have been able to make the transition if he wasn't such a great athlete.

Yes, I've seen that sports science. It didn't really prove anything but hitting power. However still leaves the argument of which is worse, a bigger hit spread over the body and a percentage absorbed by padding or a concentrated hit on muscle and bone. I won't argue this because there would be no use, automatically you'll take the total amount. BTW - Great that they use amateur rugby players while using pro NFL players, but that is neither here nor there. LA Rugby club? The USA National team is considered an amateur that have full time jobs, LA Rugby Club are like YMCA basketballers.

Take those totals, 6 tackles a game vs 18. Thats with a NFL DB vs Rugby Center, both aren't top tackling positions. A Flanker for rugby makes twice as many tackles as a center as well as a linebacker for the NFL. HOWEVER!!!!!! A rugby player plays anywhere from 25 to 35 games a year. Plus practice, vs 16 to 23 for a
NFL player plus practice too. Not to mention that Rugby players hit and get hit as much as each other. I bet Jammer doesn't cop anywhere near that much punishment himself.

On for Dhani Jones, I was wondering when someone will bring up this guy. Blackheath Rugby Club, is a division 3 (yes 3) English Rugby club, and a very bad one at that. Meaning there are anywhere from 60-80 Teams (In England alone) better than that one. Not to mention New Zealand, Australia, France, South African etc etc clubs around the world, so we might be getting into the 200-300's of teams BETTER than that one. Oh yeah, he got a run with them in the final 10mins. Do you know what the score of that game was? 61-15 in a losing effort. That would be like an Australian saying US basketball isn't hard because they torn it up in the NCAA division 2 college ranks.

So basically your argument amounts to "ALALALALALA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU, ALALALALALA!!!" and "I'm so insecure about my nation's masculinity I feel the need to undermine America's superior version of our sport".

Get a grip, man! American men aren't more well endowed than Australian men...

...by much.

LOL I swear this is the same argument you are making. Dhani Jones's impact and experience on a Rugby team is like saying Ben Graham is a dominant NFL player (in every aspect of the game). I bet if a Rugby player played a few minutes of a NFL preseason game, then left and after wards stated it was tougher to play Rugby, you guys would be all over his jock saying "yeah one preseason game, etc etc.
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
How the hell can someone seriously argue that all NFL players are automatically disqualified as elite athletes?

Because someone obviously doesn't appreciate how rare it is for a 275 pound man to run 40 yards in under 4.8 seconds, yet still have the strength to squat over 500 pounds, and the explosiveness to achieve a vertical jump in excess of 20".

Football FTW.

Even if this "beast" plays 5mins of a game. Yes that is truly amazing. You aren't a great athlete if you are not on the field.

Christ on a godd@mn cracker!

If you want to say NFL players aren't elite, that's on you. Its a short sighted, unsupportable, completely subjective argument, and it shows how little you know about the game.

Football and rugby are completely different sports, so likening the two is pointless.

The fact is, many football players are multi sport athletes...most WRs, RBs and DBs have a track background. Many linemen have been competitive field or lifting athletes (in fact...one former standouts on the line of the 49ers was a silver medalist in the 1984 summer games...bonus points if you can figure out who he was and what event he competed in). It isn't unusual for football players to have played basketball at the collegiate level.

If your next assertion is that sprinters, basketball players, power lifters and field athletes aren't elite athletes, then you'll have proven what I already suspect: that you are playing the role of "homer" in this thread, and haven't the faintest notion about the dedication required to excel at any sport other than rugby.

NFL players aren't run of the mill...they are not average. These are world class athletes that combine strength, speed, and explosiveness in a way that is unique to football. That does not make them any less "special" than your typical rugby player.

most of us typing wouldn't last one hit or 4 sec in the NFL LMFAO
q

[ Edited by tjd808185 on Feb 12, 2010 at 07:02:56 ]
Originally posted by tjd808185:
When it comes to rest baseball seems to be the only sport comparable to football. So Aussie are you going to argue that your dart players have better arms than American pitchers because they don't rest between innings?
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
How the hell can someone seriously argue that all NFL players are automatically disqualified as elite athletes?

Because someone obviously doesn't appreciate how rare it is for a 275 pound man to run 40 yards in under 4.8 seconds, yet still have the strength to squat over 500 pounds, and the explosiveness to achieve a vertical jump in excess of 20".

Football FTW.

Even if this "beast" plays 5mins of a game. Yes that is truly amazing. You aren't a great athlete if you are not on the field.

Christ on a godd@mn cracker!

If you want to say NFL players aren't elite, that's on you. Its a short sighted, unsupportable, completely subjective argument, and it shows how little you know about the game.

Football and rugby are completely different sports, so likening the two is pointless.

The fact is, many football players are multi sport athletes...most WRs, RBs and DBs have a track background. Many linemen have been competitive field or lifting athletes (in fact...one former standouts on the line of the 49ers was a silver medalist in the 1984 summer games...bonus points if you can figure out who he was and what event he competed in). It isn't unusual for football players to have played basketball at the collegiate level.

If your next assertion is that sprinters, basketball players, power lifters and field athletes aren't elite athletes, then you'll have proven what I already suspect: that you are playing the role of "homer" in this thread, and haven't the faintest notion about the dedication required to excel at any sport other than rugby.

NFL players aren't run of the mill...they are not average. These are world class athletes that combine strength, speed, and explosiveness in a way that is unique to football. That does not make them any less "special" than your typical rugby player.

I anxiously await the "they only play 5 minutes" response that ignores everything else.
first off, you cant literally play more than 11 or so mins of actual time. its too violent. there maybe be very little time "in-play", but in that time people are getting hit hard.

second, the breaks create anticipation. baseball has alot of waiting around too, but it builds up that nervous and methodical momentum.

and as far as rugby goes, its just a bunch of euro guys who play football with no pads on. yes, its tougher to play, but i would argue alot of NFL players would play the game with no pads all around.

tougher to play like that, but theyre also dumber, and will end up with even more health problems later in life.
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
How the hell can someone seriously argue that all NFL players are automatically disqualified as elite athletes?

Because someone obviously doesn't appreciate how rare it is for a 275 pound man to run 40 yards in under 4.8 seconds, yet still have the strength to squat over 500 pounds, and the explosiveness to achieve a vertical jump in excess of 20".

Football FTW.

Even if this "beast" plays 5mins of a game. Yes that is truly amazing. You aren't a great athlete if you are not on the field.

Christ on a godd@mn cracker!

If you want to say NFL players aren't elite, that's on you. Its a short sighted, unsupportable, completely subjective argument, and it shows how little you know about the game.

Football and rugby are completely different sports, so likening the two is pointless.

The fact is, many football players are multi sport athletes...most WRs, RBs and DBs have a track background. Many linemen have been competitive field or lifting athletes (in fact...one former standouts on the line of the 49ers was a silver medalist in the 1984 summer games...bonus points if you can figure out who he was and what event he competed in). It isn't unusual for football players to have played basketball at the collegiate level.

If your next assertion is that sprinters, basketball players, power lifters and field athletes aren't elite athletes, then you'll have proven what I already suspect: that you are playing the role of "homer" in this thread, and haven't the faintest notion about the dedication required to excel at any sport other than rugby.

NFL players aren't run of the mill...they are not average. These are world class athletes that combine strength, speed, and explosiveness in a way that is unique to football. That does not make them any less "special" than your typical rugby player.

I anxiously await the "they only play 5 minutes" response that ignores everything else.

Yup.

I would then ask if he wants to say that wrestlers aren't elite because they only wrestle for three 2-minute periods per match....only 6 minutes.

If that's the case...he'd have been a fun one to bring into practice back in the day
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Aussie49er:
Originally posted by Legbreaker:
Originally posted by Kalen49ers:
How the hell can someone seriously argue that all NFL players are automatically disqualified as elite athletes?

Because someone obviously doesn't appreciate how rare it is for a 275 pound man to run 40 yards in under 4.8 seconds, yet still have the strength to squat over 500 pounds, and the explosiveness to achieve a vertical jump in excess of 20".

Football FTW.

Even if this "beast" plays 5mins of a game. Yes that is truly amazing. You aren't a great athlete if you are not on the field.

Christ on a godd@mn cracker!

If you want to say NFL players aren't elite, that's on you. Its a short sighted, unsupportable, completely subjective argument, and it shows how little you know about the game.

Football and rugby are completely different sports, so likening the two is pointless.

The fact is, many football players are multi sport athletes...most WRs, RBs and DBs have a track background. Many linemen have been competitive field or lifting athletes (in fact...one former standouts on the line of the 49ers was a silver medalist in the 1984 summer games...bonus points if you can figure out who he was and what event he competed in). It isn't unusual for football players to have played basketball at the collegiate level.

If your next assertion is that sprinters, basketball players, power lifters and field athletes aren't elite athletes, then you'll have proven what I already suspect: that you are playing the role of "homer" in this thread, and haven't the faintest notion about the dedication required to excel at any sport other than rugby.

NFL players aren't run of the mill...they are not average. These are world class athletes that combine strength, speed, and explosiveness in a way that is unique to football. That does not make them any less "special" than your typical rugby player.

I anxiously await the "they only play 5 minutes" response that ignores everything else.

Yup.

I would then ask if he wants to say that wrestlers aren't elite because they only wrestle for three 2-minute periods per match....only 6 minutes.

If that's the case...he'd have been a fun one to bring into practice back in the day

wrestling is gay