Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
oh sure, yeah that....but not the other way around
Quote:
Originally Posted by soletaire
Just another rehash of the same old argument...the reality is rugby is a tough sport..and football is a tough sport... rugby = contact sport with lateral passes, violent scrums and few frontal tackles, and football = collision sport with violent set plays, forward passes and full frontal contact on every single play.
Football has more specialists who are incredible athletes for their body types...Rugby has more all around athletes who fit into the categories of either speed demon or flat out wild hooligan. Football is a much, much more strategic game in terms of both play calling and body positioning.. (tackling, catching, pass blocking, run blocking,open field blocking, pass defense etc.)...i think most line backers, D-Ends and running backs in the NFL could play rugby with no problem, and would probably even excel at it....I think most rugby players are more than tough enough and well conditioned for the NFL, but I dont see the athleticism nor the strategy element coming easy to them.
I agree, it is two separate sports with a similar skill set but as the games diverged you began to see the differences. Some NFL players will have the endurance to go both ways and a few rugby players will have the size and power to deal with an NFL player who long ago learned how to hunker down behind his body armor and deliver a hit to spoil a tackler's attack.
It would be like what is more valuable a tank or an artillery piece, it depends upon the nature of the battlefield.
There is, according to the Wall Street Journal, only 13minutes of actual ball in play action in an average NFL game. That means that defensive and attacking teams each spend only 6.5 minutes actually playing.
Rugby players on the other hand spend 80 minutes on the field without the use of helmets or padding and no time outs for commercial breaks etc, now that's endurance.
There is, according to the Wall Street Journal, only 13minutes of actual ball in play action in an average NFL game. That means that defensive and attacking teams each spend only 6.5 minutes actually playing.
Rugby players on the other hand spend 80 minutes on the field without the use of helmets or padding and no time outs for commercial breaks etc, now that's endurance.
This does not mean your game is better. Again this is a stupid argument. If you like your sport better that's fine and perfectly understandable. But comparing the 2 in an attempt to form a conclussion is a waste of bandwith. As is the idea that NFL players are not tough enough to play rugby.
This does not mean your game is better. Again this is a stupid argument. If you like your sport better that's fine and perfectly understandable. But comparing the 2 in an attempt to form a conclussion is a waste of bandwith. As is the idea that NFL players are not tough enough to play rugby.
That's like saying some tennis matches last for 4 hours, so that makes tennis better than football and rugby. Hell, cricket lasts for 5 days, and golf last even longer. Therefore golf and cricket are the two best games in the world
I think the players who are in positions that require a greater balance of skills could transition: Tight ends, linebackers, running backs and full backs.
I think that offensive linemen would struggle but defensive linemen might be better equipped. Wide receivers, corners and safties might be able to as they could provide speed for a rugby team.
However, quarterbacks would be unable to transition.
There are a couple of quarterbacks in the pro game that could probably translate. I could see Russel Wilson in as a scrum half. I agree that the defensive lineman would fair better than the offensive lineman at their current playing weights. This doesn't include the hefty interior 3-4 nose tackle types like Vince Wilfork, but I could see even some of the bigger guys like recently retired Justin Smith as a front rower.
In watching Wales vs England this weekend I kept thinking how much I'd like to see Chris Robshaw as a mike linebacker. His game would be like Paul Poslousny of the Jaguars. Coincidentally, they have the exact same height/weight listed on Wiki! (6'2"/242lbs).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
