Football VS Rugby players...

[rezznor]

1. who are tougher?
2. who are better athletes?

[mbell75]

Lots of Rugby players and fans think the NFL is weaker because they wear helmets and pads which is silly. Whats the average size of a rugby player? 5'10 205 lbs maybe? I never really see any BIG rugby players. Let them try taking a hit from a 6'5 260 lbs NFL player who can run a 4.6 40 running full speed and see how they feel about that :lol

[LuppersGB]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/img//galleries/ChabalGallery/Chabal01_322x450.jpg

vs

http://soccerlens.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/cristiano-ronaldo.jpg

who would you rather meet down a dark alley?

[sunsfan1357]

I think the toughness factor can be a toss up while there's no doubt that NFL players are more athletic.

[RedBlackAttack]

Two totally different sports and two totally different kinds of athletes. Rugby requires incredible endurance (like soccer), because it is non-stop. The NFL requires incredible, short bursts of athleticism.

Those that claim rugby isn't as difficult because the players aren't as big or as bulky strong are wrong, because players in the NFL would be exhausted a few minutes into a game. Those that claim that NFL players are pansies because they wear pads are wrong, because if you tried to go against the guys in the NFL during these short bursts of full-speed, nearly no-holds-barred contact, you would seriously be risking your life.

Too different to even compare...

[LuppersGB]

I think the toughness factor can be a toss up while there's no doubt that NFL players are more athletic.

i don't watch a lot of NFL...how long does the average player actually play per game?
Is it 80 mins? I don't think so. Rugby players also happen to play both offence and defence for that duration. They each play against a massive size range of opposition players ranging from a wing(similar to a wr) about 6'1 190 to a prop ( maybe a centre comparison) about 6'1 290 or a lock (no comparison) who comes in at 6'5 290. All of them doing a full 80min shift. rugby players are most probably better athletes

[lefthook00]

NFL players > Rugby players. The top athletes from the genetic gene pool go to the NFL and NBA. NFL players are stronger, faster, more explosive. I've played both, and the tackling in rugby is different, there is more dragging down/tackling than there are hits or full speed collisions. People think that NFL players wear helmets/pad b/c it's more p*ssy, but it's actually the opposite. Helmets/pads are necessary for the health of the players. Rugby players don't have pads not b/c they are more hardcore, they don't have pads b/c the game isn't violent enough to need pads. A player would be paralyzed, get their skull cracked open, or die every single game if football players didn't have helmets/pads.

[Mikaiel]

100m sprinters vs decathletes, who are the better athletes ? :hammerhead:

[LuppersGB]

this years six nations - scotland vs wales had like 3 hospitalisations in the 1st half. rugby is just a dangerous as nfl. yes linebakers and the like are big but there are some hella big rugby guys out their who can do some serious damage

[west_tip]

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/09_03/LesleyVainikoloGET_468x444.jpg



the common denominator is polynesians.

id like to see manu samoa play american samoa in 2 games, one rugby rules the other american football.

[RedBlackAttack]

this years six nations - scotland vs wales had like 3 hospitalisations in the 1st half. rugby is just a dangerous as nfl. yes linebakers and the like are big but there are some hella big rugby guys out their who can do some serious damage
It may be as dangerous only because rugby players wear no padding. Even then, I don't really think so. It is very difficult to catch someone off-guard and hit them with all of your weight, power and speed when you are running the entire length of the field 200x nonstop.

As I said, the short bursts of action in American football allow for maximum energy and speed on every play. If you took padding off of the players, there would literally be multiple deaths each week. The game is far too fast and the players are far too big.

There may be some big rugby players out there, but I can pretty much guarantee that every team in the NFL has at least three linebackers bigger (not 'flabby' big like some linemen) than any rugby player. You just cannot be as big as the guy's in the NFL and play a game like rugby.

[sergiorodriguez]

Football players don't have the endurance to play a full rugby match, not the massive linemen or linebackers atleast, and taking a hit without pads is way different from taking a hit with pads.

Rugby players aren't big enough or explosive enough (the majority, though there are alot of top quality athletes in rugby who could play NFL if they wanted to) for the short stop start play in american football.

Both are real tough and amazing athletes, it's like sprinters vs distance runners how can you compare the two , who are the better runners?

[Knuck the Ficks]

As RBA has already said a gridiron player would have almost no chance in rugby and vice versa. You could argue that some of the forwards in rugby would find a place in the NFL while someone like Larry Fitzgerald could play as a rugby winger.

[G-train]

Australian Rules Football - The Greatest Game on Earth. :)

http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/images/AFL/Essendon/Lloyd_mark_pre246xWIM.jpg

[rezznor]

Australian Rules Football - The Greatest Game on Earth. :)

http://mm.afl.com.au/Portals/0/images/AFL/Essendon/Lloyd_mark_pre246xWIM.jpg
is this not the same as rugby?

[JtotheIzzo]

As RBA has already said a gridiron player would have almost no chance in rugby and vice versa. You could argue that some of the forwards in rugby would find a place in the NFL while someone like Larry Fitzgerald could play as a rugby winger.

you hit on a few good points, but most NFL skill position players would make outstanding rugby players.

Michael Vick at scrum half for example.
any running back or return specialist in jersey 11-15.
lineman would kick ass at prop and hooker (endurance work would be needed).
defensive ends would make great locks.
linebackers would be awesome flankers.

I have played both games and as posted before they are different. I am not going to say which is better or tougher, just that both are awesome. Injuries are a reality in both as well.

Football is a collision sport, rugby is a contact sport.
Football is a sprint, rugby is a marathon.

Players from either discipline (except the smaller rugby guys and the really fat lineman in football) could train for the other sport. They focus would need to move from power to endurance or vice-versa.

World class athletes are world class athletes and both sports are heavily focused on physical attributes and easy for an athlete to transfer position.

The whole helmet argument is BS too as most forwards in Rugby Union wear scrum hats and shoulder pads now. The collisions in the NFL are more consistent and vicious, without the gear there could be no game. As rugby develops (it is still an evolving game) the move towards equipment will be greater.

On the whole though I think football is the more dangerous game, you can play club rugby right up into the senior ranks, I can't imagine a bunch of middle-aged dudes donning the pads to play gridiron.

[RedBlackAttack]

On the whole though I think football is the more dangerous game, you can play club rugby right up into the senior ranks, I can't imagine a bunch of middle-aged dudes donning the pads to play gridiron.

Sandlot football is a mainstay in every American midwestern kid's life from a very early age. There comes a time, though, when every person has to say 'enough is enough' and that usually comes somewhere in the 20s.

For those that don't know, sandlot football in America is just going to an empty field and playing tackle football with no pads.

The last time me and my buddies tried and failed was around 5 years ago. On the first play, my buddy was knocked unconscious and the guy that knocked him out lost his front tooth on a seemingly harmless play. The game is totally unplayable (unless you are a kid) without padding.

Also, padding in football does not supply the kind of massive protection from every hit that a lot of people outside of the US thinks. I played organized football from the time I was very young through high school... When you get hit hard by something that you don't see coming, you feel it to your bones and I doubt there is another sport, outside of combat sports like MMA and boxing, in which you receive the kind of dizzying punishment that you do in American football.

It is just a brutal, brutal sport.

[Se]

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-union/on-the-wing-and-a-prayer-profile-jonah-lomu-739306.html

This was in 1995. $6 million is a lot of money for someone that has never played the sport.

[QUOTE]Had it not been for union's sudden abandonment of the amateur ethic and its embrace of professionalism in the immediate aftermath of the tournament in South Africa, its most bankable crowd-puller would have taken someone else's shilling and switched sports. Big-time rugby league outfits had been pursuing him for months; rather more temptingly, the Dallas Cowboys gridiron team offered him $6m to don the crash-helmet and set his sights on the Superbowl. The New Zealand Rugby Football Union had to find big bucks to keep him on the straight and narrow, and with Murdoch's timely millions pouring into its coffers, it was soon in a position to strike a deal. On 9 July 1995, the All Black hierarchy announced that the name Jonah Lomu was now a registered trademark, and that they had commercial authority over its use. Jonah was New Zealand rugby and vice versa./QUOTE]

[yungtyrekeevans]

NFL players > Rugby players. The top athletes from the genetic gene pool go to the NFL and NBA. NFL players are stronger, faster, more explosive. I've played both, and the tackling in rugby is different, there is more dragging down/tackling than there are hits or full speed collisions. People think that NFL players wear helmets/pad b/c it's more p*ssy, but it's actually the opposite. Helmets/pads are necessary for the health of the players. Rugby players don't have pads not b/c they are more hardcore, they don't have pads b/c the game isn't violent enough to need pads. A player would be paralyzed, get their skull cracked open, or die every single game if football players didn't have helmets/pads.


man some cats on here are stupid... i like nfl a hell of a lot more, seeing as i dont even watch rugby, but thats just plain stupid.

you think nfl cats would be throwing all their weight into hits if they didnt have the pads? give rugby guys a bunch of pads to protect themselves and see what happens. rugby is ridiculous. peeps gettin knocked in the head and stomped on while on the ground.

rugby guys are a hell of a lot tougher, but nfl is no doubt the better producer of athletes. some of the samoans and new zealanders though are on par and if not better than the nfl guys.

for example you had jonah lomu. dude was 6'5, 270lbs and had a 10.6 100m sprint. 40 yard dash was 4.5. dude sh!tted on fools in rugby when they tried to tackle him. he would have thrived in the nfl.

[JtotheIzzo]

man some cats on here are stupid... i like nfl a hell of a lot more, seeing as i dont even watch rugby, but thats just plain stupid.

you think nfl cats would be throwing all their weight into hits if they didnt have the pads? give rugby guys a bunch of pads to protect themselves and see what happens. rugby is ridiculous. peeps gettin knocked in the head and stomped on while on the ground.

rugby guys are a hell of a lot tougher, but nfl is no doubt the better producer of athletes. some of the samoans and new zealanders though are on par and if not better than the nfl guys.

for example you had jonah lomu. dude was 6'5, 270lbs and had a 10.6 100m sprint. 40 yard dash was 4.5. dude sh!tted on fools in rugby when they tried to tackle him. he would have thrived in the nfl.

a few points:

1-rugby guys wear pads, this is conveniently ignored by everyone.

https://www.lovell-rugby.co.uk/products/1132.jpg
http://www.lovell-rugby.co.uk/products/3712.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31vIwbAVKbL._AA280_.jpg
http://www.prosportuk.com/images/indexprodimages/7/rugby%20protective%20wear/49.jpg

in a generation this gear will all be mandatory.

2-Jonah Lomu was one of the greatest, if not the greatest rugby player ever (certainly the most famous), it doesn't really say much to say he'd thrive in a parallel sport.

3-Samoa's never really done much in rugby so I am not sure why you mention them. I assume you mean the Maoris and Polynesians who play in the Super 14 and for Australia and New Zealand. Many of them have been successful in the NFL, and it is safe to assume the Polynesian NFLers are just as tough, skilled, rugged as Polynesian Rugby players.

4-Saying one group of guys is tougher than the other is stupid. Both are tough.

[Manute for Ever!]

is this not the same as rugby?

Not even remotely close...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BOzQwj4fSE

[Rameek]

I will say Rugby is tougher (although they have the worse tackling technique. They try to tackle with there head down which I am utterly shocked dudes havent died or broken there neck or been paralyzed!)
Those flimsy pads dont really protect a lot. I have seen rugby players and they are just as huge as NFL players but not offensive lineman size though more like DE LB RB size.

The athletic ability to me is clearly on the Football side. Although there are some rugby players that do run fast. The ability to run fast and make athletic moves are part of Football where the Rugby players arent as skillful in that area.

The conditioning is definitely on the Rugby side...

I dont think Rugby players could play in the NFL not at that level but an NFL player could probably play in a Rugby league if he could be in the proper condition.

[rezznor]

Not even remotely close...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BOzQwj4fSE
can you tell what the difference is between AFL and rugby? it looks pretty similar to me. is it the way they ass-check people?

[monaroCountry]

I will say Rugby is tougher (although they have the worse tackling technique. They try to tackle with there head down which I am utterly shocked dudes havent died or broken there neck or been paralyzed!)

Rugby tackle technique is actually very important and an oft practiced art. I see rugby tackles far more effective at stopping a player and when done properly far safer to the tackler. Rugby players do have their head up during a tackle to straighten their spine, prevent unjuries and to see where the incoming player is coming from. Rugby League has the best defence and tacklers in all football codes, arguably they also make the most amount of tackles per game.

Rugby and Football have the same basic techniques.

Rugby Union
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQJ39bbq2uU

American Football
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWIdbx2CP1s



Those flimsy pads dont really protect a lot. I have seen rugby players and they are just as huge as NFL players but not offensive lineman size though more like DE LB RB size.

The pads isnt to cushion the impact. The head gear simply prevent cauliflower ears.

http://www.abc.net.au/rugbyunion/galleries/2006/ausveng_syd/images/09.jpg



The conditioning is definitely on the Rugby side...

I dont think Rugby players could play in the NFL not at that level but an NFL player could probably play in a Rugby league if he could be in the proper condition.



I would again argue the other way around. Rugby players would make far better football players than football to rugby. Take for example the American Samoans who are a rugby dominated country, these guys according to reports are 40 times more likely to make it into the NFL than mainland Americans.

A Rugby (easpecially Rugby League) player would have defence, offence, kicking and catching down pat. They only thing players are not taught is how to throw a ball like in football. The most difficult part for a rugby player would be memorising all the plays. A football player is far too specialised and would not adapt easily to doing everything (no precial team, no offensive team and no defensive team), there are also allot of set plays in rugby as well as skills/plays that are just not or cant be taught. Rugby is basically an instinctive game where the two teams are let loose for 80 minutes without many/any sideline instructions.

[JtotheIzzo]

lets not forget, a high tackle in rugby is illegal, and in football people use the equipement to hurt people (going helmet first into a tackler).

bottom line:

Rugby = contact sport

Football = collision sport

[zabuza666]

a few points:

1-rugby guys wear pads, this is conveniently ignored by everyone.

https://www.lovell-rugby.co.uk/products/1132.jpg
http://www.lovell-rugby.co.uk/products/3712.jpg
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31vIwbAVKbL._AA280_.jpg
http://www.prosportuk.com/images/indexprodimages/7/rugby%20protective%20wear/49.jpg

in a generation this gear will all be mandatory.

2-Jonah Lomu was one of the greatest, if not the greatest rugby player ever (certainly the most famous), it doesn't really say much to say he'd thrive in a parallel sport.

3-Samoa's never really done much in rugby so I am not sure why you mention them. I assume you mean the Maoris and Polynesians who play in the Super 14 and for Australia and New Zealand. Many of them have been successful in the NFL, and it is safe to assume the Polynesian NFLers are just as tough, skilled, rugged as Polynesian Rugby players.

4-Saying one group of guys is tougher than the other is stupid. Both are tough.

No offense man but your posts are full of ****.

The "pads" worn by rugby players aren't there to protect them. The headgear is there in order to protect getting cuts to the head and to stop forwards from getting cauliflower ears in the scrum. The chest/leg underarmour is there in order to keep muscles warm to allow for greater muscle endurance during games. All the aforementioned items are ****ing thin fabric and provide **** all protection, and to try pass them off as padding is downright ficticious.