NFL America's game

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry, I lived in New England for a long time. The Pats fans, the Red Sox fans and the Yankees fans are all as bad as each other. Massive kopites, all of them.
 
Brennan91 said:
Disagree.

Handegg players may be larger in terms of raw muscle size, but in endurance and general fitness rugby players are on a completely different level. In rugby the players cover way more ground and have far less standing around between plays like Handegg players do.

Depends on how you describe the term 'athlete'. I don't consider huge guys with no endurance to be the world's best athletes, personally. The average Rugby player covers 4.35 miles per match, for Handegg it's 0.19 miles.

In fact, i'd even say the size issue is debatable.
Click to expand...

I'm late to this debate, but its fair to say that both sports have world class athletes. However, they evolve in a completely different way, starting at a young age. American football players are putting on large amounts of weight (muscle hopefully) from their teens onward. Footballers need not do this. Imagine how huge Distin would be if he grew up in Paris, Texas instead of Paris, France. Also, American football permits a much broader array of "athlete" to be on the field, and permits a high degree of specialization. Thus, you can have a big fat belly and weigh 325 pounds, but be a great player if you are strong and quick in short bursts. You can also be small and fast with little athletic ability in terms of skills and vision, so long as you can run fast and catch a ball. Football, on the other hand, requires players to be a little but of everything. Specialization is out, because the players all need to be fast, athletic, fit, strong, good vision, good ball skills, etc.

Many non-Americans do not realize how small many american football players are, outside of the linemen. The perimeter players (QB, RB, WR, LB, S, CB) are really just Jags with more weight training.
 
EFC NY said:
I'm late to this debate, but its fair to say that both sports have world class athletes. However, they evolve in a completely different way, starting at a young age. American football players are putting on large amounts of weight (muscle hopefully) from their teens onward. Footballers need not do this. Imagine how huge Distin would be if he grew up in Paris, Texas instead of Paris, France. Also, American football permits a much broader array of "athlete" to be on the field, and permits a high degree of specialization. Thus, you can have a big fat belly and weigh 325 pounds, but be a great player if you are strong and quick in short bursts. You can also be small and fast with little athletic ability in terms of skills and vision, so long as you can run fast and catch a ball. Football, on the other hand, requires players to be a little but of everything. Specialization is out, because the players all need to be fast, athletic, fit, strong, good vision, good ball skills, etc.

Many non-Americans do not realize how small many american football players are, outside of the linemen. The perimeter players (QB, RB, WR, LB, S, CB) are really just Jags with more weight training.
Click to expand...

Wait, wait, wait.




There's a Paris, Texas?
 
Some cracking games this weekend,Broncos v Ravens had great drama,from what the commentators reported the equalizing touchdown in the last minute was a really poor bit of defending (remind you of any team this season ????).
As I thought my lot the Packers weren't quite up to it but credit to the 49's quarterback,great performance.Don't think too many teams would have stopped that fella on saturday.
roll on the next games
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top