Page 1 of 1
The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 9:52 am
by DoubleVodkas
Now we have all searched for 'big hits' and 'huge hit' on youtube havn't we? Well maybe not. Anyway, you can bet on looking at the comments there will be a 'american football is for pussies!' comment or a 'come play it bitch!' quote by some pricks who want to be macho.
Now as a fan of both sports and having played rugby at quite a high level (Union for my university, league for North Of England) I would like other people's views on the two different sports, in particular, those who have played American Football to some level,. Factors on the physical side such as training, fitness, pre - season training, nutrition and also opinions on rugby. How big it is in the States? How is it viewed.
I would bet this is the same at whatever level you play in either sport, you feel like you've been hit by a fucking bus the next morning!
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 9:56 am
by DoubleVodkas
............ I would say that NFL is more anaerobically based than rugby which leans towards more towards aerobic. Short sharp burst of high intensity against a mid intensity over a longer period.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:09 am
by MickeyG
I've played neither at a decent level, but you should also factor in money when comparing these sports.
Rugby, even if you add both codes together, is by far the poor relation of the NFL. And as usual, money talks and bullshit walks. Also, at least in the UK anyway Rugby became "professional" later than the NFL. More money and professionalism just push the athletes further, in IMO.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:19 am
by DoubleVodkas
American Football careers are generally shorter arn't they? I know running backs get beat up quite a bit. 'Bitches got ta get paid while they can I suppose.
Everybody here in the UK thinks footballers (Soccer) get paid too much, like £175,000 a week but some of the NFL contracts are nuts.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:18 pm
by thejuggernaut
Both sports are great.
Played both.
North American football is a little more entertaining to watch, whereas Rugby was more fun to play. Keep in mind I am being biased because speed and elusiveness was my game, but I couldn't catch passes worth a damn.
So in NA Football, I was RB, DE, LB, S, CS and returner. I could catch kicks, not passes. Figure that one out. LOL
Rugby allowed me to do more of my thing - get the ball on a pitch and take off.
I will say one thing. You often hear the hardcore rugby types saying "football players are pussies - they need gear" and I can tell you that is absolutely incorrect.
Exceptions of course, by and large rugby is mostly a game of tackling via dragging people to the ground. There most certainly is some hitting. And of course, knees, elbows, heads all flying about toward unshielded body parts.
However, I can honestly say there are few things more painful than being hit in an padded area by a counter momentum projectile with a compressed hard plastic helmet on the end.
Hell, I've taken helmets to the thigh pads and limped for weeks.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:49 pm
by DenimAndLeather
DoubleVodkas wrote:American Football careers are generally shorter arn't they?
Yeah, I remember hearing the average NFL player has a career of about 3 to 5 years
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 1:19 pm
by DoubleVodkas
[quote]I will say one thing. You often hear the hardcore rugby types saying "football players are pussies - they need gear" and I can tell you that is absolutely incorrect.[quote]
I know, that is what annoys me. I havn't had the chance to play American Football but would love to. I could see myself as a Tight End in the Witten or Boss mould.

I see some of the hits that go in, especially with the helmet and just think 'ouch'. I read an article about the increased number of concussions that happen these days and that ex pro's have all sorts of health problems. Hard sport indeed.
How much does all the armour and helmet weigh? How long does it take to getting use to?
I would consider rugby to be more 'grinding' in the sense that retribution can be dished out with regards to elbows, punches, knees and at worse, eye gouging. Nothing worse than clashing knees, clashing heads, knees on heads and heads of hip bones! It is not the hits that do the damage like American Football but the continuous dragging, wrestling, pushing, running, getting up and off the floor repeatedly and then add a sprinkling of hits over 80 minutes and you certainly feel it but fuck taking one of them blindside hits just as the reciever is about to take a pass in.
Fuck it, I'll be the kicker.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:02 pm
by KillDevilHill
Football palyers take huge fucking hits that dont really happen often(or ever) Rugby is one of the only non combat sports that mixes aerobics anarobics, violence and mad skill.
Two of the best sports on the planet in my opinion.
However hardcore rugby players that football is a bitch sport are stupid as fuck and would get knocked out of game by Ray lewis, and burned by Deshuan Jackson.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:05 pm
by KillDevilHill
DoubleVodkas wrote:American Football careers are generally shorter arn't they? I know running backs get beat up quite a bit. 'Bitches got ta get paid while they can I suppose.
.
The stars ussually play at a high level longer than in international rugby Compare Jonah Lomu and Emmit Smith. I mean isnt Brian Habana retiring after the world cup?
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:38 am
by UtahRatt
Played both and love both, my experience with Rugby only lasted one summer while football was from Pop Warner up to a few years ago with a multistate full contact league.
My last few years being active was full on pads in the spring, flag football in the fall and indoor in the winter "Tho I didn't play much indoor"
Rugby vs Football, I wouldn't say one was tougher then the other, rugby wore me to exhaustion a bit more while football beat me up a little more. Both are tough physical games end of story.
I will say the most physically beat up game to me personally was full contact flag football "double pass", the seasons were tough but the tourneys were totally brutal sometimes playing 3 to 5 games in a day then coming back the next day for 1 or 2 more.
Sad part is, after all that......I'm physically beat the fuck up and hurt all the fucking time.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:41 am
by demolition23
Both are great games.
NFL clearly has bigger hits. It's generally bigger guys with the gear that enables them to make hits that would literally kill people if they weren't padded up... So anyone that thinks they're not tough because they're wearing helmets is an idiot. Just listen to and watch some of those impacts. Those guys aren't trying to wrap the ball-carrier up and roll them to the ground to secure possession. They're trying to smash the guy with no need to think of wrapping them up to stop the offload etc.
By comparison, rugby may look less spectacular, but the grit required to continue hammering at the line in the 80th minute of a game with very few stoppages is something that an NFL fan whose never played rugby might not appreciate. Watching guys just lying on the ground exhausted at the end of games should tell you something though. I've heard people say it's not so bad ass cos the guys are smaller... Well, no 330 pounder could survive more than half a game. You can't be taken on and off from play to play.
Also far, far more dubious shit happens to you when you hit the deck in rugby given that the play doesn't go dead. No NFL pile up over a fumble matches getting rucked (ie people scraping their cleats over you and stomping you to get you out of the way) by the opposition forward pack because you landed on their side of the ball...
But yeah, they're ultimately completely incomparable when it comes to a debate over 'toughness'. Classic example of 'apples and oranges' with no definitive answer. Nor should there be. Both are great games, and the great players in both sports are tough as nails.
Rugby does have the odd good punch-up though.

Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:47 am
by demolition23
As a side-note, I never played American football (except some slightly ill-disciplined flag football), but as a smaller guy, my last game of rugby ended as follows...
Dislocated finger popped back in (after putting my arm out to stop landing on my head in a tackle.
Black-eye (from getting punched after jabbing the guy who dumped me on my head in the throat).
Cleat marks all over my back and chest.
Swollen knee (from being stamped on after scoring) that I couldn't bend for a week.
Nose bleeding so badly I had to go to the hospital and get it cauterised (fucking ouch!).
Some guy bit me too, but it didn't break the skin, so doesn't really count.
Yeah. I didn't play again.

Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:06 am
by UtahRatt
DoubleVodkas wrote:How much does all the armour and helmet weigh? How long does it take to getting use to?
Weight can vary depending on money spent and all the different options. lineman shoulder pads weight more then a WR or QB. Additional stuff like elbow or cowboy collars add more. Never really thought about it....Hum...10-15lbs I'm guessing.
I think the hardest thing for someone who hasn't suited up before would be vision, catching the ball with a helmet on, getting a feel and being aware of your blind sides is a learning curve. After a couple crack-backs you learn quickly to grow eyes on the side of your helmet.
If you're interested make sure you try on several different sets of makes, styles and brands of shoulder pads. Don't just settle with hand me downs or the cheapest used set, a few extra bucks is money well spent.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:23 am
by UtahRatt
DoubleVodkas wrote:Now as a fan of both sports and having played rugby at quite a high level (Union for my university, league for North Of England) I would like other people's views on the two different sports, in particular, those who have played American Football to some level,. Factors on the physical side such as training, fitness, pre - season training, nutrition and also opinions on rugby. How big it is in the States? How is it viewed.
I would bet this is the same at whatever level you play in either sport, you feel like you've been hit by a fucking bus the next morning!
Guess I should fully read your post before answering scattered questions.
I'd train for both in the same way "apart from practice that is" laps around the field and hit the gym. Bulk up if you're on the line, high reps and sprints if you demand a faster game. It all depends on the level of competition you're entering at.
Rugby isn't really viewed here at all, I don't know anyone who follows and the reason why I only played one summer was because I couldn't find a league/team. Hell I'm not even sure what channel to find it on. Haven't watched a match in ages. Over all Id say the majority of sports fans in the states even with limited knowledge would accept Rugby as a physically tough sport. It's got a good rep.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:43 am
by UtahRatt
demolition23 wrote:As a side-note, I never played American football (except some slightly ill-disciplined flag football), but as a smaller guy, my last game of rugby ended as follows...
Dislocated finger popped back in (after putting my arm out to stop landing on my head in a tackle.
Black-eye (from getting punched after jabbing the guy who dumped me on my head in the throat).
Cleat marks all over my back and chest.
Swollen knee (from being stamped on after scoring) that I couldn't bend for a week.
Nose bleeding so badly I had to go to the hospital and get it cauterised (fucking ouch!).
Some guy bit me too, but it didn't break the skin, so doesn't really count.
Yeah. I didn't play again.

HAHAHA! Love it!
The last time I suited up..
A helmet to helmet contact gave me a major concussion leaving bone spurs in my neck. I don't remember much after the 1st quarter, the 60 mile drive home took several hours. Had to pull over several times because I couldn't fucking see straight. Neck still goes out every so often.
The 2nd to last game, popped 2 ribs, finished the game sparingly but took the next week off before I played my final.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:52 am
by demolition23
UtahRatt wrote:demolition23 wrote:As a side-note, I never played American football (except some slightly ill-disciplined flag football), but as a smaller guy, my last game of rugby ended as follows...
Dislocated finger popped back in (after putting my arm out to stop landing on my head in a tackle.
Black-eye (from getting punched after jabbing the guy who dumped me on my head in the throat).
Cleat marks all over my back and chest.
Swollen knee (from being stamped on after scoring) that I couldn't bend for a week.
Nose bleeding so badly I had to go to the hospital and get it cauterised (fucking ouch!).
Some guy bit me too, but it didn't break the skin, so doesn't really count.
Yeah. I didn't play again.

HAHAHA! Love it!
The last time I suited up..
A helmet to helmet contact gave me a major concussion leaving bone spurs in my neck. I don't remember much after the 1st quarter, the 60 mile drive home took several hours. Had to pull over several times because I couldn't fucking see straight. Neck still goes out every so often.
The 2nd to last game, popped 2 ribs, finished the game sparingly but took the next week off before I played my final.
The great irony of helmets is the amount of neck and head injuries that come from people trying for stuff they would never dream of doing without a helmet.
Oh, you reminded me too that I had some nicely bruised ribs... I was half back and I managed to get around the scrum to block their Five-Eight's kick. Blocking the ball? Good. Blocking the foot? Less pleasant. Loved playin rugby. Loved playing soccer (which was far more sustainable for a guy my size/build) and would have loved a chance to play american football, although I can't imagine I could have done anything but maybe be a kick returner.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:08 pm
by DoubleVodkas
When I watch the NFL the brutality of the hits really comes through when they show the reply with the sound turned up. Muscle, bone, pads and helmet and coming into contact at high speed. Fucking naughty.
As someone mentioned before, Rugby is more like like an assault course where your physically exhausted towards the end without taking any huge bell-ringers. Played my first game since November last week. All the matches had been cancelled due to the bad weather and it was a shock to the system. Played on the Saturday and was just about recovered by Wednesday morning. Time for ice baths and recovery shakes!
Pity I have nor the talent or the attitude to play either professionally.
On a side note, which is the worst penalty you can give in American Football? A action that is frowned upon and not cool. Helmet to helmet?
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 1:42 pm
by UtahRatt
DoubleVodkas wrote:On a side note, which is the worst penalty you can give in American Football? A action that is frowned upon and not cool. Helmet to helmet?
Chop blocks, clippings, face-masks, spearing....Late hits.
Helmet to helmet happens, it's a newer rule I'm not a fan of.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 2:15 pm
by Skate4RnR
One example, I was watching Wales play England and a Welsh dude took a bad shot to the head. Was staggering, disoriented and had to be carried/led off of the field. Blood was coming down his head and his mouth. He came back after the first and played the second half.
NFL? I don't have anything for ya dudes.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:47 pm
by KillDevilHill
UtahRatt wrote:DoubleVodkas wrote:On a side note, which is the worst penalty you can give in American Football? A action that is frowned upon and not cool. Helmet to helmet?
Chop blocks, clippings, face-masks, spearing....Late hits.
Helmet to helmet happens, it's a newer rule I'm not a fan of.
I could be incorrect, but in many leagues A highlow cut block is 25 yards.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2010 11:24 pm
by demolition23
DoubleVodkas wrote:
As someone mentioned before, Rugby is more like like an assault course where your physically exhausted towards the end without taking any huge bell-ringers.
Less? Yeah...
But
none?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8v-qZFVYnc
Also, not that it denotes toughness per se, there is something to be said for bleeding from the head.

Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:42 am
by Cyber Spirit
Sadly both pale in comparision to
Australian Rules Football.
100 000 people at the Melbourne Cricket
Ground, Grand Final day.There is nothing
better than this.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:47 am
by demolition23
Cyber Spirit wrote:Sadly both pale in comparision to
Australian Rules Football.
100 000 people at the Melbourne Cricket
Ground, Grand Final day.There is nothing
better than this.
Never been able to get into Aussie Rules... I've given it a shot, watched with people who know the game etc, but it has just never lit my fuse.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:50 am
by MickeyG
Aussie rules is rough though, and Gaelic football has it's moments.
I used to work with lots of guys that played amateur rugby in the North West of England and on a regular basis it seemed like it was just an excuse for a brawl.
The higher the level though, like the National Conference League, the violence is less.
One thing that used to be cool back in the 80's before Rugby league turned professional in the UK was that players from local teams would be given regular jobs around the towns that the teams played in. I used to work at a Glass factory and several high profile players were given jobs there to supplement their rugby income. New Zealander and Saints captain Shane Cooper worked at the glass factory, but apparently answered every question he was asked with a "Yup" or a "Nope".
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:57 am
by DoubleVodkas
The only rule that I would like to see tweaked in the NFL is the fair catch. Scrap that for moments of brutality and hilarity.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:20 am
by Cyber Spirit
demolition23 wrote:Cyber Spirit wrote:Sadly both pale in comparision to
Australian Rules Football.
100 000 people at the Melbourne Cricket
Ground, Grand Final day.There is nothing
better than this.
Never been able to get into Aussie Rules... I've given it a shot, watched with people who know the game etc, but it has just never lit my fuse.
Likewise with me and rugby, and gridiron for that matter.
Doesnt have the same flow as AFL.
But each to their own i guess.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:06 pm
by UtahRatt
KillDevilHill wrote:UtahRatt wrote:DoubleVodkas wrote:On a side note, which is the worst penalty you can give in American Football? A action that is frowned upon and not cool. Helmet to helmet?
Chop blocks, clippings, face-masks, spearing....Late hits.
Helmet to helmet happens, it's a newer rule I'm not a fan of.
I could be incorrect, but in many leagues A highlow cut block is 25 yards.
Under NCAA rules they were all 15 yards with the possibility of being called a flagrant that could call for an ejection.
Of course not playing for a few years, rule changes and my ever fading memory I could be wrong. Between drugs and shots to the head my memory is all over the fucking place. Some days I can't remember my jersey number.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 5:27 pm
by biff malibu
Rugby League is a tougher more physical game all round. Rugby Union can be sloppy but is definitely tough and the NFL is about as tough as fishing.
I had a good chuckle over someone thinking AFL is tough. Typical Victorian.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Fri Feb 12, 2010 8:26 pm
by Cyber Spirit
biff malibu wrote:Rugby League is a tougher more physical game all round. Rugby Union can be sloppy but is definitely tough and the NFL is about as tough as fishing.
I had a good chuckle over someone thinking AFL is tough. Typical Victorian.
AFL used to be tougher,no question,they
have sanitised the game.
It still has the aspect though where you
can be hit from someone behind you.
i dont think that happens too much
in rugby or gridiron,where your opponents in general
are more front on.
But the players in AFL have in the main tapered
off in weight because of the huge aerobic demands
needed,where players can run 15km a match.
Re: The tired NFL V Rugby debate.
Posted: Sat Feb 13, 2010 4:27 pm
by KillDevilHill
biff malibu wrote:Rugby League is a tougher more physical game all round. Rugby Union can be sloppy but is definitely tough and the NFL is about as tough as fishing.
I had a good chuckle over someone thinking AFL is tough. Typical Victorian.
crikey, I think the sun has fried your brain champ