Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 28 of 28
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    midwest
    Posts
    31,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Norm View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yItnEVoD0VQ

    This just isn't that impressive to me but some people swear it's just amazing.
    Yea, I don't get it...I also don't understand why we gave him 100,000 guaranteed.
    2019

    QB-Lock
    RB-Montgomery
    WR-AJ Brown, Hakeem Butler
    TE-TJ Hockenson
    Edge-Allen
    LB-Devon White, Blake Cashman
    CB-Joejuan Williams
    S-Dieonte Thompson

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
    Posts
    16,032
    The NFL is a copycat league; people are hoping with these "rugby" players and what not that they can find the next Antonio Gates or Julius Thomas. Most of these players end up doing absolutely nothing
    Eichel Tower

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bushwood Country Club
    Posts
    79,279
    Quote Originally Posted by DBR96A View Post
    I do believe that football might eventually have to adopt a tackling style closer to rugby in order to reduce the risk of concussions. The rate of concussions in rugby is lower than most people would think, given the violence of the sport.
    cause the hits are coming from a ton more speed.....

    try and rugby tackle Lynch. He would drag you 100 yards.

    NFL players are simply bigger, stronger, and faster

    If you want the ultimate, you've got to be willing to pay the ultimate price. It's not tragic to die doing what you love.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    4,808
    The NFL has had a lot of guys with sub 10.40/9.5yards speed, tons! That is not rugby. They are smaller and slower. But, superior cardio conditioning. Not that that's really needed in football.
    Last edited by CCRider; 03-05-2015 at 04:41 PM.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    10,816
    Quote Originally Posted by lincecum=future View Post
    People who are into rugby are annoying as **** swearing that rugby is the manlier and tougher sport. Guy seems tough and hope for the Niners sake he works out but he's really just an average athlete for NFL standards
    I know what you're talking about, but they're two different sports. The rugby guys can be annoying, but you can't knock it if you haven't tried it. I played football in HS, but I played rugby with some guys who played at a nearby college and it's not really made for football players to have easy success. So much cardio whereas football relies on explosive short plays. And the tackling involves more technique.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkeye15 View Post
    cause the hits are coming from a ton more speed.....

    try and rugby tackle Lynch. He would drag you 100 yards.

    NFL players are simply bigger, stronger, and faster
    ********. Rugby players are some of the most fundamentally sound tacklers I've ever seen, they'd have no more difficulty than a football player, and if lynch tried running the way he runs with pads he'd have a ton of injuries. That's with overlooking the fact that Lynch (who relies on power running) probably couldn't handle the cardio required for professional rugby in the first place.

    Like I said, they're two different sports designed for two different physiques. None of this is a criticism of NFL players conditioning, they're among the best athletes in the world, but they're not built for rugby, and vice versa. When we see defenses get tired and sloppy? Or a RB gets tired and goes down easier? That's likely what most NFL players would look like 20 minutes into a rugby game. And this rugby guy is probably not going to be prepared for the explosiveness of football.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Santa Maria Ca,
    Posts
    3,871
    Quote Originally Posted by CCRider View Post
    The NFL has had a lot of guys with sub 10.40/9.5yards speed, tons! That is not rugby. They are smaller and slower. But, superior cardio conditioning. Not that that's really needed in football.
    I agree with because there are many more breaks in an NFL game. Guys have to run around for days in Rugby that is why the better cardio Also why NFL player are bigger and and stronger but not as fast on average.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Santa Maria Ca,
    Posts
    3,871
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    I know what you're talking about, but they're two different sports. The rugby guys can be annoying, but you can't knock it if you haven't tried it. I played football in HS, but I played rugby with some guys who played at a nearby college and it's not really made for football players to have easy success. So much cardio whereas football relies on explosive short plays. And the tackling involves more technique.



    ********. Rugby players are some of the most fundamentally sound tacklers I've ever seen, they'd have no more difficulty than a football player, and if lynch tried running the way he runs with pads he'd have a ton of injuries. That's with overlooking the fact that Lynch (who relies on power running) probably couldn't handle the cardio required for professional rugby in the first place.

    Like I said, they're two different sports designed for two different physiques. None of this is a criticism of NFL players conditioning, they're among the best athletes in the world, but they're not built for rugby, and vice versa. When we see defenses get tired and sloppy? Or a RB gets tired and goes down easier? That's likely what most NFL players would look like 20 minutes into a rugby game. And this rugby guy is probably not going to be prepared for the explosiveness of football.
    Very well said on the subject. I have to say you have a good handle on both sports. One glaring thing that many forget is the sad truth of the money difference there is between the two sports. NFL teams and players make more money. This to me makes the #1 difference between the two. Not saying one is better than the other they are different.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Indy
    Posts
    1,682
    Quote Originally Posted by DBR96A View Post
    I do believe that football might eventually have to adopt a tackling style closer to rugby in order to reduce the risk of concussions. The rate of concussions in rugby is lower than most people would think, given the violence of the sport.
    NFL just needs to lose the helmets so some of those idiots have to think of their own lives. Tackling would get fundamental fast and there would be less injuries.

    You look at rugby players and a lot are obviously on roids just like the nfl, but the injuries are still less and it's not because they aren't passing.
    Your perception of the obvious is OUTSTANDING!!!


  9. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    14,234
    What ever happened to that gigantic rugby player that the Eagles drafted ?

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    44,367
    Quote Originally Posted by DBR96A View Post
    I do believe that football might eventually have to adopt a tackling style closer to rugby in order to reduce the risk of concussions. The rate of concussions in rugby is lower than most people would think, given the violence of the sport.
    x HS football player (DE/LB) and x college Rugby player (#8) here: Rugby has less injuries because people are trying to figure out how to get a guy with the ball down while not going down yourself. Also it's much easier to retaliate in Rugby. Once a guy gave me dirty shot when I was down, 20 seconds later he was pinned down, while I stood over him and rotated my cleat in his ear gently while I laughed like a hyena. He didn't come near me again.

    I don't see rugby as very violent, but you have to be tough to play.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  11. #26
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    [emoji288]
    Posts
    14,638
    Quote Originally Posted by surf and turf View Post
    What ever happened to that gigantic rugby player that the Eagles drafted ?
    Still on the team.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Metroplex
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by DBR96A View Post
    I do believe that football might eventually have to adopt a tackling style closer to rugby in order to reduce the risk of concussions. The rate of concussions in rugby is lower than most people would think, given the violence of the sport.
    How? Although I understand what you are saying the fact the very nature of Rugby lends itself to low speed lateral type impacts instead of head on full speed NFL type violence. Rugby collisions are nowhere near as forceful as football. How would you accomplish making NFL adopt Ruby tackling? By requiring NFL teams to only pitch the ball back to people behind the line of scrimmage? Nice thought, not possible though.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Metroplex
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by eibbor View Post
    NFL just needs to lose the helmets so some of those idiots have to think of their own lives. Tackling would get fundamental fast and there would be less injuries.

    You look at rugby players and a lot are obviously on roids just like the nfl, but the injuries are still less and it's not because they aren't passing.
    It is pure physics. The nature of the game makes ruby tackles a lateral type of impact with minimal force on impact vs. NFL head on collisions. American Football will always have harder collisions due to the fundamental difference in the games, regardless of age or level of competition.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •