1 edit
Originally posted by MCARugby players are ten times tougher than American footballers but sorry guys, you simply cannot play American football without padding. Some of the tackling in American football would mame or worse in seconds, and to suggest that it should be played without proper protection is just ill-informed rugby big-headedness IMHO.
roflmao - thats just goes to prove what all rugby fans already knew...
american football is for big girls blouses, try taking off the big gay padding and helmets
I repeat, rugby players are FAR harder than the American football players, but leave it at that, guys, don't slag of the entire sport because you go onto the pitch wearing nothing but cotton.
Originally posted by asromacalcioHave to agree. Rugby is a far tougher sport. NFL has it easy.
Rugby players are ten times tougher than American footballers but sorry guys, you simply cannot play American football without padding. Some of the tackling in American football would mame or worse in seconds, and to suggest that it should be played without proper protection is just ill-informed rugby big-headedness IMHO.
I repeat, rugby players are ...[text shortened]... guys, don't slag of the entire sport because you go onto the pitch wearing nothing but cotton.
1 edit
Originally posted by mochironProfessional cyclists are the toughest of ALL. OK, there is a difference between the pain of endurance and the pain of impact, but how many sportsmen and women work, often at levels like 80% of their maximum HR, for up to six hours a day for three weeks, over mountains, down mountains etc?
Have to agree. Rugby is a far tougher sport. NFL has it easy.
Somebody may remark that a cyclist wouldn't last two minutes in a rugby or American football match. Of course they wouldn't, but no rugby player would stand a chance against even an average pro-cyclist in a time trial. They simply wouldn't have the fitness, and would not be able to take the strain.
Any views on the toughest sports, feel free to state your views.
Originally posted by rbmorrisMarv Levy was good, just always fell short on the BIG day! I also admired him for being a vegetarian, not that it makes any difference to anything really, but when I was a new veggie I never tired of quoting famous veggies to people and he was one of them.
Parcells is the best NFL coach that ever lived.
What about Shula though, or was he overrated?
Originally posted by asromacalcioI agree. Levy was good. Never knew he was a vegetarian though. I think Shula was a good coach, but yeah, a little overrated. Belechick (sp?) is also a great coach. He was a student of Parcells, so I'm not surprised.
Marv Levy was good, just always fell short on the BIG day! I also admired him for being a vegetarian, not that it makes any difference to anything really, but when I was a new veggie I never tired of quoting famous veggies to people and he was one of them.
What about Shula though, or was he overrated?
1 edit
Originally posted by Moldy CrowI agree, to a degree (Ha! poetry!).
ANY NFL defensive end would snap a rugbee player in two and use him for a toothpick.
Rugby players are pretty tough guys and I think are fitter than most NFL players because rugby is much more of a 'flowing / dynamic' game than football. Rugby players need to be quicker and have more stamina than the NFL players.
BUT, the NFL boys are much bigger (linebackers?) and stronger than rugby players, because that's what the sport demands.
I think if the NFL boys wanted a fight, they'd have to catch us first...
Also (not related to Moldy's post) rugby players are protected by the rules (in open play) in the way and when they are tackled, where those NFL boys get taken out HARD! Around the neck etc. - you need protection.