#41  
Old 03-16-2010, 10:42 PM
Well i dont think anyones opinions will change but how anyone can think soccer is more dangerous than playing in the NFL is beyond me. The whole "they wear pads" arguement is weak. I suppose hockey players are huge vaginas as well huh? There was some show (I think its called Sports Science) that said that the NFL is far more dangerous than MMA(the UFC) so I think its safe to say that its more dangerous than soccer. I dont doubt that soccer has its fair share of nasty injuries but they are no where near as common as the major injuries in the NFL.

As far as rugby goes, I would put money down that if Adrian Peterson or Troy Polamalu decided to join the pro rugby league, I have no doubt that they would dominate it from the get go.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 03-17-2010, 05:23 AM
The thing about (American) football is that there are so many different positions that one person (maybe two) plays . . . like QB, RB, LB, OT, etc. It's been a while since I've seen a rugby match, but it seemed that anybody on the field was doing the same thing.

Yeah, Adrian Peterson and Troy Polamalu would make good rugby players, but would Peyton Manning? Tom Brady? Larry Fitzgerald? Some 300 lb. offensive lineman?
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 03-17-2010, 06:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigred760 View Post
The thing about (American) football is that there are so many different positions that one person (maybe two) plays . . . like QB, RB, LB, OT, etc. It's been a while since I've seen a rugby match, but it seemed that anybody on the field was doing the same thing.

Yeah, Adrian Peterson and Troy Polamalu would make good rugby players, but would Peyton Manning? Tom Brady? Larry Fitzgerald? Some 300 lb. offensive lineman?
They may not look it, but those 300 lb Offensive Lineman are the best athletes on the field. They carry around a LOT of weight and still run great 40 times. Most modern Olinemen chase plays down field and "pull" or "twist" around the line of scrimmage. Meaning they're running down the field alongside the RBs and WRs AND throwing big time blocks in front of them.

Could they beat Chris Johnson in a foot race? Doubt it. Then again, hes the fastest recorded player in league history.

Likewise, QBs like Mike Vick have become amazing athletes.

Stick any of those guys on a rugby field and they dominate. Even a clunker like Peyton Manning would do well on the rugby field simply for his height and athleticism.

Some rugby players go as small 5'5' or 5'6', less than 200 pounds. That's a midget on an NFL field. By any standard.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 03-17-2010, 06:58 AM
Yeah, but the linemen . . . and well all (American) football players . . . get a break when they're not on the field - when the other team's offense/defense is on the field. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't rugby players play "iron man" style.

I'm not saying they wouldn't do as good a job as rugby players, but the fact that rugby is played without pads just appears that much more tough and impressive.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 03-17-2010, 07:59 AM
Jesus Christ. Use the fucking SPOILER tags for those damn pics. Fucking hate seeing shit like that.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03-17-2010, 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigred760 View Post
Yeah, but the linemen . . . and well all (American) football players . . . get a break when they're not on the field - when the other team's offense/defense is on the field. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't rugby players play "iron man" style.

I'm not saying they wouldn't do as good a job as rugby players, but the fact that rugby is played without pads just appears that much more tough and impressive.
Like I said before, a lot of the tackling in rugby is really just arm tackling. A lot of the tackles arent head on where the players lead with their heads (like in the NFL). Thats not to say that rugby players arent tough (they definitely are) and they would kick my ass as well.

And yeah not all NFL players could cut it on the rugby field. But ALL of the players at skill positions could IMO (runningbacks, fullbacks, most wide recievers and safeties).
Even the athletes in this years' NFL draft are freaks of nature. For example, Taylor Mays is listed at 6'3 230 lbs(all muscle) and runs a 4.3 40 yard dash.thats just insane.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03-17-2010, 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
Like I said before, a lot of the tackling in rugby is really just arm tackling.
I don't get why your saying this.

It may be mostly arm tackles, but a guy running full belt and all of a sudden gets a clothesline from a big fat arm right across the chest - that takes some nuts. Plus they don't have any sort of padding to protect them from flying arms and legs, apart from a little gum shield.

Muscle tears in 'soccer' is a very common occurance, happens in most games actually. I've only ever pulled my muscle (which fucking killed) So I can only imagine how excruciating a muscle tear would be. Not saying 'soccer' is more dangerous, but it does have it's dangers.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03-18-2010, 03:31 PM
This topic has gone into so many different areas...

Rugby is definitely more dangerous than the NFL. I don't doubt the NFL's danger but honestly, Rugby players have to have WAY MORE stamina to survive a game then NFL players. I always notice NFL players, after a side has switched, have to run over to a breathing machine to get their breath together. I NEVER see that in Rugby. These Rugby players have very few breaks in between, compared to the NFL...and we all already know about the padding the NFL has. And lackthereof for Rugby.

If any of the Offensive Lineman tried to play Rugby, they would be out of breath so quickly and then proceed to get destroyed by today's modern Rugby players. Some NFL players could make the transition, such as Polamalu sucessfully, but it's very few and far in between that could. Ray Lewis could NOT last a full game. The sheer size of some Rugby players can rival the NFL's.

Going to Soccer, while it's not quite as dangerous as NFL or Rugby, it's definitely A LOT more dangerous than people take it out to be. Just the previous photo posted shows the number of horrific injuries that can occur in the game. Just as some players will stage a dive and act like they got hurt (In order to get an opposing player penalized)...Players will willfully target and viciously injure opposing player to take them out of the game. Just look up Roy Keane and his antics.

Last edited by drc5145; 03-18-2010 at 03:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03-18-2010, 03:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by drc5145 View Post
Some NFL players could make the transition, such as Polamalu sucessfully, but it's very few and far in between that could. Ray Lewis could NOT last a full game. The sheer size of some Rugby players can rival the NFL's.
Thats just simply NOT true at all. ANY (and I mean any) of the starting runningbacks in the NFL would dominate rugby.
Do people realize why NFL runningbacks have such a short career? The game is brutal on their bodies.
And of course offensive linemen wouldnt be good at rugby. I have no clue how that got into the discussion. O-lineman arent skill positions. Runningback is though.
Anyways, I would definitely pay money to see this dude take it to a bunch of rugby players. It would be great.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 03-18-2010, 04:21 PM
Getting tackled in football is like getting in a 30 mph car wreck. Imagine being an elite running back and getting into the equivalent of two or three little car crashes in just one series. The wear and tear can be so great that one can go from being a superstar to a multi-million dollar inconvenience in just a few years, like LaDanian Tomlinson. Football is one sport where it's totally understandable for someone to be on steroids.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 03-18-2010, 04:22 PM
Also, the pads worn in the NFL allow the hitters to make more reckless hitting. (Leading with their helmets/"spear tackling" or leaving their feet and basically decleating an opponent which is basically a human missile). So the whole pads thing can be a double edged sword.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 03-18-2010, 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
Thats just simply NOT true at all. ANY (and I mean any) of the starting runningbacks in the NFL would dominate rugby.
Anyways, I would definitely pay money to see this dude take it to a bunch of rugby players. It would be great.
I think your seriously underestimating rugby players. There are alot of rugby players as fast and as strong as football players, I'd be suprised if anybody could make the switch from either game smoothly.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 03-18-2010, 07:54 PM
I think it's clear that the injuries between soccer and the NFL are pretty comparable. The worst thing posted was a soccer player breaking a leg at a 45 degree angle, and likewise with the NFL.

It can't be that hard to find statistics. And you really can't just say which has more injuries. I got a paper cut the other day. That's considered an injury. An athlete getting a sprained ankle is an injury. You get a black eye in rugby - it's because you aren't wearing a helmet, so of course some blood vessels might break and it looks really hardcore and so forth, but anyone who's gotten a black eye can tell you it generally hurts less than a paper cut, or getting hit on the funny bone. Yet, it's an injury all the same.

So I think looking at the most severe injuries in both sports is a way to go, and it seems that we've exhausted that, and it is comparable. But what I find fascinating is that these severe injuries - they happen in the NFL with protective gear - the same severity as the ones you see in soccer.

One thing I don't think NFL-haters appreciate is that wearing helmets and pads doesn't necessarily mean you are playing safer. That is to say, if you were crossing the road, would you be more reckless and confident in a car, or on foot? Isn't it safe to assume that by wearing protective gear, a player is going to push himself in a more reckless manner? It pretty standard psychology - the more protected someone is, the more likely they will push limits.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 03-18-2010, 07:55 PM
Yeah, let's not forget that in both sports the top players are the top players because they've had intense training for that particular sport since a very young age. Making a transition would be difficult.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 03-18-2010, 09:44 PM
Bubba actually makes a valid point and for the record I don't think Soccer is for pussies. I just wanted to be a little controversial.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 03-19-2010, 12:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by drc5145 View Post
This topic has gone into so many different areas...

Rugby is definitely more dangerous than the NFL. I don't doubt the NFL's danger but honestly, Rugby players have to have WAY MORE stamina to survive a game then NFL players. I always notice NFL players, after a side has switched, have to run over to a breathing machine to get their breath together. I NEVER see that in Rugby. These Rugby players have very few breaks in between, compared to the NFL...and we all already know about the padding the NFL has. And lackthereof for Rugby.

If any of the Offensive Lineman tried to play Rugby, they would be out of breath so quickly and then proceed to get destroyed by today's modern Rugby players. Some NFL players could make the transition, such as Polamalu sucessfully, but it's very few and far in between that could. Ray Lewis could NOT last a full game. The sheer size of some Rugby players can rival the NFL's.

Going to Soccer, while it's not quite as dangerous as NFL or Rugby, it's definitely A LOT more dangerous than people take it out to be. Just the previous photo posted shows the number of horrific injuries that can occur in the game. Just as some players will stage a dive and act like they got hurt (In order to get an opposing player penalized)...Players will willfully target and viciously injure opposing player to take them out of the game. Just look up Roy Keane and his antics.
There's so much wrong with this post. Offensive linemen can't play rugby, but if you put them in a scrum or whatever it's called, they would absolutely destroy rugby players. NFL linemen are the biggest and strongest athletes out of any major sport. The explosion and strength they display at the snap of a play is ridiculous.

NFL players have to wear pads. Defensive players can tackle with over 1000 pounds of force, so I don't understand the argument about how pads somehow make the hits less vicious. YouTube Ray Lewis on Sports Science to see the importance of pads, and how hard players hit.

I don't like soccer, but I respect how well conditioned those players are to be able to run around for 90+ minutes.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 03-19-2010, 11:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digifruitella View Post
Jesus Christ. Use the fucking SPOILER tags for those damn pics. Fucking hate seeing shit like that.
Don't be such a soccer player
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 03-19-2010, 11:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Don't be such a soccer player
You mean NFL players...the big girls with pads?
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 03-20-2010, 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reigh Kaufman View Post
You mean NFL players...the big girls with pads?
Be careful sweetie. That could simultaneously mean a bunch a fat girls on the rag.... more dangerous than Rugby, NFL and Soccer players combined.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03-21-2010, 01:59 PM
Just so that you guys know: The sport in the picture below is statistically far more dangerous than any of the other ones mentioned in this thread. Broken bones, brain damage, paralysis and death are quite common.

And it's mostly done by people who in fact DO have a vagina. Soccer, rugby and american football are pussy-sports compared to this:

Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 03-21-2010, 02:08 PM
Very good point. Death isn't exactly 'common' in horse-riding, but more common than any other sport I suppose.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 03-21-2010, 02:09 PM
Also it might interest you that statistically speaking, these girls in the picture below are a lot more likely to suffer injuries, both mild and serious, than the actual American football players.

By using the criteria people are using in this thread, cheerleading is a lot more hardcore sport than American Football.

(EDIT: Since I had trouble finding statistics for this, I might be well be completely wrong about Cheerleading injuries vs. Football injuries)


Last edited by Tuukka; 03-21-2010 at 02:51 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 03-21-2010, 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natty View Post
Very good point. Death isn't exactly 'common' in horse-riding, but more common than any other sport I suppose.
"Common" might be not be the best word, but yeah, it's a more deadly sport than any other, if we exclude some extreme sports with a very small number of practitioners (Such as rock climbing).

Last edited by Tuukka; 03-21-2010 at 02:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 03-21-2010, 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuukka View Post
By using the criteria people are using in this thread, cheerleading is a lot more hardcore sport than American Football (or soccer, or rugby).
Now I'm not so sure about that, "more likely" to suffer injuries might be right, but I'm fairly certain more football, rugby and NFL players end up in hospital than cheerleaders.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 03-21-2010, 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natty View Post
Now I'm not so sure about that, "more likely" to suffer injuries might be right, but I'm fairly certain more football, rugby and NFL players end up in hospital than cheerleaders.
I could be wrong, as it is really hard to find statistics. It was mentioned in one article that cheerleading is more likely to cause injuries (over 20.000 hospital treatments annually in USA), but of course you have to compare the amount of practitioners to the amount of injuries to get a proper comparison. Wiki states there are roughly 1.5 million cheerleaders in USA. After googling around I also found out that footballers have roughly 180.000 hospital visits annually in USA, but surprisingly I couldn't find anywhere how many practitioners there are. Not even rough estimates.

I also found mentions that rugby has roughly 3 times more injuries than American Football, but again it was hard to find actual statistics.

Then of course there is the question of whether we only consider professional athletes, or do we include also amateurs. Injury-statistics generally include *all* practitioners, and with professionals the ratios might be different in some sports.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 03-21-2010, 03:30 PM
I guess next time I'll break my point up into several posts instead of just trying to touch on all these bases in one.

And probably cheerleaders sustaining their injuries by not attempting to stop one another, nor are equestrians ramming their horses into one another, and this is the reason they weren't compared to football players. If we are going to open it up like this, why not count NASCAR, or Xtreme sports --- Oh, that's right. Because they are un-fucking-comparable besides the fact that they are things people train to do for spectating and competition. I think someone, if not I, mentioned apples and oranges earlier, but it's somewhat disheartening that everything up until now has been glossed over in lieu of apples and hamburgers.

Last edited by The Postmaster General; 03-21-2010 at 03:32 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 03-21-2010, 03:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaStrangelove View Post
I guess next time I'll break my point up into several posts instead of just trying to touch on all these bases in one.

And probably cheerleaders sustaining their injuries by not attempting to stop one another, nor are equestrians ramming their horses into one another, and this is the reason they weren't compared to football players. If we are going to open it up like this, why not count NASCAR, or Xtreme sports --- Oh, that's right. Because they are un-fucking-comparable besides the fact that they are things people train to do for spectating and competition. I think someone, if not I, mentioned apples and oranges earlier, but it's somewhat disheartening that everything up until now has been glossed over in lieu of apples and hamburgers.
More people are injured juggling apples than oranges.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 03-21-2010, 03:58 PM
Well I guess Tuukka didn't know we were only comparing male contact sports, nobody set any rules down.

I don't think I've read an angry Bubba post before...
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 03-21-2010, 04:19 PM
I'm not angry, and don't think my post read like that other than me being in a mood to say 'fuck' today. I was just pointing out that this had nothing to do with what anyone was talking about. It has nothing to do with anyone talking about male contact sports or any 'rules' set in the thread.

In my second-to-last post, I said it was futile to compare the sports on an injury by injury basis, because an injury could be anything. I said if you wanted to compare soccer to NFL, you may want to look at the worst injuries and consider that NFL players sustain the same injuries with pads, then dropped some food for thought in regards to the psychology differences between wearing and not wearing pads.

The only reason injuries were being discussed in the first place was because of the comparison to soccer players not wearing pads to NFL players who wear pads, and whether or not that indicated which was more "hardcore." That was what was being discussed. Not whether or not cheerleaders or horse riders were more hardcore. Not a discussion on which was the toughest sport in the world. It only added insult to the discussion that injuries were being brought up in regards to people sustaining injuries in totally different manners, when clearly the injury thing was being discussed because NFL and soccer players get their injuries in similar manners.

It's like Donny says in The Big Lebowski: "I am the walrus. I am the walrus. I am the walrus."
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 03-21-2010, 05:02 PM
For a second there I thought Bubba's grandfather was killed by a cheerleader on a horse.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 03-21-2010, 05:17 PM
David Beckham is a huge pussy. A really goodlooking one, but a huge vag. Dude is made out of glass. He is always hurt.

And FTR, I respect the hell out of rugby. I think its a great, tough sport. Not as tough as the NFL however.

I think we can all agree that NBA players are huge nancies though. If a player breathes on Lebron, he is called for a foul.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 03-21-2010, 06:51 PM
Well basketball players in general are notorious for playing up fouls. It's a lot easy to take a couple from the free throw than to score otherwise.

And just to say, I said that in my initial response about Tuuka's post that I was "disheartened" because it felt like 90% of the progress made in the discussion had been ignored and misconstrued for the sake of making a "one-upsmanship"-type of post ("nothing you guys said is as injurious as these totally different kinds sports no one is talking about"). It wasn't taking jabs, and I think you guys are being a bit too sensitive if you think I'm being irate, much less angry. All I said was that he was opening a door that you can take anywhere, and why not Xtreme sports? I'm pretty sure more people rock climb than competitively ride horses, but for the sake of pointing out that we were using silly criteria (which had already been said and agreed upon) those off-base examples were used, and I called it that.

Maybe you guys should wear pads when you read my posts from now on.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 03-21-2010, 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaStrangelove View Post
Maybe you guys should wear pads when you read my posts from now on.
Ouch. Will do. I think I got the impression you were angry because of the "oh that's right" sarcasm as well as the use of the word fuck.

In terms of the topic going astray, that's just what happens in a thread sometimes. Discussing which sport involves the most injuries is still relevant to the title at least. We were originally talking about cheating in football, the cheating involves pretending you have been injured, now we are talking about injuries in football and the topic has opened up to talking about injuries in all sports. This is how discussions generally work isn't it?

Sorry to take it further of topic...um...what do we all think of "The Hand of God", I respect him for getting away with it, though it is disgraceful.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 03-21-2010, 07:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Natty View Post
Ouch. Will do. I think I got the impression you were angry because of the "oh that's right" sarcasm as well as the use of the word fuck.

In terms of the topic going astray, that's just what happens in a thread sometimes. Discussing which sport involves the most injuries is still relevant to the title at least. We were originally talking about cheating in football, the cheating involves pretending you have been injured, now we are talking about injuries in football and the topic has opened up to talking about injuries in all sports. This is how discussions generally work isn't it?

Sorry to take it further of topic...um...what do we all think of "The Hand of God", I respect him for getting away with it, though it is disgraceful.
I'm pretty sure I've never complained about topics going in tangents and I also think it's something I do quite often.

To be clear though...

You can read into my post enough to think I'm angry, but at the same time you think Tuuka was discussing which sports had more injuries and not condescendingly making a point that he thinks using injuries as a criteria for which sport is tougher is silly, even pointing out that "using the criteria you guys are using" sports where people have vaginas are more hardcore.

This is why I pointed out exactly why injuries were being used to begin with and also noted that it had already been established that this wasn't the best criteria. The only difference in my sarcasm is that I wear it on my sleeve.

Last edited by The Postmaster General; 03-21-2010 at 07:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 03-21-2010, 08:02 PM
I'd like to see the stuff backing up the NFL over MMA. I watched one Sports Science where Ray Lewis smashed through a framed door with more force than a police battering ram. That is quite nuts indeed but I'm sorry, I'll take my chances with that all day (wearing pads, being able to brace yourself) then be pinned on the mat by any top fighter in the UFC and have his exposed forearm crashing against my face 6-7 times before the ref stops it.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 03-21-2010, 09:18 PM
The MMA has a long way to go. Half of the fighters look like out of shape trailer trash. Case in point:

Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 03-21-2010, 10:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by echo_bravo View Post
David Beckham is a huge pussy. A really goodlooking one, but a huge vag. Dude is made out of glass. He is always hurt.

And FTR, I respect the hell out of rugby. I think its a great, tough sport. Not as tough as the NFL however.

I think we can all agree that NBA players are huge nancies though. If a player breathes on Lebron, he is called for a foul.
Beckham is probably the worst comparison possible....

I fully respect the NFL myself. Not exactly an easy league to play in, to say the least.

...and I can fully agree on NBA Players. If one player runs touches another one, it's a foul.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 03-21-2010, 10:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EVILxxx View Post
The MMA has a long way to go. Half of the fighters look like out of shape trailer trash. Case in point:

LOL

That's a picture from the Ultimate Fighter competition. They're amateurs. Only one actually becomes a UFC fighter. I'll say it again, this time with a specific fighter, I'd rather get full-forced tackled by Ray Lewis than bare-leg/foot kicked in the head by Anderson Silva.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 03-21-2010, 10:40 PM
There is a possibility of breaking nearly every bone in the UFC. Throw a kick into the wrong spot, there goes your shin. Bet a kick blocked by a forearm, there goes foot, ankle, and possibly shin too. Collar bones can shatter like glass on a slam. Permanent structural damage to your face, long-lasting joint problems, I've seen someone get kneed multiple times in the ribs and 3 bones protruded through the skin. It is FIGHTING. But big MMA cards only happen once a month so it isn't as forefront or relevant as professional football. But this is a sport based SOLELY around hurting the other person so much, they're unable to do anything.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 03-22-2010, 12:18 AM
The funny thing about that picture is the guys who are obviously embarrassed of their man breasts.

I would almost think the thing with these fighting competitions is that no matter how hard you punch or kick, it's still not going to be as impacting as running full force into someone. I'd much rather be hit in the head several times with a hammer being drawn back a foot then hit once with a hammer that was hurled across a room. (or some similar analogy...)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump