9 ms·
"The size of the people. In both sports their has been an increase in the mass of the players. However US football players seems disproportionately massive. In
by rsync 9y ago
"The size of the people. In both sports their has been an increase in the mass of the players. However US football players seems disproportionately massive. In Rugby their are not rolling substitutions, so you have to carry that mass around for 80 minutes, and therefore a compromise is necessary, perhaps gridiron could restrict the number of subs, or the squad size so the bruisers actually had to run."
You are correct that NFL players are much, much larger than comparable rugby players. NFL linemen are enormous.
And they can run. It is not uncommon in 2017 to see 300+ pound linemen that can run quite fast. Michael Oher, the subject of the Michael Lewis book _The Blind Side_[2] is 6'4", has an actual weight of 320+ pounds, and is described to move very quickly on the basketball court.
However it is not these large players that are involved in the concussion hits. It is the "smaller" 200+ pound players who, while wearing full pads, can run as fast as olympic sprinters and launch themselves into opponents at full speed.
I'm afraid the "bruisers" can already run and the "small guys" are the size of normal rugby players. And are faster.
This is why I find the NFL so enormously compelling: In the 21st century, what happens in an NFL game is otherworldly.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Oher
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blind_Side:_Evolution_of_a_Game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Blind_Side:_Evolution_of_a...
- outsideoflife 9y ago> And they can run. It is not uncommon in 2017 to see 300+ pound linemen that can run quite fast. Michael Oher, the subject of the Michael Lewis book _The Blind Side_[2] is 6'4", has an actual weight of 320+ pounds, and is described to move very quickly on the basketball court. I guess the obvious comeback is that they don't also have to pace themselves for 80 minutes. There are some very fast men in Rugby but they have to trade on stamina, and strength too as everyone has to defend. > the size of normal rugby players. And are faster There is a huge variation in size and builds in Rugby too. 200lbs is about the minimum now (was less) for backs. 266lbs is probably the max now. Height wise 5'7" to 6'8" is the normal range. George North[0] for instance is 238lbs 6ft 4 and runs the hundred metres in around 11 seconds with his compromise physique. They tend to aim for a very fast 40m time as it is all about breaking the defensive line in Rugby. Other smaller players clock in mid 10's for 100m, again the physique is too compromised to run at full olympic pace. They are expected to tackle the big guys for a full 80 minutes. There have been genuine sprinters in Rugby, I think of Carlin Isles in particular who was a novelty in the cut down game of Rugby 7's (7 rather than 15 players, shorter in duration and designed to encourage a running game). He didn't make any headway in the full game however for the reasons above. > And are faster > It is not uncommon in 2017 to see 300+ pound linemen that can run quite fast Apart from my comments about the compromise in physique required to run and tackle for 80 minutes, this just makes me believe more an more that their performances are otherwordly or at least enhanced. > launch themselves into opponents at full speed Which if they were not both wearing padding would result in two broken players. If you watch how a Rugby player tackles one of the fast guys, it is a much more dynamic move without sudden deceleration. You have to deflect and unbalance, not body check. It still looks cool, you shouldn't be concerned that it will hurt the spectacle of the NFL. [0]https://genuinepace.com/category/rugby-union-2/ https://genuinepace.com/category/rugby-union-2/ [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA5bwqVN5LM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA5bwqVN5LM