american football vs rugby?

Question

i'm gonna attempt to settle the debate between the sport with tougher guys

you could make an argument for rugby because they have no pads. however, the hits they make are more of "everyone pile on the guy with the ball" than football. this is the only case i can think of for rugby

in football, the emphasis is knock the crap out of the guy with the ball, and then everyone dog piles you. every single play, at least 8 guys on the team will try to completley knock the crap out of the other team. in rugby, one guy gets people to jump on him. in football, a 254 pound brian ulacher rocks a 200 pound tomlinson, and then smashes him to the ground. in rugby, a guy gets dogpiled.

if guys didn't wear pads in foot ball, they'd die. if guys didn't wear cups in rugby, they'd be fine (that was just a joke.)

what aer your reasons for which sport involves tougher guys? why?

i would like to add finally that wearing pads and not shorts makes you look like a
Bad *** Mutha even if you're not black (heh heh)

i mean, come on, don't you think that urlacher looks much tougher and more intimidating when he's wearing pads? in the locker room, he just looks like a normal body builder, but with pads, he's scary as hell.

same things with one of my friends. in school, he's just a normal guy. but when he puts on his pads, he looks like he's ready to hit someone so hard their kidney's wind up in their cup

and don't give football players wear pads as a reason. the more pads, the harder you hit.

in football, it's run as fast as you can and deck the guy you're running towards.

or juke. whatever.

in rugby, it may hurt just as much, but only cuz they're not going full speed after the first few minutes.
it's run as fast as you can, slow don, then hit.

as a summary, football= run, run, run CRUNCH

rugby= run run, slow down a little, crunch.
still a solid cruch, just not as bone jarring.

in football, run as fast as you can into other guy = good job


in rugby, run full speed into other guy = stretcher

Answer 1

I played both.

Your points are sound ones of course.

from an American football perspective...
"If you like to play football, you will LOVE rugby. If you love football, rugby will become your obsession."

I was obsessed with rugby...it was easy for me to excell as a former American football player.

Now I coach semi-pro football.
We recruit from the local union and rugby clubs...

not a single rugby player stays the entire year.
They quit or get hurt.
Most of the time they quit after getting their bell rung for the first time...they aren't used to that...it hurts, it's humiliating, and it leaves you very dazed for the rest of the game.

It's only an argument for those that have never played both for a long time.
We currently have one rugby / hockey player returning next year.
James will tell you that what he's learned from football he brings to the game of rugby ... what he's learned from rugby - theres no use for in football..

Answer 2

American Football Vs Rugby

Answer 3

if u haven't played both dont answer this question... if u hit in football the way ur supposed to (use them pads) its more dangerous.. for the positions that r serious bout hitting.. the other positions that r more about passing n catching r wimpier then rugby.. rugby players r bout the same across for toughness... forwards a little tougher... but both forwards n backs have american football counterparts that r tougher and wimpier... each position in football has a completely different job.. in football im a DE and gaurd so i dont touch the ball i just line up helmet to helmet and smash them togeth as hard as i can... do that for an hour and tell me football isnt tough... there both tough and it depends on ur positon n the way u play it...

Answer 4

I would say they are equal tough. Aussie rules players don't wear any protection at all so some would say they are tougher. American football and rugby players both are covered up in pads and protection but they are pretty rough.

Answer 5

I generally agree with your assessment. I think rugby players are bound to sustain a lot of bruises that American football players won't get. But like you said, if football players didn't have pads, they'd be getting carried off in stretchers by the busload. So my conclusion is that football is inherently rougher, but the athletes have to be just as hearty and conditioned in both sports.

Answer 6

I grew up playing Football in Oklahoma with a father that was on the 1974 USC Trojans and Played Pro as a Center and also Grew up watching a Cousin play QB for Texas, So I grew up in a Football house and have played since I can remember. I have been hit by some of the best and have been drilled by the worst. Once I moved out to San Diego I picked up Rugby and love it. The hitting is just as hard and the play is quicker and you always gotta have your head on a swivel. I was a wedge breaker in High School and drilled kids on kick offs so I know the full speed head to head hits and miss those but in Rugby on kick offs, if there is a good kicker and I get the ball sometimes I have to jump (when in the air no-one is allowed to hit them) to get a ball and have been drilled and sung back to the earth. There are 300lbs players in Rugby there is a guy named Henry who plays Belmont Shores in Long beach who can run with the best of them and hits like an ox. The team I play on now we have an ex Denver Bronco on the roster. Also in football after you get tackled you dont have to worry about some stomping your head or body with metal cleats. They are both hard hitting sports. The big diffrence is when you have time to stand up and walk around and have time to rest after each play or when your team is on offense you can go full speed every play you are in and hit that hard, unlike Rugby where you are running for 40mins a half with no time outs or stopage except for when you score. In rugby its 15 on 15 with each team only having 7 subs, so if you are hurt and your sub is alreedy in then so be it tuff it up and stay in the game, unlike football when you have 60+ people on a roster and nowing you have 3 or 4 people behind you if you get an owie. Dont get me wrong they are both hard hitting sports and have seen people get hit so hard in both sports that necks, legs, arms, and whatever else have been broken. If I had to choose the hardest hitting one I dont think I could.

Answer 7

Apart from the fact that you're not really comparing like with like, of course rugby is a harder game!

The reason why American footballers can run in to each other at full speed is precisely because of all the padding - they think they're invincible.

With rugby, because there's no padding, there is a reality check - if two rugby players hit each other at full speed they'd probably kill themselves. In saying that, though, injuries do happen in rugby but they're fortunately very rare.

But I'd also say that Australian Rules Football is the toughest of the lot!

Answer 8

Impossible to argue this. You make a good point about the smashing of football players. I mean, football players still break their legs with all that equipment on, it has to be rougher than rugby. But, I've never played rugby or watched so i don't know really.

Answer 9

Rugby is tougher I seen it played and seen American football too. Yeah I am a woman but I got my opinion. My sister played rugby and the injuries I saw were quite scary at times. No cups involved in women's rugby lol. And yes it was a women's team but they often beat the guys and won many tournaments!

Answer 10

I think that your question is flawed, because you are asking which involves tougher guys, but then comparing the roughness of the sport.

The padding that football players wear makes them feel more secure and protects them from injuries, whereas ruggers are unprotected. So yes, the hits are not usually as hard, but they're done with almost no protection, so I'd say that ruggers are tougher.

Oh, but I might be biased since I play rugby.

And uh, whoever said that girls who play rugby are lesbians, well...not all of them are. And anyway, who cares?