Rugby Or American Football?

Question

I am English so just read through before you answer:

In England main sport with a large amount of Contact is Rugby which is equivalent to you American Football.....You cant say that rugby players are just Fat etc BECAUSE RUGBY IS CHANGING...To be an international or rugby 7's player you have to be extremely healthy and pretty built......

Next Rugby is not just for losers who cant do other sports...It may be in america but you Americans have to reliase that a sports status is different for different Countries.

Also i can understand where your comming from saying that American Football may be better but i only think because American Footballers health is better.

Answer 1

american football sucks big ones
big fat tossers in helmets and skin tight pants
bumping into each other and falling over
then this painful cr@p game is draged out for 5 hours

Answer 2

I agree 100% no such thing as best sport only favorite. American Football is what I grew up with it's a part of my tradition. But I learned allot from watching the 1995 Rugby World Cup really enjoyed the "All Blacks" and one player in particularly Jonah Lomu. It really took watching Rugby played at such an international level to really appreciate it. This sport needs more exposure in the USA, since it's no longer shown on regular channels. (You've to pay extra)

Trust me Jonah Lomu and many other Rugby players had they grown up in a country that played American Football that is the sport they would have chosen. Vice Versa for say a player like LaDainian Tomlinson if Rugby was the sport of choice. Again it all goes back to sport culture. American Samoa they play American Football on Samoa they play Rugby.

Rugby and American Football both are good sports for different reasons and while they may have shared an origin back in the late 19th century they have become very different sports. 1885 Walter Camp standardized the rules of American Football to 11X11, the 4 downs, many of the other rules that made it different then Rugby.

-1907 some bloke decided to throw the ball forward and ever since it's has been a legal rule.

Trust me those pads and helmets are so guys don't get killed. No exageration players suffer conccussions from open field tackles and the velocity in which they're hit. Back in the early 1900's this sport was almost outlawed at the college level. Hence the pads and helmets. Last Pro player to not wear a helmet was around the 1940's guys where alot smaller then.

Also the reason why American Football starts and stops is because the team on offense is coming up with plays (from a book of over 100) that will outsmart the defence. The Quarter Back is the field general since he has to read the defence and execute the plays. We also have to have commercial breaks since the TV stations demand it.

This doesn't make the game better just different. Trust me unless you grasp the strategy of American Football it will be very boring. Rugby of course doesn't have to stop as much and you don't have all the substitutions. This makes it a very fast paced game and doesn't take as long.


I really hope the 2009 Rugby Seven's World Cup is in San Deigo, Calfornia I'll definatly go. Really wished I could have made it to Hong Kong.

Finally Rugby in the USA does have an elitest/preppy image , but I doubt this stereotype fits for the players on the American Eagles. These guys must really love Rugby because they get 0% attention in the USA. If it wasn't for the internet I would never have known about us qualifying for the 2007 Rugby World Cup.

Answer 3

First of all the games are totally different, and fitness for both games at a high level are different to. American Football players are trained to have explosive power and speed because that's what they need - to go full tilt for 15 seconds or less. Rugby players fitness requires not only strength and power but also endurance.

Football players also tend to be trained for very specific positions too. Have a look at an offensive tackle, they are giant men that are ridiculously strong but they are fatter than any high level Rugby player. Not saying they are not great athletes because they are. It's just what their position requires.

And sure if you compare Drunken Frat boys playing 6 unsanctioned intramural Rugby games a year to NFL players yeah it's going to look sad. If you compare the best in the NFL and the best in international or top level club Rugby you'll see that fitness is an absolute must in both. The fitness is different but it's still a requirement.

I don't agree that American Footballers health is better. It seems that every other summer someone at some NFL training camp dies from overheating, heart attack or something. You don't see that in Rugby.

Answer 4

To play any Major (or minor) sport a person has to have talent, ability and endurance or they'll stay in the lower ranks.
Both American Football and Rugby require physical strength and stamina. I have the utmost respect for all opinions because the two sports are totally different irrespective of how you try to match them in difference areas.
I got interested in Rugby League when I lived in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Some of the teams were The Bulldogs, Sharks, Saints, Eels, Magpies, Rabbitohs, Sea Eagles, and Tigers.
Trying to compare Football and Rugby is like trying to compare Baseball with Cricket, or as apples and oranges. You can't. Go Rams & Cardinals.

Answer 5

As a player of both sports, I would say rugby is the best in terms of building stamina and strength. I kinda used rugby as a way to stay in shape until football season and I love it. But right now I would say american football just because I've been playing it the longest and I have hopes of going far with it. If rugby becomes more popular in the U.S. in the near future, then it's possible I could turn my head.

P.S.: ALL BLACKS RULE!!!!

Answer 6

I am a Rugby Union fan but I have watched a lot of American Football. It is good and competitive but it is nothing like rugby. They are both big man games but I think they go over the top with NFL. You can't just play at the local town club like in rugby. In the NFL you have to put on all of that protection and technology and it is quite slow as it is always stop and go for over two hours. While rugby is much more fluid and original. In a ruck, scrum or even a tackle it is about strength, skill and force. While in NFL its about size and brutality. I respect each athlete and sport but I think I prefer Rugby. Those reasons are why the NFL hasn't expanded out of North America. But both sports are great to watch.

Answer 7

American Football

Answer 8

Like hell are rugby players all public school wankers.
And rugby players would have to be fitter because they play a game without stopping every 4 seconds, and don't need padding for the same ammount of physical contact as American Footballers. Defensive lines in American football... you can't really say that any of them haven't passed through the Golden Arches a few too many times (and that's the nicest possible way to put it.)

Northampton Saints forever.

Answer 9

Im an American, and I play Rugby, I believe it is one of the better sports out there. It is physically demanding and mentally demanding as well. I play the hooker position, and it gets a lot of hell being in between two big props, I have been cleeted several times in the face and have gotten hurt more times and had to keep hitting and running during the whole game. Football aint nearly as tough. Ya wear pads and ya don't have to run nearly as much. Stats show that a typical foward will run as much as 8 miles in a game. Lets see football players do that. Rugby's the only sport I know of too that you can beat the crap outta the other team and then live in that persons home for a day and have a barbecue afterwards. Rugby is better hands down

Answer 10

First of all, I am an NFL fan. I must say though, that rugby is a very interesting sport that I enjoy watching. The fact that the NFL is commercialized in America and rugby is not is important to consider. If rugby was televised, it would be just as popular, if not moreso. Think of boxing, versus UFC. I think of it as being like football used to be, before the invention of the downfield pass. Lots of running, lots of contact, and no pads. It's great!
American Footballers may be healthier, but I think, in a media-driven society, exposure is more important.

Answer 11

I don't think it's completely like comparing apples to oranges ... granted they are different games but it's all a matter of perspective. Since I'm from the US and have only seen international and high level matches from other countries, I wouldn't say that rugby players are fat. I'm on a Super league team in the US and although we do have some guys that are "fat" they are in better shape than most of the American football players I played with at an NCAA D-III college. Not to mention myself, I played O-line in high school and college, and am now playing prop and lock and can say I have never been in as good physical condition as I am now.

Next I agree...rugby isn't for losers who can't do other sports, the fitness level is just different. You still have to have the hand eye coordination and footwork skills, as well as the added ability most football players don't need and that's putting a boot to the ball. As it's been said before, Rugby is an endurance sport, football is a power sport. The only difference is that in rugby you do need to have that power from time to time, where in American football you really don't need to have endurance unless you're playing iron man football (both sides of the ball).

With regards to the mental level in American football, it is far more complex than rugby, to learn the sheer volume of most team's playbooks is to have some intelligence (just like in the movie The Program- guys might be complete idiots in any other mental aspect, but when it comes to football, they know every nuance of their position). When comparing the hands of a great receiver and a great wing, I would say they match pretty evenly, just for the simple fact that if you drop the ball forward in rugby it is basically a turnover, in American football it just flips to the next down.

American rugby is not just "drunken white frat boys" in the US, you need to broaden your exposure to rugby, not that we don't enjoy a drink now and then, but as in any sport there are different levels of skill and knowledge of the game. Fortunately I've been in a system where we learn the laws, learn the fundamentals and how to support your mates and play as a team, not a "smear the queer" style as some teams we play against. That's simply the difference between a Super league team and a D-3 or college team in the US.

Since American football's birth from rugby it has always been a step ahead. Teddy Roosevelt threatened to ban rugby from the US (because it was too violent), so football became the new "cutting edge sport" and eventually evolved from Rugby to where it is today. The biggest problem with rugby's lack of acceptance in the US today is largely in part due to the fact that there are no huge coporate sponsorships, and no tv exposure, which kind of turns into a viscious circle. I firmly believe that Super League rugby in the US should be picked up by ESPN, but the problem is the average American has not a clue how the game is played (like women trying to learn American football). Until a major network like ESPN or Fox Sports jumps on and starts televising our sport we won't begin to gain widespread acceptance. The problem with rugby is that since it is non stop action for 40 minutes at a time, there is no time to work in the almighty dollar for advertising. If a company realizes that they can have their ad projected onto the field (like that stupid yellow first down line) for the entire game, or have 5 second flash commercials in a brief stoppage then perhaps we'll actually begin to get tv exposure.

To sum up my entire answer, having played American football for about 10 years of my life, and Rugby now only for 2, I will always get excited in the fall for the football season to get started. But I'll still be playing rugby (God willing) for the next 10 years, and hopefully be in the stands for the World Cup in New Zealand in 2011.