Which is the real 'Football'?

But... that's just not true.

The pads are to protect the people getting hit... not to help the people hitting. You really think these guys are thinking of themselves when they lay someone out? nope. You're just wrong on so many levels.

 

Pads would only help the hitter if the hittee wasn't wearing any. That would be an unpleasant sight.

 

High School football hits of the year


These kids are in high school still... crazy.

 

Both hitter and hittee run the risk of being injured. The pads protect both.

Strangely no comment on the video I just linked to. All without pads, too. To relate that to my original point way back in reply to DRHJ9, Europe has no need of gridiron because they can do the same things, without armour.

 

lol..if you were refering to me, I was only joking...should have used the smily faces...

But...really...they don't. Most of the hits come from the side. Most tackles are made by arms, not shoulders. There are always exceptions to the rule...I have watched rugby, have no problem with the sport, but they do not hit like Football players.

 

Obviously the tackling styles are different. They wouldn't be different sports otherwise. The point is, a physical game in the mould of gridiron already exists outside America. The equivalent of American youth that want to get involved in the physical contact sports in Europe/elsewhere, will play rugby.

But I think we've digressed a bit too much Back to which is the real football

 

the pads protect both, but people don't hit harder BECAUSE of pads. I guarantee you guys like Ray Lewis and Brian Urlacher don't care if they have pads on or not, they just want to lay someone out.

And there's no comment on the video because I didn't watch it. I've seen a bunch of videos with supposedly "great rugby hits" and they just don't match up to the hits in football.

 

I don't really care about this argument. But...try and tell me linebackers and tackles have better ball skills than a soccer player. Wide receivers and running backs are not the majority of grid iron teams.

 

Here's a great video of NFL hits

why the hell would a linebacker or tackle need ball skills? That argument makes no sense.

 

I've been in mosh pits where the stated aim has been to lay someone out. Nobody needed pads in there, either. And perhaps you should do some research into people that have played both sports. Comments I've read in the past half-hour on sports forums and even youtube have gone on record saying they've felt more adventurous making tackles in gridiron because they had the pads to protect them.

And you're missing out on watching the video because the evidence is right there for you for equivalent hits made in rugby that happen in gridiron. Your concession is accepted.

 

I've talked to people who've played both and they all say they've gotten hurt worse playing football, even with the pads.

And I watched the video... nothing special.

 

The point is- the argument was that gridiron players require more skill, and the WR/RB was used as an example. But the majority of NFL players don't have those skills. Whereas the distribution of ball control skills is far more even on a soccer team.

 

Not to mention that it's easier to catch a ball with your hands than it is to control a ball with another part of your body. And doing it while running.

 

Everthing they do revolves around the ball, and I was talking about overall skill level, Athletically, mentally, and strength.

Linebackers: Covering backs and recievers out of the backfield, shedding blockers, spying the QB, pass defense by deflection or interception, Tackling, disguising blitz packages, blocking kicks.

Tackles: Shedding blocks by using a variety of moves, running stunts, dropping into coverage on zone blitzes, tackling, they have to also make catches and block kicks and punts.

Simply put, they do so much more that soccer players. And everything revolves around the football.

Try catching a ball while getting hit or having someones hands in your face. Try catching a ball on a timed rout, when the ball is thrown before you actually look for it. Try catching a ball running full speed, and the ball is thrown from 50-60 yards away...yeah really easy!

 

I didn't say it was easy. I said it was easier than trying to control a ball with another body part. Either learn to be honest or learn to read. Whichever one it is.

 

And that could be called an argument against soccer as easily as an argument for. The skill set for all of the players on the soccer field is relatively the same in comparison to gridiron. If you switched up all of the players' positions in soccer the result probably wouldn't be too chaotic. In gridiron every player contributes in a completely unique way.

 

football is still a more difficult skill to master then soccer.

 

No its not. And for that matter soccer isn't a more difficult skill to master than football. What are we really arguing about here? You can't just arbitrarily say "x is much harder to do than y". They're completely different skill sets.

 

Linebackers: Covering backs and recievers out of the backfield, shedding blockers, spying the QB, pass defense by deflection or interception, Tackling, disguising blitz packages, blocking kicks.

Tackles: Shedding blocks by using a variety of moves, running stunts, dropping into coverage on zone blitzes, tackling, they have to also make catches and block kicks and punts.

Simply put, they do so much more that soccer players. And everything revolves around the football.

So....they provide defense for other players, help maintain possession, and try to spot what the other team is going to do with the ball? Guess I just lost. When soccer players don't have the ball they don't do anything.

 

Let's just all agree with this and move on with our lives. Everybody has their minds so fixated to their own points that it's pointless to debate this any further.

 

Everybody has their minds so fixated to their own points that it's pointless to debate this any further.

Welcome to the internet!

 

Sorry A_J, but that's crap.

'Soccer' requires a natural talent to play. Gridiron is nothing more than bulking up, catching balls and running around, no matter how you try and coat it as some complicated sport. Anyone can play gridiron under the right conditions. 'Soccer' is a skill that some people are unable to master their entire lives.

 

"Catching balls" doesn't require talent? "bulking up and running around"? Are you kidding?

I think this bickering regarding which is "harder" is pointless because nobody's comparing the sports in a systematic way, just stating their opinion. Gridiron players have certain talents, Soccer players have different talents, and athletes from either sport would make fools out of themselves on the opposite field. Whichever you like better is little more than a matter of preference. Oversimplified generalizations of both sports are equally stupid.

 

No, it really doesn't. Sorry.

 

That's really enough antagonizing posts from anyone and everyone. You might disagree on preferences, but to state that one or the other doesn't take skill, hard work, mental capabilities, etc. is just antagonizing at this point in time. You're, IMO, posting that just to get another reaction out of the other camp. The two sports are very different and share about one thing in common: they can both be called football. Let's agree to disagree, and politely continue the discussion without insulting other users, or making light of the other sport. Any more behavior of the sort will be viewed as baiting and/or trolling.