American football is a dead sport. As more research comes out people will find the very nature of the game is bad for the brain, i.e. tackling, blocking, etc. The NFL has already launched a massive propaganda campaign against this and I think, while they admitted it a couple years ago, still deny that football can lead to brain damage.

The only question is what is going to take it's place. I think either basketball or baseball and not soccer.

I was listening to NPR the other day and discovered that the World Cup has a bit of a following among women and gays, due to the physiques of the players. Therefore we should expect its popularity to grow.

I have nothing against it. When I attended a football match in Europe I thought it was a lot of fun. (Very drunk people in the stands...)

Quote: (06-30-2014 08:59 AM)TheKantian Wrote:  

American football is a dead sport. As more research comes out people will find the very nature of the game is bad for the brain, i.e. tackling, blocking, etc. The NFL has already launched a massive propaganda campaign against this and I think, while they admitted it a couple years ago, still deny that football can lead to brain damage.

The only question is what is going to take it's place. I think either basketball or baseball and not soccer.

Boxing is bad for the brain too..I don't think the concern is to the health risks of the players..

Quote: (06-30-2014 08:40 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

Cristiano Ronaldo is a great example of someone who has amazing athletic prowess, forget your NBA stars and NFL linebackers, this guy as an athletic is only below F1 drivers (yep you read that right)

We're mostly in agreement with regard to everything else, but let us not get carried away here.

The major upside to the American NFL and NBA's overemphasis on raw athleticism relative to Soccer is precisely this: the athleticism of its participants.

Ronaldo is a great athlete, but he is not remarkable by NFL standards. He's got much more aerobic stamina than most NFL players (reasonable considering the nature of soccer as an aerobic sport and American Football as an anaerobic game), but beyond that he's merely good.

His speed, while elite by world soccer standards, is commonplace in the NFL (Ronaldo runs a 100meter in something like 11.0 seconds, a time typical for many skill position players in the NFL who often spend their teens running competititively on the track), and his size is nothing to write home about. There are quite a few players in the national football league who can best Ronaldo in a 100 meter dash despite outweighing him by 50lbs or more (example: Adrian Peterson, owner of a confirmed 10.33 100 meter time), and they do this while maintaining just as much agility (arguably more given American Football's emphasis on short-burst explosion) and also being FAR stronger. There are plenty of NFL linebackers who are just as explosive as Ronaldo despite being MUCH larger. That is what happens when you create a game that values raw athleticism over stamina, technical ability, intelligence and just about everything else.

The NBA is a similar story. There is nobody in soccer with the kind of raw athletic freakishness you'll see from the likes of LeBron James (incredible straight line speed, remarkable agility and explosion, great technical skill, all in a massive 6'8", 250lb package).

I love soccer and there are great athletes participating in the game, but it is unwise to downplay the athleticism we see in the NFL and NBA.

Quote: (06-30-2014 11:02 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

Quote: (06-30-2014 08:40 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

Cristiano Ronaldo is a great example of someone who has amazing athletic prowess, forget your NBA stars and NFL linebackers, this guy as an athletic is only below F1 drivers (yep you read that right)

We're mostly in agreement with regard to everything else, but let us not get carried away here.

The major upside to the American NFL and NBA's overemphasis on raw athleticism relative to Soccer is precisely this: the athleticism of its participants.

Ronaldo is a great athlete, but he is not remarkable by NFL standards. He's got much more aerobic stamina than most NFL players (reasonable considering the nature of soccer as an aerobic sport and American Football as an anaerobic game), but beyond that he's merely good.

His speed, while elite by world soccer standards, is commonplace in the NFL (Ronaldo runs a 100meter in something like 11.0 seconds, a time typical for many skill position players in the NFL who often spend their teens running competititively on the track), and his size is nothing to write home about. There are quite a few players in the national football league who can best Ronaldo in a 100 meter dash despite outweighing him by 50lbs or more (example: Adrian Peterson, owner of a confirmed 10.33 100 meter time), and they do this while maintaining just as much agility (arguably more given American Football's emphasis on short-burst explosion) and also being FAR stronger. There are plenty of NFL linebackers who are just as explosive as Ronaldo despite being MUCH larger. That is what happens when you create a game that values raw athleticism over stamina, technical ability, intelligence and just about everything else.

The NBA is a similar story. There is nobody in soccer with the kind of raw athletic freakishness you'll see from the likes of LeBron James (incredible straight line speed, remarkable agility and explosion, great technical skill, all in a massive 6'8", 250lb package).

I love soccer and there are great athletes participating in the game, but it is unwise to downplay the athleticism we see in the NFL and NBA.

Ronaldo is more a very complete athlete, a good point being able the aformentioned stuff combined with great stamina. There is a documentary on youtube about Ronaldo where they analyze all his athletic skills and put him up directly with a 100m sprint guy (he loses in a straight line, but wins when he has to go around kegs). They also analyze his jumping ability for instance and at one point they shoot balls in the dark to him and he nets pretty much all of them based on a flash of interpretation on where the ball will land, very interesting to see. Your statement about guys a lot bigger than him outrunning him can be true, but is there any evidence of this? He is damn fast. A quick youtube search tells me he runs 96m in 10s, so that means he is faster than your example and near top level if the stats are correct. Nevertheless NBA/NFL guys have a lot of things going for them, nobody debates that, just different sports.

Quote: (06-30-2014 11:02 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

Quote: (06-30-2014 08:40 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

Cristiano Ronaldo is a great example of someone who has amazing athletic prowess, forget your NBA stars and NFL linebackers, this guy as an athletic is only below F1 drivers (yep you read that right)

We're mostly in agreement with regard to everything else, but let us not get carried away here.

The major upside to the American NFL and NBA's overemphasis on raw athleticism relative to Soccer is precisely this: the athleticism of its participants.

Ronaldo is a great athlete, but he is not remarkable by NFL standards. He's got much more aerobic stamina than most NFL players (reasonable considering the nature of soccer as an aerobic sport and American Football as an anaerobic game), but beyond that he's merely good.

His speed, while elite by world soccer standards, is commonplace in the NFL (Ronaldo runs a 100meter in something like 11.0 seconds, a time typical for many skill position players in the NFL who often spend their teens running competititively on the track), and his size is nothing to write home about. There are quite a few players in the national football league who can best Ronaldo in a 100 meter dash despite outweighing him by 50lbs or more (example: Adrian Peterson, owner of a confirmed 10.33 100 meter time), and they do this while maintaining just as much agility (arguably more given American Football's emphasis on short-burst explosion) and also being FAR stronger. There are plenty of NFL linebackers who are just as explosive as Ronaldo despite being MUCH larger. That is what happens when you create a game that values raw athleticism over stamina, technical ability, intelligence and just about everything else.

The NBA is a similar story. There is nobody in soccer with the kind of raw athletic freakishness you'll see from the likes of LeBron James (incredible straight line speed, remarkable agility and explosion, great technical skill, all in a massive 6'8", 250lb package).

I love soccer and there are great athletes participating in the game, but it is unwise to downplay the athleticism we see in the NFL and NBA.

Cool, now let's compare skill and ratio's of people playing each sport:

Adrian Peterson: One of the best players in a sport played by a few million people worldwide

Lebron James: One of the best players in a sport played by a few million people worldwide

Cristiano Ronaldo: One of the best players in a sport played by billions worldwide

American Footbal is very unhealthy for the athletes. I heard some get really ugly spine injury.

But apart from that, I think soccer has some elegance American Football lacks. When I see American Football all I see is some buffed up guys running around with a ball in their hand, banging each other against the ground like neathertalers to get attention from the cheerleaders.

Soccer requires mastery over the ball. It is a gentleman sport and it envolves tactics and strategy to get the ball in the goal. You can't use your hands. That is cheating. Therefore it is all about technique and team work.

Read a bit more into it and it seems fair to say indeed that NFL players are faster than football players, not that it really matters, but I though Id share that.

Foreigners telling Americans what they should like certainly doesn't help...

I haven't seen anyone mention Title IX of the Civil Rights Act yet. I'm sure that canceling so many NCAA men's soccer programs has to have impacted the sports popularity in the US

Quote: (06-29-2014 02:02 AM)moridin Wrote:  

One thing I never understood is why american football, canadian football, australian football, etc haven't disappeared and been replaced by rugby, a sport whose popularity is much more widespread, considering the number of countries that play it.

The various football codes are roughly divided along state lines in Australia. The southern states (Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia) play Australian Rules Football while New South Wales and Queensland tend to focus on Rugby Union and Rugby League. Rugby Union also has a rich university tradition. Obviously there's bleedover and the lines are much less clearly defined than they used to be. Those who support Rugby Union, Rugby League and AFL all like having a dig at each other about their respective codes.

We have our regular soccer (football) season during the summer as it would otherwise interfere with the other football codes.

Quote: (06-30-2014 11:02 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

Quote: (06-30-2014 08:40 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

Cristiano Ronaldo is a great example of someone who has amazing athletic prowess, forget your NBA stars and NFL linebackers, this guy as an athletic is only below F1 drivers (yep you read that right)

We're mostly in agreement with regard to everything else, but let us not get carried away here.

The major upside to the American NFL and NBA's overemphasis on raw athleticism relative to Soccer is precisely this: the athleticism of its participants.

Ronaldo is a great athlete, but he is not remarkable by NFL standards. He's got much more aerobic stamina than most NFL players (reasonable considering the nature of soccer as an aerobic sport and American Football as an anaerobic game), but beyond that he's merely good.

His speed, while elite by world soccer standards, is commonplace in the NFL (Ronaldo runs a 100meter in something like 11.0 seconds, a time typical for many skill position players in the NFL who often spend their teens running competititively on the track), and his size is nothing to write home about. There are quite a few players in the national football league who can best Ronaldo in a 100 meter dash despite outweighing him by 50lbs or more (example: Adrian Peterson, owner of a confirmed 10.33 100 meter time), and they do this while maintaining just as much agility (arguably more given American Football's emphasis on short-burst explosion) and also being FAR stronger. There are plenty of NFL linebackers who are just as explosive as Ronaldo despite being MUCH larger. That is what happens when you create a game that values raw athleticism over stamina, technical ability, intelligence and just about everything else.

The NBA is a similar story. There is nobody in soccer with the kind of raw athletic freakishness you'll see from the likes of LeBron James (incredible straight line speed, remarkable agility and explosion, great technical skill, all in a massive 6'8", 250lb package).

I love soccer and there are great athletes participating in the game, but it is unwise to downplay the athleticism we see in the NFL and NBA.

I'd agree NFL athletes are stronger and faster, but in completion how high can they jump, how far can they jump, how quick are they are turning (and I know certain positions are good at certain things) but why I saw Ronaldo is complete is because he's quick, agile, strong, got a ridiculous leap etc.

Quote: (07-01-2014 07:42 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

Quote: (06-30-2014 11:02 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

Quote: (06-30-2014 08:40 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

Cristiano Ronaldo is a great example of someone who has amazing athletic prowess, forget your NBA stars and NFL linebackers, this guy as an athletic is only below F1 drivers (yep you read that right)

We're mostly in agreement with regard to everything else, but let us not get carried away here.

The major upside to the American NFL and NBA's overemphasis on raw athleticism relative to Soccer is precisely this: the athleticism of its participants.

Ronaldo is a great athlete, but he is not remarkable by NFL standards. He's got much more aerobic stamina than most NFL players (reasonable considering the nature of soccer as an aerobic sport and American Football as an anaerobic game), but beyond that he's merely good.

His speed, while elite by world soccer standards, is commonplace in the NFL (Ronaldo runs a 100meter in something like 11.0 seconds, a time typical for many skill position players in the NFL who often spend their teens running competititively on the track), and his size is nothing to write home about. There are quite a few players in the national football league who can best Ronaldo in a 100 meter dash despite outweighing him by 50lbs or more (example: Adrian Peterson, owner of a confirmed 10.33 100 meter time), and they do this while maintaining just as much agility (arguably more given American Football's emphasis on short-burst explosion) and also being FAR stronger. There are plenty of NFL linebackers who are just as explosive as Ronaldo despite being MUCH larger. That is what happens when you create a game that values raw athleticism over stamina, technical ability, intelligence and just about everything else.

The NBA is a similar story. There is nobody in soccer with the kind of raw athletic freakishness you'll see from the likes of LeBron James (incredible straight line speed, remarkable agility and explosion, great technical skill, all in a massive 6'8", 250lb package).

I love soccer and there are great athletes participating in the game, but it is unwise to downplay the athleticism we see in the NFL and NBA.

I'd agree NFL athletes are stronger and faster, but in completion how high can they jump, how far can they jump, how quick are they are turning (and I know certain positions are good at certain things) but why I saw Ronaldo is complete is because he's quick, agile, strong, got a ridiculous leap etc.

NFL athletes can jump out of the gym. I've played basketball against a few NFL players over the years. When you are rock solid muscle, like they are, yet as flexible and explosive as they are, you can jump like crazy.

Look up videos of the Foot Locker Slam fest, it was a dunk contest for non basketball professional athletes in the early 1990's. Lots of track members and NFL players there. NFL guys who are 5'8" were putting down wicked dunks.

Someone like Adrian Peterson could probably out jump most any soccer player by a long ways.

The one thing the soccer players would have on an NFL athlete is distance running. The NFL athlete does not condition to run 15 miles. They are in great shape, but in shape to burst for a few yards, then get up and do it again.

It is hard for someone who has not competed against an NFL athlete, even in not American football but another sport, to fully realize how unreal these guys are. Play a pick-up basketball game against one and you will be blown away at how quick, strong, fast, explosive and even how much endurance they have.

Athletically, NFL running backs are one dimensional. The metric that's more important is how fast can he run the 100m immediately after he's been for a five mile run.

An NBA player has a much better chance to cross over. Because NBA players have to run the floor continuously and they require the reflexes and fine motor skills to play defense.

I been getting pretty into soccer lately. Ive always kinda liked soccer like playing fifa on xbox and occasionally watch games on Mexican channel but never regularly watched it or followed a team.

In addition to all the other reasons people have given which I agree with, I think another reason is its hard to film. In the day of HD everything soccer due to the size of the field and spreadout nature of the game means you dont get a lot of closeup shots. Everything for the most part is guys are dots on the screen. Sure sometimes they'll zoom in but then you lose perspective of whats going on on the rest of the field.

Prior to HD tv hockey was struggling for this very reason just doesnt translate to tv well. They tried that stupid glowing puck with laser trails but didn't really work that well. Once HD became the norm hockey was a lot cooler to watch. Obviously an ice rink is a fraction of the size of a soccer field so its easier to capture the whole picture in a frame and still have some detail.

I guess you could make a similar argument for american football regarding field size but football is a slower moving game with breaks every few seconds. Even though they play on a giant field most players at any given time are withing like a 20 yard radius

Another reason not mentioned are the announcers. For example I hate watching ice hockey if it ain't Canadian announcers doing the play by play. Having an American accent do play by play on soccer for me doesn't do it. An announcer from the BBC (British) doing the play by play makes it more complete.

NHL- Canadian crews,,,,,bob costas doesn't cut it IMHO, but Jeremy roenick does good in his color commentary.
NBA,NFL- American crews.
Tennis- British, Australian, South African, American.
Golf - South African

Another reason not mentioned are the announcers. For example I hate watching ice hockey if it ain't Canadian announcers doing the play by play. Having an American accent do play by play on soccer for me doesn't do it. An announcer from the BBC (British) doing the play by play makes it more complete.

NHL- Canadian crews,,,,,bob costas doesn't cut it IMHO, but Jeremy roenick does good in his color commentary.
NBA,NFL- American crews.
Tennis- British, Australian, South African, American.
Golf - South African

Quote: (07-01-2014 07:42 AM)bojangles Wrote:  

I'd agree NFL athletes are stronger and faster, but in completion how high can they jump, how far can they jump, how quick are they are turning (and I know certain positions are good at certain things) but why I saw Ronaldo is complete is because he's quick, agile, strong, got a ridiculous leap etc.

Brojangles, NFL athletes are complete athletic specimens..even more complete than NBA players. Again, I speak from personal experience. As you know, I grew up in countries where football (soccer) was the premier sport. I have played barefoot football in Nigeria and I have played football growing up in London, England. During P.E, we would play indoor football or outdoors on the pitch. One of the guys in my secondary school went professional in the English league and is a reasonably paid striker. I remember him in the first year, he was as fast and had unlimited cardio. He would play football ALL the time.

From that personal experience, I have seen guys that could had crazy footwork with the football and were technically sound as could be. Headers, timing, cuts to the goal etc.
Physically, they could run forever.

There were guys in my class that would use their left foot for striking although they were naturally right handed and incidentally, right footed. This was ingenious in my opinion because during opportunities to score, if you get the ball on your off foot side, the time it takes you to adjust and get ready to score can be time lost and give the defence and the goalie time to regroup and stymie your strike attempt. If you are comfortable with the left and you receive the ball on your right side, due to you naturally being rightfooted, you can boot that shyt into the goal without having to fall back to your 'strong' foot.

I was in Georgia, USA some years back and I used to be ball crazy. I played pickup basketball with some of the guys that were on the college football team and I was blown away by their overall strength, speed of the guys. Some of the shorter guys, 5'8 etc..were rippling with abs, traps and taut, pecs and demanding alley oops be thrown during 2 on 1 offense on fast breaks. They would assault the basketball rim (10 feet off of the ground) with reckless abandon.

Every time I went into the college gym, the American football guys were in there almost like it was a club, always on the bench or the squat rack.

So in comparing the two groups (football (soccer) players and American football players), I would say:

NFL athletes have upper body strength as well as lower body strength and hence are a complete PHYSICAL package. I don't believe you would have any cats such as Kevin Durant playing in the NFL (so mawga like dawg) but if you did witness a cat in there with such a slight build, you can bet your bottom dollar that he would be as fast as greased lightning.

Comparatively, you can perhaps compare rugby athletes to NFL. The only reason football (soccer) gets such an acclaimed mention here is due to its popularity world wide. America might be the only country where you may be stumped at times to find a group of guys who can't go for a kickaround. Even in India which is cricket crazy, I'[m certain you can find a group of IRT's who are up for a game of eleven a side without having to go too far. As aforementioned, you don't need to be buff to play football. Women can even play with men without much of a disadvantage if she is nimble with the feet. One Argentine I used to work with said he went home (to Argentina) and saw dimes chilling, walking on the beach, playing keep ups with a football as they chatted amicably amongst each other.

As forementioned, football requires minimal equipment (which can exclude the poor who don't have money for expensive gear) to play. It doesn't leverage on athleticism in a major way (you don't need to be tall, strong or fast in order to excel at football). This leaves it open for any country on earth, any body type really and hence easy to get involved with.

[quote] (07-01-2014 10:43 AM)Moma Wrote:  

[quote='bojangles' pid='769110' dateline='1404218520']
I was in Georgia, USA some years back and I used to be ball crazy. I played pickup basketball with some of the guys that were on the college football team and I was blown away by their overall strength, speed of the guys. Some of the shorter guys, 5'8 etc..were rippling with abs, traps and taut, pecs and demanding alley oops be thrown during 2 on 1 offense on fast breaks. They would assault the basketball rim (10 feet off of the ground) with reckless abandon.

Every time I went into the college gym, the American football guys were in there almost like it was a club, always on the bench or the squat rack.

So in comparing the two groups (football (soccer) players and American football players), I would say:

NFL athletes have upper body strength as well as lower body strength and hence are a complete PHYSICAL package. I don't believe you would have any cats such as Kevin Durant playing in the NFL (so mawga like dawg) but if you did witness a cat in there with such a slight build, you can bet your bottom dollar that he would be as fast as greased lightning.

Comparatively, you can perhaps compare rugby athletes to NFL. The only reason football (soccer) gets such an acclaimed mention here is due to its popularity world wide. America might be the only country where you may be stumped at times to find a group of guys who can't go for a kickaround. Even in India which is cricket crazy, I'[m certain you can find a group of IRT's who are up for a game of eleven a side without having to go too far. As aforementioned, you don't need to be buff to play football. Women can even play with men without much of a disadvantage if she is nimble with the feet. One Argentine I used to work with said he went home (to Argentina) and saw dimes chilling, walking on the beach, playing keep ups with a football as they chatted amicably amongst each other.

As forementioned, football requires minimal equipment (which can exclude the poor who don't have money for expensive gear) to play. It doesn't leverage on athleticism in a major way (you don't need to be tall, strong or fast in order to excel at football). This leaves it open for any country on earth, any body type really and hence easy to get involved with.[/quote]

Great post.

And I have said much the same as far as the NFL athletic ability. I was a decent basketball player growing up. I could dunk. I had small school scholarship offers.

But I probably would struggle in my prime to even keep up with an NFL player on the basketball court. I played in a pick up game with an NFL running back who only made it in the league as a back-up for 3 years. He almost broke the back board on a standard 10' rim he was dunking so hard and decided to quit before he hurt himself or someone else or broke the back board. It was unreal. And he was FAR from a star NFL player. This guy was about 6'1" 220 lbs. and probably could touch 11' in the air when he jumped and was blazing fast.

I used to work at a bar where once in a while some NFL guys would come in. They were always nice to me. I had met a guy who become a regular that was from England. I remember his exact words about the NFL guys...

"I had no idea, they are like perfect physical specimen, it is like you Americans breed these people just to be perfect specimen and then go to battle with each other on the field"

That about sums up how impressive they are. If you are 6' 200 lbs. with 5% body fat, you are a very small football player and better have near Olympic quality speed to make the NFL.

Moma my discussion was generally around just one player - Ronaldo, you'll see my post on the previous page about Socrates which shows why you don't need that athletic prowess to be a footballer.

Quote: (07-01-2014 08:38 AM)Tigre Wrote:  

Athletically, NFL running backs are one dimensional. The metric that's more important is how fast can he run the 100m immediately after he's been for a five mile run.

An NBA player has a much better chance to cross over. Because NBA players have to run the floor continuously and they require the reflexes and fine motor skills to play defense.

One dimensional?

Have you honestly watched a full game?

Stamina can be gained by anyone who tries but for the most part you either have speed or you don't.
That covers the conditioning aspect.

I think people outside the US Watch football and see a bunch of guys running around with pads and taking 20 second breaks between plays.
The hardest thing in the world is to get hit by a man who is most likely bigger than you (while both going full speed) and have to do it over and over again.

That covers the mental 'toughness' required to play soccer and the 'physical' aspect.

In terms of skill you must understand that our best athletes don't play soccer. In terms of total athletic ability football is first followed by basketball. Soccer isn't even getting our top 200 athletes coming out of high school in any given year. Imagine if 25% of those kids played soccer with the same intensity of those outside of the US from ages 5-18. It would be a different story.

But there lies the problem. I don't think this will ever happen as there are too many sports too choose from and until football goes bankrupt or the feminist find a way to ban the game, soccer in the US will never get our best talent.

The college system you have does not allow it either, the college system is made for those top athletes to go into the sports you guys like and promote like NFL NBA etc. Soccer stars are picked out and don't go to college, they become soccer players.

Quote: (07-01-2014 08:12 PM)Mentavious Wrote:  

In terms of skill you must understand that our best athletes don't play soccer. In terms of total athletic ability football is first followed by basketball. Soccer isn't even getting our top 200 athletes coming out of high school in any given year. Imagine if 25% of those kids played soccer with the same intensity of those outside of the US from ages 5-18. It would be a different story.

No, it wouldn't. And yes, one dimensional.

A Barry Sanders type is never going to be an elite tennis player, for example. It's a different skillset. And neither would he be an elite soccer player.

An NFL running back is optimized to a very specialized skillset that doesn't necessarily translate to dominating other sports.

I think that's obvious to anyone who follows different sports and observes that they are suited to different body types.

If you have a hard on for vertical leap and sprint speed and define who are your best athletes only on those metrics, you can expect to see your "best athletes" fail to reach the highest levels at a wide variety of sports.

Quote: (07-01-2014 12:25 AM)rottenapple Wrote:  

Ronaldo is more a very complete athlete, a good point being able the aformentioned stuff combined with great stamina.

I can’t really buy this.

Assume that the different components of athleticism are as follows:
Strength
Speed
Agility
Endurance
H/E Coordination

In which of these categories does Ronaldo outdo his American football equivalent? We could give him H/E coordination because, though he doesn’t use his hands, he is more technically skilled in general (using his feet, head, etc) than the vast majority of American football players who realy more on their physical gifts and aggression.

American football players are going to be much more agile given their sport’s emphasis on short-burst explosion over aerobic endurance. All of that bulky, fast-twitch muscle facilitates quicker change of direction, and the game of American football itself (with its emphasis on route running, coverage, and the execution of very quick cuts during very short bursts of explosion during play in order to escape other players and catch them) involves much more regular and violent changes in direction than soccer.
We’ve already covered speed – American football players will outrun soccer players over sprint distances, on average. Again, this is down to the emphasis on explosiveness in their training.

American football players are much stronger than footballers.

Footballers have superior aerobic endurance, though American football players are more physically durable (read: able to take more damage and keep going – their size helps with this). We’ll just assume “endurance” means “aerobic endurance” and give this one to Ronaldo too.

That’s what, 2 out of the 5 components of athleticism in which Ronaldo can claim to clearly outdo his American football peers? How is he a more complete athlete?

Quote:Quote:

There is a documentary on youtube about Ronaldo where they analyze all his athletic skills and put him up directly with a 100m sprint guy (he loses in a straight line, but wins when he has to go around kegs).

NFL and NBA players aren’t merely “100m sprint guys”, though. They’re going to be almost as fast in a straight line (since many did run track competitively), but they’ll be vastly more agile than your run of the mill pro sprinter who doesn't spend much time doing agility drills, making cuts and generally improving his lateral mobility.

Quote:Quote:

Your statement about guys a lot bigger than him outrunning him can be true, but is there any evidence of this? He is damn fast. A quick youtube search tells me he runs 96m in 10s, so that means he is faster than your example and near top level if the stats are correct.

Ronaldo’s speed has been a topic of discussion for a long time, and much has been written about it.

http://speedendurance.com/2013/11/19/how...-the-100m/

I’m also familiar with the video you’re talking about. Ronaldo did indeed cover 96m in around 10 seconds…from a standing, moving start.






This is unlike the times I mentioned with regard to American Football players like Adrian Peterson (10.33), whose times were measured in competitive track events (no standing, no moving start, full adherence to limits/constraints typical of a sprinter, etc). On a track in a legitimate 100 meter dash where he isn't allowed to get a little jog going to start things off and has to start from a standstill in a proper stance, Ronaldo would not come close to a 10.00. He runs an 11.00 flat, at best. This is fast and wouldn’t look out of place in the NFL, but it is not special by the standards of skill position players in American football.

Quote: (07-01-2014 12:29 AM)NomadofEU Wrote:  

Quote: (06-30-2014 11:02 PM)Excelsior Wrote:  

We're mostly in agreement with regard to everything else, but let us not get carried away here.

The major upside to the American NFL and NBA's overemphasis on raw athleticism relative to Soccer is precisely this: the athleticism of its participants.

Ronaldo is a great athlete, but he is not remarkable by NFL standards. He's got much more aerobic stamina than most NFL players (reasonable considering the nature of soccer as an aerobic sport and American Football as an anaerobic game), but beyond that he's merely good.

His speed, while elite by world soccer standards, is commonplace in the NFL (Ronaldo runs a 100meter in something like 11.0 seconds, a time typical for many skill position players in the NFL who often spend their teens running competititively on the track), and his size is nothing to write home about. There are quite a few players in the national football league who can best Ronaldo in a 100 meter dash despite outweighing him by 50lbs or more (example: Adrian Peterson, owner of a confirmed 10.33 100 meter time), and they do this while maintaining just as much agility (arguably more given American Football's emphasis on short-burst explosion) and also being FAR stronger. There are plenty of NFL linebackers who are just as explosive as Ronaldo despite being MUCH larger. That is what happens when you create a game that values raw athleticism over stamina, technical ability, intelligence and just about everything else.

The NBA is a similar story. There is nobody in soccer with the kind of raw athletic freakishness you'll see from the likes of LeBron James (incredible straight line speed, remarkable agility and explosion, great technical skill, all in a massive 6'8", 250lb package).

I love soccer and there are great athletes participating in the game, but it is unwise to downplay the athleticism we see in the NFL and NBA.

Cool, now let's compare skill and ratio's of people playing each sport:

Adrian Peterson: One of the best players in a sport played by a few million people worldwide

Lebron James: One of the best players in a sport played by a few million people worldwide

Cristiano Ronaldo: One of the best players in a sport played by billions worldwide

No need to get defensive. Nobody here is denying Ronaldo’s raw technical ability or skill. I merely claimed that, when discussing raw athleticism exclusively (speed, height, weight, agility, etc), he’s not elite among NFL or NBA players. This is the natural byproduct of his participating in a sport that does not overemphasize said natural athleticism or anaerobic explosiveness while instead prioritizing intelligence, aerobic stamina and technical ability.

Basketball and gridiron football are played by more than “a few million” people worldwide, and you know that. Neither sport approaches the global reach and popularity that soccer has, but let us not get carried away. You don’t need to intentionally downplay the popularity of either of those sports in order to make a point.