Could NFL players hold their own in a game of Rugby?

[CoMoChief]

If you got a bunch of NFL badasses and taught them how to play Rugby do you think they could pick the game up quickly and do you think they'd eventually become dominant against other current competition? I know you have to be made of steel and tough as nails to play the sport and it's ridiculously physically demanding etc.

Or do you think they'd get roughed up too much since they're no pads etc...

Thoughts?

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by Bowser

This is a pretty wicked shot, though

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-JC6CFbeklT..._collision.gif

NFL safeties do that all the time, at least before the rule changes

not trying to insult rugby players, they are some tough mofos

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by Bowser

This is a pretty wicked shot, though

Not rugby. Thats afl which is NOTHING like rugby.

[MahiMike]

Only the linebackers would do well. The rest would be looking for their armor. As soon as they got a hangnail, they would want medical attention. Rugby guys are badass.

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

Listen dipshit, I could train for 50 years and never be able to run a 4.3 forty. I can't make my physical frame bigger than it is. Yes, I could get stronger, but there is a genetic limit to that. I can however train to increase my endurance to the level I could have more than enough endurance to play an entire game of rugby.

I laugh at your constant harping about ball skills. 80% of the ball skills in rugby are short laterals to teammates. Most Americans learn that skill their first couple if years playing football in their backyards.

. Man yep endurance isnt genetic at all. You have no idea what you are talking about bro.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

LMFAO. Ok dude. Ive played rugby, afl and and gridiron. Im telling you, that your shitty team you played in because yall couldnt get on the football team isnt a good gauge of rugby talent.

I won't dispute that the U-M team was shitty (hell I was on the team for ****'s sake) but there was only the one ex-football player. The rest of the team was almost entirely made up of ex-pats who grew up playing rugby.

Rugby players are athletes, that is not a question. They just aren't even close to the level of NFL,NBA,NHL players. Asserting otherwise is simply ridiculous.

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Absolutely. He would be AVERAGE. Which tells you that rugby players are about at the level of 2nd tier college athletes. Not NBA,NHL,NFL caliber or even close.

Hyperbole. I dont agree in the slightest. Sorry bro.

[PornChief]

[QUOTE=Bowser;10768660
youre-doing-it-wrong-australia.[/QUOTE]
not Australian, you're doing it wrong.

The reason you don't see players from one game in the other is they have completely different skill sets. There's aussies in the NFL, mostly punters and that kid that plays NT somewhere, I forget his name.
Rugby League isn't Rugby, Rugby's for fat poofs.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

Hyperbole. I dont agree in the slightest. Sorry bro.

Sorry man, but your just dead wrong on this. I'm a fan of rugby but I'm also a realist.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

. Man yep endurance isnt genetic at all. You have no idea what you are talking about bro.

You're right nobody can train and significantly increase their endurance. That's why there are only about 20 contestants in the Boston Marathon each year.

[AustinChief]

Oh and just to be clear. Aussie football is reeruned. There is absolutely nothing of redeeming value about it and I'm certain that the players all bugger each other after the matches. That sport is a complete joke.

[beach tribe]

Go Chiefs!! That Red N Gold Baby!!

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

I won't dispute that the U-M team was shitty (hell I was on the team for ****'s sake) but there was only the one ex-football player. The rest of the team was almost entirely made up of ex-pats who grew up playing rugby.

Rugby players are athletes, that is not a question. They just aren't even close to the level of NFL,NBA,NHL players. Asserting otherwise is simply ridiculous.

Judging by this post, what you consider to make one an athlete is different to myself. I cant argue with you if we aren't speaking the same language. Look dude you have no idea what real rugby is. In nsw australia there is something like 20 divisions from proffesional down. Your division would have been very close to the bottom. There is an enormous jump between the bottom and proffesional. Just as there would be 3rd division football and nfl. Ask anyone from a country whose rugby standards are internationally competitive. Ask them what they think of rugby players. Are nfl players on the reg maybe slighty more athletic? Maybe a small bit. Bit hey with the US population thats not surprising. There is a great pool to choose from compared to say an australia. Having said that anyone who thinks a nfl player walks onto a rugby field and destroys is fooling themselves. These are professional athletes selected from ultra competitive systems. They are athletic as ****.

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by PornChief

not Australian, you're doing it wrong.

The reason you don't see players from one game in the other is they have completely different skill sets. There's aussies in the NFL, mostly punters and that kid that plays NT somewhere, I forget his name.
Rugby League isn't Rugby, Rugby's for fat poofs.

Oh look a sane person.

[beach tribe]

Let's take notice that there are about 20 white guys on that field.
And then ponder this question again.

[Bowser]

I know exactly two things about rugby - 1) jack, and 2) shit. But I'm pretty sure that some of those players would make fine running backs, receivers, and safeties if given the chance from the very little of rugby I've seen.