Football vs. American "Football"?

[OZZYGT]

*Before anything, I wanna let everyone know that I really didn't know where to place this thread; the Soccer forum is rarely frequented by Americans who love their football and the Football forum is also not frequented by a lot of die hard soccer fans...if the mods feel that this belongs somewhere else, please feel free to move the thread.*

The main purpose of the thread, is to review both sports, give opinions about both sports and also how you feel about The United States being so apart from the rest of the world in the love for soccer, preferably and originally known as the real Football.

To avoid confusion, let's call football soccer and American (foot)ball....football.

---------------------------------------


- My first point is: why is American Football even called "football?

I understand that the game starts with a kick off and the kick also takes place at the beginning of every quarter, on turnovers and when the coach decides to go for a 3-point goal kick rather than a fourth attempt to a play. But that's it. The rest of the game is played using mostly hands, everyone knows that.
And what I find more annoying is that here, not only handball is called football, but the original football is called SOCCER!!! To me, that's offensive, but anyway, let's continue.

- My second thought about this topic is: the strong dis likeness of Americans towards soccer.

Football was created here in the USA, as well as Baseball, Basketball and Hockey (I think?) and that I think is the main reason of why Americans love football so much. I would feel proud too, but my question is, why look at soccer with disdain? I've met people here who classify soccer as a "boring" sport. I nearly dropped dead the first time I heard that, but then I thought, "well, they think that way because they probably never played it or never got used to it. They don't know how hard it is for one to kick the ball properly or make successful plays, let's not even mention making goals."

Then I thought the same about us, most people outside the US think that football is as boring as traffic jam, because they stop every 2 seconds, there's rarely any fluid movement throughout the whole game and almost every play looks the same. But hey that's because we really don't understand the game and we're really not interested in learning it either. Honestly, It looks complicated as hell.

But as time went by, I met friends who were really into Football and one of them explained me really well the rules and plays of the game. Until then I was able to watch an entire football game. I have to be honest, I kinda liked it, but it still wasn't as exciting as watching a soccer game, probably because I wasn't much of a Giant fan at the moment, but even if I was big fan of them, I would have still preferred to see a play on any match of the UEFA Champions League.

Then I learnt about the role of football in the American culture. I learnt about tailgating and also about The Super Bowl. Probably the biggest event in the US, kinda like The Euro Cup, and The final match of the Champions League in Europe and The Copa America with Copa Libertadores in Latin America as well.

But I still didn't understand why The USA has to be so isolated from the rest of the world. Why? I mean, even in High School, in gym class, the teacher rarely put us to play soccer in the summer, let's not even mention in winter. It was all about Basketball (nothing wrong with it because I love it), Football, Volleyball, and even Hockey on a basketball court

So I thought, maybe they just want to be like that, are they afraid that the football values might be lost if they got more into soccer?
The only time that I see Americans excited about soccer is when I see little kids on soccer leagues...or sometimes girls.

It doesn't take an Albert Einstein to realize that soccer is the most popular sport in the world, and it's not because we haven't discovered American football yet. And it's surprising to me, that the USA, being a country related in most international affairs and events, doesn't join everyone else like they should on soccer.
Look at World Cup for instance. Countries like Germany, Italy, Argentina, Brazil, England, France are the best ones, because they can afford to make soccer programs for children and build facilities to play on. Although I think some people in Brazil see soccer as an escape to poverty, but the US, they could get the best player on the world if they could. Just like many rich companies sponsor small football, baseball and basketball teams, they could do the same for soccer.

Is it a thinking of "We're the US and we're different from the rest of the world" what sets them apart?


Seriously, soccer is the best sport I have ever played/watched and I know I'm not the only one that thinks that way. Just look at the soccer forum and Football forum on this web site:

• Football forum: 380 threads made but who are the members who constantly post there? JohnBM01, FoolKiller, M5Power, Max Powers, Zrow, Omnis and Danoff. And the combined posts between the Super Bowl thread and the NFL general discussion is no more than 235 posts.
  
• Whereas the Soccer forum: 123 threads made but the number of post in the World Cup thread alone is nearly 1,700! and let's not count how many members post in it.

To my American friends: How do you guys feel about this? why are most of you reluctant to get into soccer?

To everyone else: Do you agree with what I say and feel? and how do you feel about American..erm...football?



I'll make some pros and cons comparing both sports:

World Football

- Pros:

1. The game moves faster.
2. Almost no time wasted because of fouls or "In between" plays.
3. If time is wasted, it is added to the overtime after the 90 Minutes
4. Only 2 parts.
5. On important desicive games, if the game is tied by 90 minutes and overtime, Extra time is given, if score persists, the winner is decided by penalty kicks.
6. Penalties are the best thing ever.
7. Scoring is harder, threfore goals are celebrated better.
8. You can play it with anything that looks decently small and round, and it's not too heavy.
9. Yelling "GOOOOOOAALLLL" is better than "Yes! that's what I'm taking about"....

- Cons:

1. Sometimes it's too tiring, and you have no resting time until half time or the end of the match.
2. Players can be too individualistic.
3. You have no head protection, some players wear some bands but that's it doesn't help you if you want to hit the ball with your head.
4. Once you're part of the defensive barrier on a free kick, only God can protect your face.

American Football

- Pros:

1. More resting time due to stops made in the game.
2. It's more of a "teamwork".
3. Inportant plays can be reviewd by referees on limited ocassions, often called "Challenging"
4. Hard tackiling a player is awesome.
5. Plays are carefully planned and supervised by the coching staff while in the game.
6. Headphones with mircophones are legal for communication.
7. Interceptions are also awesome.
8. The clock is stopped in numerous ocassions. Although that can hurt you if you're the defending team.

Cons:

1. Way too many interruptions in the game that can take a mommentum away. It also makes the game more boring IMO
2. Challenging shouldn't be allowed, a game is a game and mistakes happen, and that is part of any game.
3. It's far more complex than soccer, more rules, and harder to understand to people who are unfamiliar with the sport.
4. The clock is stopped too much, 1 minute can take half hour to pass.
5. The shape of thre football makes the bouncing trickier to players.
6. Players are not as individuals as they should be.
7. Uniforms are ugly and it looks even uglier when a regular person is wearing them with casual clothes.
8. Way too much equipment on top of your upper body, I've worn it and It feels awful, ackward and uncomfortable.

So? what do you all think?

 

[Loon]

originally posted by Il Padrino
- My first point is: why is American Football even called "football?

I understand that the game starts with a kick off and the kick also takes place at the beginning of every quarter, on turnovers and when the coach decides to go for a 3-point goal kick rather than a fourth attempt to a play. But that's it. The rest of the game is played using mostly hands, everyone knows that.

I have no answer to your first point, honestly it seems weird to me also.

Secondly there isn't a kickoff at the beginning of every quarter, just at the beginning and at halftime. Neither is there a kickoff when the ball is turned over.

originally posted by Il Padrino
Football was created here in the USA, as well as Baseball, Basketball and Hockey (I think?)

I think the Canadians came up with hockey.

I myself am a big football fan (watching the wildcard games right now), I like it mostly because of action- Hard hits, big plays, and rivalries. Its also a very strategic game, lots of planning goes into these games, watching films of how other teams play and intense training.

I have nothing against soccer it seems like a pretty fun game to play and watch. I don't play it because its to much running for an overweight guy like me and don't watch it because I don't have ESPN or any other channels that show it.

originally posted by Il Padrino
Way too much equipment on top of your upper body, I've worn it and It feels awful, ackward and uncomfortable.

I'd rather were some equipment than nothing at all in a sport like football.

 

[Evolution.]

Who cares?

/thread

I have an opinion, but really, what is the point in arguing over something as stupid as this? I've seen this over and over again, and the same points are resurrected, over and over again also.

Nobody cares about technicalities, and you know it. It all really boils down to which game you think is more fun. Arguing about the two simply because they share a similar name is pretty stupid IMO. But then again, that's just my 2 cents.

Not to mention someone will end up dragging out the "Rugby > Football" argument.

Edit: And this wasn't meant to be offensive. I just think there are more important things that could be discussed than 2 sports that share a similar name.

 

[sn00pie]

Hey but what about rugby!

Not to mention someone will end up dragging out the "Rugby > Football" argument.

 

[Speedy Samurai]

I just think there are more important things that could be discussed than 2 sports that share a similar name.

There are indeed more important things that can be discussed, but how often do these discussions happen?

I think football (soccer) is popular around the world, for the most part, because it is intensely inexpensive to play. Find something round.. then kick it. Even kids from the poor parts of the world can do this. This is similar to basketball in the states (find something bouncy... then bounce it), and baseball in central america (find something small.. and hit it with a stick).

Football, and Ice Hockey for that matter, are expensive to get into and maintain. Often the parents are well off and can afford the expenses. Add to this the outrageous treatment that college football gets and you can see why the NFL is as popular as it is in the US.

edit: could you do something about your last poll option? the double negative could confuse people. Right now your question means 'I really care about both of them'...

 

[Kylehnat]

The only reason that we even have this debate is because these two sports have the same name. They're completely different sports, with completely different plays and strategies. Whenever this debate comes up, I roll my eyes, as it's no different than arguing over whether cricket is better than water polo.

Now my views: American football kicks ass. Yes, it takes a bit of patience to learn the game, but it's the same for any sport. Not enough continuous action? Doesn't matter. Though the clock may run while nobody is doing a damn thing, the anticipation of what might happen next is what makes it exciting. For that matter, during a 3 hour baseball game, the ball may only be in play for 5 minutes total, but the game itself can be immensely entertaining. I guess we Yanks like sports in which the game iself is rarely in play.

Soccer: The reason we don't like soccer on this side of the pond is that there is no good soccer over here to watch. The MLS features sub-professionals playing with little passion in front of a high-school sized crowd. It is boring because unlike in the NFL and MLB, the best players in the world are not playing for us to see. When an American soccer game is on TV, I can't change the channel fast enough. That said, I was glued to the World Cup. That was good, entertaining soccer, because the players actually had skill, and played with as much passion as human beings can. That, and the fans actually cared, which is a big plus.

 

[Zrow]

MachOne - what's the point of talking about anything on the forum? I could say "who cares" to almost any topic in the Rumble Strip.


I actually watch American football, so that's what I picked. And, uh...

GO RAVENS!

 

[fyfee]

What about Aussie Rules Football? Its tougher, faster, theres more skill involved and its just an awesome game all around.

Too bad theres only a few minor leagues in other countries around the world. I think the rest of the world would like it alot.

 

[YSSMAN]

I did vote here as a "draw," because I watch both sports as much as I can when they are on. However I find it very hard to really say that one in particular is "outstandingly better" than the other, but I think "enjoyable" is a word that can get thrown around a bit more.

To me, American Football is probably my favorite sport right next to NASCAR racing (Yeah, I'm an American, right?). Year after year, I just can't wait for the season to start, and once it gets going, you hope that it never ends. Although this year I have been far more active in following the various teams, I like to pick three or four to follow closely for the whole season, and then narrow it down when the playoffs come around.

I think that what it comes down to, at least here in America, is that it is a distinctively American sport, despite the fact that it combines a lot of things from other sports around the world. The city-to-city rivalries are awesome (Detroit/Chicago, NYG/Dallas, Cincinnati/Pittsburgh, etc), the player-to-player rivalries are classic (Farve/Manning, Barber/Barber, T.O/everyone), there is just so much to get excited about.

Although I think people who are not experienced enough with American football may find it boring, I find the pacing to be on-target with what I like. Good games are fast paced, varied between air and ground games, however they do not have to be high-scoring to be worth watching. One of the best games in recent memory was indeed the Detroit/Dallas game two weeks ago, and although I was pissed at my home team (Detroit, thanks for dropping 1st round pick #1!!!), it was a good game overall.

---

As for Soccer, I like it too, and it is "as good as" American football, however it isn't always my favorite. With soccer, I have to be "in the mood," or one of my favorite teams have to be playing (Manchester, Chelsea, Madrid) for me to really be into it. I wouldn't touch the MLS with a ten-foot pole, as it does come off as an over-glorified high-school soccer match... And I've seen some good high-school soccer games (My HS won the state champs in 2005).

...As for the World Cup, I watched every game I possibly could. I even got some people at work hooked on Soccer. You get tied up in the national emotions there, and most of us were pretty pissed-off at the poor attempt given by our national team, thus we began to root for "home country," or where our ancestors came from. I know I was rooting for England, Germany, and the Netherlands (home country for me), but we all came up short.

---

I like both sports a lot, and I will watch both when they are on. But if I had to pick one with a gun to my head, I'd probably pick American football, no matter how much I may love players like Beckham and Klose.

BTW: Do they even show the Bundesliga in America?

 

[Casio]

What about Aussie Rules Football? Its tougher, faster, theres more skill involved and its just an awesome game all around

Totally agree. AFL is the best sport ever.

I'm a general sports freak and I'll watch both. I go to the local soccer game almost every week to watch the Melbourne Victory, and I will add, that being there is much more exciting then watching it on TV. I'll rarely watch a soccer match on TV unless it's something really worth watching.

However, I can understand how some people may think it's boring. I've been to a couple of 0-0 matches where jack all has happened, and yeah, it is pretty boring. But as Kylehnat said, the anticipation of what might happen next still makes it somewhat exciting.

On the NFL side, I'll watch that too. I've adopted the Dolphins for no particular reason other then I always picked them on 'NFL Sports-Talk Football' on Sega Genesis, and catch a few games on FOX and ESPN every now and again.

I think of NFL in the same vein as cricket. In cricket, half of the time the ball just goes past the batsmen and nothing happens, or blocks the ball and gets a quick single. In NFL half the time, nothing really happens because the ball carrier gets tackled 1 yard into his run. But I'm compelled to watch it because I don't want to miss something.

Personally, I think both are good examples of competitive sport. Give me either of these over Netball anyday.

Although Aussie Rules Footy is still #1....

 

[fatman_5050]

BTW: Do they even show the Bundesliga in America?

There are a few Bundesliga games broadcast on GolTV if you have it.

Personally I prefer football/soccer over NFL football, there seems to be too much attention payed to guys like T.O. who always seem to be complaining about something. I also like college football better than the NFL, there seems to be more passion for the game in the players while they are in college.

 

[OZZYGT]

*peanuts*

While I understand that you really don't care about discussing this matter, I just can't believe how your brain can be so small? No really...
The sole purpose of the thread was NOT to discuss why American football is called football. The point here my silly friend, was to discuss WHY Americans in general are not into soccer as the rest of the world? Is it the ego? the patriotism? ....For more info, READ THE FIRST POST. Thank You.
And you, haven't come up with the most interesting threads either.....my silly friend.

As for Soccer, I like it too, and it is "as good as" American football, however it isn't always my favorite. With soccer, I have to be "in the mood,"

You see, this is what I'm talking about. I, in order to watch A.Football, Tennis, Volleyball, have to be in the mood for it. I once in a while say, Go Giants! because I live in NY, but do I really care about them? Naahhh....

I mean, you really have to see the drastic change when you first live in one country and then you move here. It's like...wow.
Believe me, I'd really like to see this country more into football.
What about when the 1994 World Cup took place here, I think FIFA did it because they wanted to promote soccer in this country, but it didn't really make any change at all....

 

[kikie]

I really don't care about none of them.

 

[Pupik]

I can watch soccer here and there, but it's not terribly exciting for me to watch as American Football. I feel that in soccer, the game is built on forcing errors and strategy, so there's little tangible evidence to the casual watcher that anything is gained or lost. In American football, everything is quantified and recorded. There's a lot of pausing in the game, lots more compared to any other sport, except baseball. You can tell what's going on in the game at any time.

In the end many Americans feel soccer is like ice hockey, lots of build-up for very little scoring action. One thing I can appreciate about it is that there's no stopping the match, except for half-time. It's a lot like F1 racing, you have to watch, or you'll miss something. I also like the fact that no commercials interrupt the match...why can't Grand Prix racing coverage be like that?

With all that said, Rugby and Australian Rules Soccer are far more interesting to watch, but they're nearly impossible to see on TV here anymore. It's like the excitement and buildup of both American and International football put together.

On the NFL side, I'll watch that too. I've adopted the Dolphins for no particular reason other then I always picked them on 'NFL Sports-Talk Football' on Sega Genesis, and catch a few games on FOX and ESPN every now and again.

Yay! An unlikely Dol-fan...you realize The Miami Dolphins are bad at being bad, but not good enough to be good, either. We're tragically average in the past 6 years!

 

[Cap'n Jack]

I voted for neither. I personally thing AFL is much better to play and watch.

 

[ExigeEvan]

I've tried watching American Football. I have honestly. But it's like trying to watch NASCAR. you can watch for 15 minutes and nothing will happen, AT ALL! The only time I get excited watching NFL is when they kick the ball down field and the opposition runs back up teh field with a line of blockers in front if the carrier. I'm just waiting for someone to get slaughtered... But it doesn't happen

Yes, there can be some really boring World Football and I'm not adverse to turning over out of boredom, but that's usually only when it's two lower teams playing. I don't recall who I've seen play NFL, but when I check online to see how they're doing they tend to be fairly high up.

Another point. Why are there so many guys in a American Football squad? Can't people be trained in attack and defense!? Soccer players can do it, rugby players can do it, hockey players can do it, basketball players can do it. Why can't American Footballers?

- My first point is: why is American Football even called "football?

Always puzzled me aswell. If they were perhaps allowed to kick the ball while it is on the ground that would be something. And wasn't it something like the first drop goal was scored in 20 years a few months ago? WTF!?


But my biggest problem with American Football is when the Super Bowl champions are given rings saying "World Champions". Come on, how far up your own arse do you have to be to have that!?

Oh and um

I'd rather were some equipment than nothing at all in a sport like football.

Isn't a bit of foam strapped round your chest and a bit on your head enough? Works for rugby players

[Off Topic]

Totally agree. AFL is the best sport ever.

Nuh uh! Rugby is. But AFL is pretty good, but an oval pitch!? Why don't you all just run round on your hands!
Yes I know it's because there's an abundance of cricket ovals in Aus.

Who cares?

/thread

I have an opinion, but really, what is the point in arguing over something as stupid as this? I've seen this over and over again, and the same points are resurrected, over and over again also.

Why discuss religion so much? I've never seen anyone converted or reject their religion because of the debates.

Hey but what about rugby!

[Borat]High Five[/Borat]

 

[Famine]

Football was created here in the USA

Yep.

as well as Baseball

Nope - Britain.

Basketball

Yep - but invented by a Canadian.

and Hockey

Nope - Canadian, of French and Dutch origins. Presuming you mean "ice hockey" and not "field hockey".

Other US-invented sports include netball, softball, volleyball and beach volleyball and street hockey.

 

[Jay]

I voted for neither. I personally thing AFL is much better to play and watch.

I agree, AFL is the best of the footballs but I don't like that all that much either.

 

[Barracuda]

I didnt read most of what you said but let me get one thing straight. its the die hard american football fans that say "soccers for pansies, its gay, soccer sucks, blah blah blah" its mostly the southern people.

I grew up in new hampshire in a small town that couldn't pay for an american football team so soccer was the major sport. mostly everybody played it, everyone loved it, and everyone watched it. i started playing it when i was 5 and played every year up until my parents moved me to florida ( no offense but the only people in the south that are good at soccer are the cubans and mexicans and its way too frikin hot all the time even in the winter) everyones friday night was going to the junior varsity and varsity soccer games. I also enjoy watching mls games with the new england revolution.

all im saying is dont say that americans have a strong dislikeness for soccer. its truly mostly the southern americans who dont like it because i am sure as hell that the northeast is really big into soccer and all the stupid rednecks i have to listen to all the time definitley hate soccer. id say america is more of a half and half on soccer

I do watch football and i dont really seem how you guys find it boring. i dont know who you were watching but its always and interesting game with the new england patriots (my team) the players are pretty individual depending on how good they are. Tom brady is basically known by everybody because he is one of the best, if not the best, quarterback in the league. I think to be able to watch football you have to be watching your team. I could never sit down and watch say the colts against the bears. you have to take pride in your from with your teams ( boston red sox, boston celtics, new england patriots, new england revolution, boston bruins ) like you guys have your favorite soccer team and whatever other sports you watch

 

[Speedy Samurai]

Another point. Why are there so many guys in a American Football squad? Can't people be trained in attack and defense!? Soccer players can do it, rugby players can do it, hockey players can do it, basketball players can do it. Why can't American Footballers?

You seem not to understand the nuances of the sports you just listed. In American Football, there is offense, defense, and special teams. They need to be divided up. On every single play every person on the field is engaged with another person on the field. You would tire very quickly if you never got to rest, especially in such a hard hitting game such as american football.

Hockey players are on the ice for a shift (only a shift) and are expected to play offense and defense, however, there is quite a difference between offense and defensive hockey. A great offensive forward can be a defenseive liability and that is why the third and fourth lines exist to allow the offensive players to rest while the defensive minded players take to the ice to defend against the other teams offensive players. Hockey shifts are fast, lasting only for a minute (and that can be stretching it).

Compare this with soccer where some players can just walk around the pitch for a bit until the ball comes to them or until an opportunity finally presents itself.

I think the NFL does a great job of parity so each game is exciting to watch and anyone can win (unless you're the Raiders). However, with all the money flying around in professional soccer, it seems there is no rhyme or reason and the New York Yankees of the soccer world can kill competition and by thier championships, which doesn't necessarily make watching the games that exciting.

I love World Cup Soccer! The best players from each country battling for national pride.

 

[ExigeEvan]

You seem not to understand the nuances of the sports you just listed. In American Football, there is offense, defense, and special teams. They need to be divided up. On every single play every person on the field is engaged with another person on the field. You would tire very quickly if you never got to rest, especially in such a hard hitting game such as american football.

Sure they're all engaged in every play. But they also are only active for very brief moments, and then they get a minute or two rest.

If a professional athlete can't handle that then they should be putting in more training.

I know, I know, I shouldn't start comparing American football to rugby but this is a valid point. Rugby players are always active, everyone moves up and down the field with the ball (except the full back perhaps) and it's also a physical game. They have one proper break in an 80 minute game, though there are brief breaks while scrums/line outs/penalties etc are organised.

Compare this with soccer where some players can just walk around the pitch for a bit until the ball comes to them or until an opportunity finally presents itself.

I'm amazed how you can be so scathing of soccer players when some American Footballers just stand and use predominantly their weight to simply block the opposition and may never hold the ball in open play in their entire career.

I think the NFL does a great job of parity so each game is exciting to watch and anyone can win (unless you're the Raiders). However, with all the money flying around in professional soccer, it seems there is no rhyme or reason and the New York Yankees of the soccer world can kill competition and by thier championships, which doesn't necessarily make watching the games that exciting.

Can we delve deeper into what makes American Football exciting.

Some people have already mentioned it's the anticipation of a great play that keeps them excited. Which is fair enough, the same stands for soccer as the build up play is often very important.

But from what I've seen watching American football, you can wait one hell of a long time before anything does happen that is even slightly as exciting as a good soccer shot saved by the goal keeper.

Soccer can be extremely frustrating as long build up play can break down due to a misplaced past or a good tackle, but watching a man run into a line of 20 stone men who represent brick walls only to gain a yard must be even more frustrating.

 

[Famine]

You seem not to understand the nuances of the sports you just listed.

Compare this with soccer where some players can just walk around the pitch for a bit until the ball comes to them or until an opportunity finally presents itself.

Given this later statement, you've just hit the irony zone...

Let's elaborate:

In American Football, there is offense, defense, and special teams. They need to be divided up.

Hockey players are on the ice for a shift (only a shift) and are expected to play offense and defense, however, there is quite a difference between offense and defensive hockey.

All you seem to be concerned about - or maybe it's just the sports you mention - is offense and defense. You're an attacking player, trying to score, or a defending player, trying to stop the opposition from scoring.

In football and hockey (soccer and field hockey) there's another area of the pitch - midfield. The job of a midfielder is to link the defence and attack together. They go forwards when the play is attacking, and they drop back and defend when not. A hockey midfielder on the pitch for a full match can reasonably expect to cover 6 miles. A football midfielder even more - and football has no rolling substitutions - when a guy is replaced he cannot go back onto the pitch, and in both sports a maximum of 3 substitutes can be used (though in hockey rolling substitutions are permissible). A midfielder has a man or zone to mark every bit as much as the defenders do, but with the additional responsibility of setting up the attacks too.

You would tire very quickly if you never got to rest, especially in such a hard hitting game such as american football.

Try running (and I mean running, not jogging) 6 miles over 70 minutes, with a 5 minute rest in the middle. See how tired you get.

Professional sportsmen are paid for their physical prowess. Getting tired is expected - and if any of my players aren't tired at the end of a hockey match, they haven't tried hard enough and don't get picked next week.

 

[Speedy Samurai]

While I agree with your points, and will admit to a lack of knowledge of Rugby, although I do know it is very fast and physical, I will concede your point about midfield. But are the defenders running at near full speed for the entire game? and are the forwards running full out when the ball is booted back towards their goal? Alot of football is set up for a strike and plays can develop slowly. Football, American Football, Rugby, and Hockey are fast sports. Very fast. Hockey players get to sit on the bench before they are put out for a shift again. That's their rest. American Football players will sit out while the other unit is on the field (although some players play special teams as well), that is their rest. Football players will take breathers on the pitch when the ball is not near them in play, and then when the play develops, the player engages again.

I'm amazed how you can be so scathing of soccer players when some American Footballers just stand and use predominantly their weight to simply block the opposition and may never hold the ball in open play in their entire career.

I wouldn't say I was scathing towards soccer players. Perhaps you're quick to take offense

While I agree a good many offensive lineman are somewhat out of shape. You could try blocking a 300lb man from getting past you for down after down after down. An offensive lineman doing his job properly, will have to block said 300lber for the length of the field. If he does his job poorly, he gets to sit off. I compare the lumbering 300lb lineman with Sumo players. The object is to push the other guy off, the bigger you are, the more weight you can bring to bear and the harder you are to push off.

Each sport requires a different kind of athlete in order to fulfill its purpose. I wouldn't use a football striker to shoot hoops and go for slam dunks, and I wouldn't use an American football offensive lineman to line up in a rugby scrum.

 

[Diego440]

and then there's the Penalty Killers.

But having lived both in the US and in Europe, I can say I enjoy both sports. I've been to about six different American Football matches and they were all awesome, and I've been to about three soccer matches. Both were quite different, both in the gameplay (obviously) but also in the spectator attitude. While soccer fans tend to be more aggressive, American football fans are usually more easy going... or at least that's what I saw in the games I went to.

As to field hockey and ice hockey, while field hockey is very demanding, I see it as more or less 'crouching lacrosse'. I much prefer ice hockey both for playing and for watching.

But I'll agree with Speedy's point in the fact that NFL players are pretty centered in their positions. While the quarterback is the only hybrid who can rush and or throw passes, most of the other players tend to stick to their positions pretty well and not try to play some other position. The only exception other than the quarterbac are certain special teams runners, who sometimes double as offensive players and wide receivers.

NFL players get their rest in-between plays, but it rarely means a full rest. They're usually too worked up to get a decent minute of rest and only have halftime to do so. While soccer players rest whenever the ball is not on their side of the field.

 

[Famine]

While I agree with your points, and will admit to a lack of knowledge of Rugby, although I do know it is very fast and physical, I will concede your point about midfield. But are the defenders running at near full speed for the entire game? and are the forwards running full out when the ball is booted back towards their goal? Alot of football is set up for a strike and plays can develop slowly. Football, American Football, Rugby, and Hockey are fast sports. Very fast. Hockey players get to sit on the bench before they are put out for a shift again. That's their rest. American Football players will sit out while the other unit is on the field (although some players play special teams as well), that is their rest. Football players will take breathers on the pitch when the ball is not near them in play, and then when the play develops, the player engages again.

Some, maybe. But a walking player is a player who isn't thinking ahead. If you aren't on the ball you should be either trying to get it back or trying to get into a position where you can help advance play - dragging the poor sod who's supposed to be marking you all over the shop.

I covered about a mile in 15 minutes yesterday, mainly running into spaces to make myself available, but only touched the ball three times - one of them to score. I have a midfielder who I really should fit a pedometer to because I've never seen him stationary.

A striker should always be running into spaces, especially from dead-ball situations. A defender should always be running to close those spaces. A midfielder should always be running full-stop.


In football you need to cover 990 man-minutes (90 minute game, 11 men on the pitch) over a maximum of 15 players - that's an average of 66 minutes running per player - with no player who is removed allowed to return to the pitch. In hockey it's 770 man-minutes (70 minute game, 11 men on the pitch) over a maximum of 15 players, an average of 51 minutes per player - and I personally try to not let any single player have less than 30 minutes on the pitch. American football has 660 man-minutes (60 minute game, 11 men on the pitch) over a maximum of 46 players, with rolling substitutions, and a complete stop of play every time someone drops the damn thing or every 30 seconds - an average of 14 minutes per player.

How much "game" does the average American football player see each match?

 

[Diego440]

what about referee stoppages?

 

[Famine]

what about referee stoppages?

What about them?

 

[Diego440]

What about them?

soccer players usually rest with referee stoppages... so they're not running full strength during that time... which means they get the rest. And soccer has tons of referee stoppages-

I've honestly seen more exhaustion cases coming from american football than from soccer.

 

[ExigeEvan]

I wouldn't say I was scathing towards soccer players. Perhaps you're quick to take offense

I'm Welsh, of course I am. However, to claim any professional athlete has the opportunity to just "walk around abit" is quite insulting. Atleast in the sports I follow.

While I agree a good many offensive lineman are somewhat out of shape. You could try blocking a 300lb man from getting past you for down after down after down. An offensive lineman doing his job properly, will have to block said 300lber for the length of the field. If he does his job poorly, he gets to sit off. I compare the lumbering 300lb lineman with Sumo players. The object is to push the other guy off, the bigger you are, the more weight you can bring to bear and the harder you are to push off.

Believe it or not but I do actually train with a 300lb (6ft 7, obese. enough said) guy in rugby. And yes it is difficult and the rules of American football don't make it any easier (only block with pushing right?) but at only 155lb (almost half his weight) I am capable of stopping him, admittedly in a tackling role (so not technically legal in AF). However, it do imagine a 200lb or 250lb man should be able to do it.

soccer players usually rest with referee stoppages... so they're not running full strength during that time... which means they get the rest. And soccer has tons of referee stoppages-

In Spanish football perhaps

I've honestly seen more exhaustion cases coming from american football than from soccer.

That simply brings up the argument of fitness levels.

 

[Famine]

soccer players usually rest with referee stoppages... so they're not running full strength during that time... which means they get the rest. And soccer has tons of referee stoppages

Though in football (soccer), any referee stoppages are added on to the end of the half - called "injury time" or "stoppage time".

What I see during free-kicks (any time the referee stops play and awards a free kick to one side) is players moving around to create space for the player on the ball to pass to them, and other players moving around to close them down so that can't happen.

I've honestly seen more exhaustion cases coming from american football than from soccer.

And that's nothing to do with a bunch of fat knackers wearing 150lb of body armour being asked to do some exercise?


I'm just curious how much of a game an average American Footballer sees, and how much distance they travel during it.