I'm from Ireland and play rugby at a level below professional rugby. We had 3 Americans try out for our team (they came to Ireland to study medicine as its so much cheaper than back home). One guy played d2 linebacker, another played d2 tightend (not sure if d2 is a good level or not but the guys were built and they were athletes so i assume its a good level) and the last lad played as a safety in college. They were hardy lads who didn't back down and were happy to smash faces but they were fucked after 15 seconds of action. They had no muscular endurance as the ball could be in play for 2 to 3 mins without break. They were also soft cocks when it came to posts match pints but after a lot of practice they massively upped their drinking game.
This has always been my experience. Besides a few cases, anytime a football player stepped on the pitch, even for just practice, they hardly last. If they make it through a practice (and most don't) it's def the only one they show up for lol.
Brilliant mate. We used to play at the end of the season a charity game between our local American Football team & our club. One match of each code. Every week crucified them at both codes. They were Fannie’s really as most of our lads were hardened drinkers & smokers 😂😂😂😂
Average NFL Match - 40 tackles per team, run about 1 mile, about 11min actual play time Average Rugby Match - 100 tackles per team, run about 6 miles, 80min of play (mostly continuous) In the recent New Zealand vs Ireland world cup match, New Zealand made almost as many tackles IN THE LAST 4min (37) as the average NFL team would make for an entire game. Just because football players do one or a small subset of the total skills required to play the sport doesn't mean they are more "specialized" at those skills. Except maybe the QB Pass, each rugby player/position has to be as "specialized" as any football player/position (easily listed) except they also have to be almost as good at every other skill where football players can just "nope" out of those skills. AKA just because O-line only blocks doesn't mean that's more "specialized" then the skills it takes the tight five to Scrum/Lineout/Ruck/Maul... yes, I cherry-picked that example but it's the same if you run through the positions and compare the skillsets (again, the QB pass being the exception).
Rugby players run and tackle more but I would bet football players are exerting more effort in burst because of stoppages. I’d be curious to see accelerometer data of who has a high average speed and average force per collision. I think generally football players are moving faster and consequently colliding at faster speeds. Whereas rugby because it’s 80 minutes of straight play there ends up being a lot of jogging especially toward the 2nd half. I think rugby requires a lot more steady state endurance than football.
@@DPMixing there have been some data gathering on it and football player impact (speed and force of collision) is higher, but when you account for the pads, it's not clear that the impact from either sport on the player is much different. Watch or play rugby, they might be jogging off the ball but it's full tilt otherwise.
Agreed that (for the most part) rugby players could not play in the NFL, but that is not due to a lack of skill but more because of how specialized NFL player skill sets are. Rugby players do everything on the field where as football players have one job that they do incredibly well.
@@cesco1990I’m not taking a side on his comment about which players could play the other sport better but he’s 100% correct on the specialization of positions. Huge monster ass dudes who really don’t have to be very fast at all vs tiny guys who have to be super fast. Or then you have a kicker who literally does nothing but kick. In rugby everyone is essentially a linebacker/running back in American football terms.
Exactly, that, & the issue of stamina ate the main differences. You can't be as big as the biggest guys in nfl in rugby because you wouldn't last am hour
@@HueyPPLongYou are right and wrong at the same time. Absolutely, rugby players can run better than linemen. You are literally like comparing some with 7/10 in all areas to someone with 10/10 in one but 0/10 on the rest. NFL will pick the 10/10 in one area than jack of all trades, master of none. They can always pick another 10/10 on the weak areas of the other player.
@@kurtsudheim825Jonah Lomu, 6’4 ft 270 lbs, comparable position in american football would be WR. Tupou 300lbs RB. Basically each player playing in the center as it would be MLB at top level is at least 250/260. Where you can easly find many, many players even bigger than Jason
The word they’re looking for is “specialization.” All rugby players have to be able to do a little of everything. In football, each player has his own job and that doesn’t change at the professional level.
I think your statement is incorrect. Rugby positions are definitely specialised and have their own unique physical traits and skills that they require. Yes, all rugby players have to know how to tackle, pass and catch, just like all NFL players know how to carry the ball, block and tackle. It’s a small set of things that they all have but a wide variety jobs amongst the positions.
@@matthewrogers2521 take place kickers. They’re on the field a total of 1 minute a game. That’s all they do. Nothing else. Or long snappers. Literally a single job. Or punters. Or some members of the special teams unit. Or an offensive tackle. With the exception of the odd trick play, those guys only do one thing-block. Rugby has nothing like that.
@@matthewrogers2521in the modern rugby game, backs and forwards are interchangeable during the game. Backs will join in mauls, rucks, lineouts, which are considered forward dominant roles, and vice versa, forwards can join the backline, or kick the ball when required. The basic skills are the same, i e. Fitness, maneuverability, speed, game sense, tackling etc. But the specialization is less then half when compared to football. Each position has their role, which is true, but the depth of skill required to play rugby is alot more then football, not to mention rugby players arent alternating between offense players and defensive players 😂, as a basic function of the game, theyve gotta be able to do both and play a full 80 mins. Objectively the Kelcis are in denial, they cant bring themselves to admit it, despite their common sense telling them otherwise.
I've played both rugby and padded football at quite low levels. I would say the cardiovascular fitness levels needed for rugby are way in excess of the average American Football player. You can be jogging for about 5 to 10 minutes on a rugby field with intermittent bursts of extreme speed, and if you get out of breath you are toast. The average American football player wouldn't have the conditioning. Conversely, American football has far more high-impact collisions, and players can condition themselves to be good at those close burst impacts. Not many rugby players would be in that kind of shape.
Love you Kelce brothers but as a former rugby union player who’s lived in the US for 20yrs and loves NFL (go CHIEFS!!!) I can tell you there are tons of pro rugby players who could make it in the NFL. To say it’s not as skillful means you don’t understand the game. The similarities between front row forwards and lineman are remarkable, especially the technique and nuances in a scrum. Rucks and mauls are very much like offensive and defensive lines coming together, especially rolling mauls. Flyhalves and inside halves have all the physical and mental skills of QBs but they have to make their plays on the fly - nobody’s calling plays for them from a stationary position. Outside backs are hybrid WRs/RBs. If you question the size of the players take a look at the stats of Taniela Tupou and Eben Etzabeth, to name just two. Let’s not forget that Jordan Mailata (much love Jordan) came to the NFL because he couldn’t get a pro contract in rugby league. I coached U19 rugby in LA and all the boys were high school football players wanting to get “harder”. My brother-in-law was a linebacker who played in two national championships for Michigan and he also played rugby…you wanna chat with him. Love you fellas but learn some more about rugby and then have me on your show for a chat. ❤
Love this, I think Americans not only don't understand rugby but in a way choose to undersell a sport like it as well as other ones they don't know or understand, they do it with football all the time. But in this instance it's rugby, I recently watched the rugby World Cup and just watching the knockout round games had me on the edge of my seat every time. I wont knock these two because I think they're just giving their honest opinion but if they understood how tough and strong willed rugby players had to be then I think they'd understand, and then skill as well we see the same type of footwork when it comes to wide receivers and players who will break ankle in Ruby with their steps there's a lot of different similarities between the sports and I guess I'm just disappointed they didn't come at it with more nuance than they did. But like I said before I think they're both great in their own sport but surely since travis is travelling with Taylor all these places that he would broaden his sports horizons 😂
Now this was an intelligent breakdown get this man on for a chat team. Could open new perspective to you and make you change this video alltogether. Im telling you il put the boys first IV Rotorua boys high up against any college damn team in the US and lets play 80 mins rugby. Our boys will kick your ass at rugby then play YOUR game straight after. Reverse this situation all the US boys would be in the physio room 60 mins in. Theyd call of the game 😂😂😂 and Rotorua Boys is a high school ahahahha levels
That’s only because of the rules in rugby league which changed the defensive ruck positioning and banned the unlimited interchange. Mailata would easily be a top test rugby player as a 2nd row or loose forward if he chose rugby union.
I coaches club rugby in Santa Monic, CA, for boys who were Seniors in high school…big, strong, athletic boys but they struggled a lot with rugby primarily because every position needs to be able to run, pass, tackle, maul and ruck…unlike NFL every rugby player is both offense and defense, and without the chance to break on the sideline between plays. Very different sports.
When I played rugby in college, one of my teammates said it about as well as anyone. American football is like getting in a car crash almost every play. Rugby is like jumping out of a plane, landing on a tree and hitting every branch on the way down.
The fact you mention the different energy system is brilliant. The impacts are often less but there are more of them. You don't get guys in the NFL making 20+ tackles in a game (Pieter Steph du Toit making 28 in the world cup final)
@@kazumakiryu3397 how many passes happen in an NFL game because I can tell you around 300 happen in a rugby game not including kicks which could be around 80.
As someone who played both in high school and still plays rugby in college, the biggest difference is that rugby takes the head completely out of tackling making it “safer”. Something the nfl is trying to do but isn’t very good at. And I’d say the body on body collisions are on par with each other if not more intense in rugby because of no shoulder pads. the conditioning it takes to play a full 80 minutes of rugby compared to say 60-70 snaps is insane. Like they said though they’re completely different sports that shouldn’t be compared.
Nfl tackles are nearly 50% harder, because there are less rules about tackling & guys have that invincibility complex, but ya, you agent getting hit 30 times in a game
You can compare, they're not completely different, nfl is derived from rugby (though not its current firm, I think it came to us before it even split into league & Union, n how rules change constantly so over the years). You can look at differences, it's if you try to argue one is better/ harder than the other, when there's no metric
ther are not tht many hit ups in nfl as the offensive line and defensive lines dnt collide and 50% harder whts tht based on......th-cam.com/video/nt_SiGWcsiE/w-d-xo.html@@kurtsudheim825
stop wearing helmets and that will take the head out of the tackles - its a weapon not a protection, if people dont have helmets then the wepon has gone
Crazy to me that Travis talks about respecting physicality in rugby players but says they're less skilled, when it's completely the opposite: just to start with, almost every guy on the rugby field absolutely must be able to pass decently, and about a third of them have to be able to kick with both power and accuracy too. They also all have to understand the game well enough to make decisions on the fly - in NFL terms, every player must be at least vaguely capable of playing QB, and a third of them need to be top class punters. NFL players are all extremely skilled in very specific ways, but the breadth of skills required to play any position at rugby (with the possible exception of prop) is so much greater. What NFL players do dominate them in is power and strength - in rugby, backs are mostly fairly slender to maximise agility, and while forwards are large and strong, they have to be fit and able to recover quickly, so the muscle profile is different. Most rugby players would be quickly overrun on an NFL field due to being less powerful, and correspondingly most NFL players would be collapsing from exhaustion in short order on the rugby pitch due to being unconditioned for extended spells of play. There are, of course, plenty of athletes able to cross over - get an elite NFL player on the treadmill or a top tier rugby player to train like a powerlifter and their bodies would likely adjust - as well as a few true outliers who could switch with little effort: Jonah Lomu was 6'5, 270 pounds and could run the 100m in 10.6 seconds, he was an absolute alien and would've been the GOAT tight end, while Aaron Donald's ludicrous agility and athleticism at 1.85m, 130kg would similarly make him the best prop rugby has ever seen.
Yes! Neither player is conditioned for the other sport. It's as simple as that. NFL players will get gassed and playing rugby, and rugby players will get smashed playing NFL. With the exception of a few of each sport.
Skill wise I don’t think you’re right, the best rugby player does it all from Kicking, passing, tackling. I think violent was the right way to compare it.
I think the key deepness of skill. Rugby players have to do it all, but they would be worse at each skill individually than their NFL counterparts. Just different games. Kind of like comparing Baseball and Cricket. Look similar, but totally different skill development.
You guys don't cut, as in vere out of lanes at fast speeds and change direction on a dime... You guys running straight or curving lines... You guys can't catch 45-60mph steamers coming out of a QBs hands... You don't have to remember a play book.... You just don't understand football because you have to be smart to understand football. It's timed chess with people.... You don't get the game because you've never played. The rules of rugby are pretty simple, you guys spend half the game in a scrum, which isn't crazy athletic... There's something lineman do called "firing out" that's when they snap the ball and either have to head forward as fast as they can or retreat as fast as they can as a defensive lineman who is fast as a little guy but weighs 250-300lbs is chasing the QB... I'm not saying football is a better game, but it's definitely more skilled and athletic... The only rugby players to make it in the NFL were decent lineman and punters... Punters aren't football players... They just kick meaning those guys rugby skills were not even close to being able to play in the NFL...
I think the hardest thing for rugby players in terms of adaptation would be the scripted nature of NFL. In rugby there is a lot more allowance for individual initiative (its often called 'heads up rugby' -or 'play what you see'), whereas football demands that players execute specific movements called by coaches. QBs have some initiative, but then only the veterans really have the status to make 'adjustments' to the off field call.
Your just referring to learning plays, you don't need to be smart to do that, though it would help, it's just a bit of work, get your head in the books. That's due to the narrow of the play, also why it'd be easier for league than union players, benayoun you have that pause to test for each passage of play. Rugby (Union), not having breaks means you can't plan out a play exactly, it's more about a system of play, & maybe you can have a "in situation x do y or z". Bit you can't have 100 set plays because you can't plan for what might happen, so as you do, you need to be more adaptable. Some might find one easier than the other
What you may think as boring is the actual reason why American Football is exciting, tactics, tactics trick plays, play call to win, etc. American Football is dynamic and changes a lot. Rugby sometimes is monotonous, they can make plays on the field but not really something far from what we’ve already seen in the earlier part of the game or in the past game.
rugby is dynamic as it is made up on the fly, football is scripted, which is the opposite of dynamic - both sports are different and both have merit@@Somm_RJ
Rugby League players perhaps have a better chance than Rugby Union players as the former tends to be the more impactful game with more hit ups and tackles, which Jason mentions. I'd also think American Football fans would much prefer the League game (13 man) versus Union (15 man, which most of you think of as "rugby").
League would make more sense to Americans because of the similarities in plays vs downs, you dont really ruck in contact, you don't really have scrums (uncontested), you don't have full on lineouts, lot more tactical kicking for territory too at times & like the NFL is in America it's a sport thats much bigger just in the Oceania area not to say other countries don't play it though..
Having played both sports rugby is far harder from a cardio perspective but the hits are much harder in American footy because of the padding. Also in rugby, only the ball carrier is getting smashed. I never got gassed playing American footy but would be hanging after 20 minutes on a rugby pitch. Rugby is very technical just in a different way. Both are great sports.
The fact that a league player picked up American football, learnt it in 3/4 years and is arguably top 5 if not 10 left tackles in the league pretty much answers that question
@@luis-ie3de "a shot" but it aint certain, alot of behemoth players come and go but never become great especially in that small amount of time. He took his league skills applied it to Football and is now one of the top O lineman..
@luis-ie3de and Jordan didn't make it in Rugby league, which is why he went to try football and succeeded. If any of the league players had that time that Jordan did to get use to football, most of them would make the nfl.
@@BlackAndTeal904they’ve tried to get international players into the NFL for years to grow the sport abroad. Jordan is the first to truly make it. But he’s a freak. Most rugby players aren’t 6 foot 8. You’re using an anomaly to justify your point.
@@aztronomy7457 Key words "Theyve tried", but the problem is no ones that interested in NFL. Thats why you'll never see a bunch of pro Rugby/ Rugby league players try out for Nfl, players have to consciously make a choice to go NFl..Jordan didn't even make to the NRL Premiership , and yet hes pancaking dudes in Nfl like he grew up playing. League star Nelson Solomona is a few inches shorter than him, i think if he applied himself to Nfl camp he would've done better than Jordan..Jordans not a anomaly, like you said theres not much interest
Rugby is a 80-minute game with no downs/ stoppages so the game is played on a different energy system, you need a combination of strength, endurance, speed, explosiveness and toughness.
Great debate! And came to a fair and balanced conclusion 👍 Travis mentioned that you don’t get 300lb players which is generally true but as Jason was saying, you have to be aerobically fit to play Rugby, so guys that size would struggle.
Yah I just looked at Toulouse rugby and at my Chiefs, and Toulouse had 1 person over 300 and the Chiefs 16. But yeah don't ask these 330 lb linemen on the Chiefs to race against the rugby players xD xD
Fundamental difference is ENDURANCE and Rigby is played with ONE (SINGULAR) continuous team while 'Merikan football is played with two teams offence and defense. Rugby as gruesome as it sometimes appears requires ENDURANCE, skill and thinking to win while 'Merikan football is big on spectacular hits along with skill and thinking.
I think the problem with rugby converts is at what age they transition over, and more importantly, how much time a team is willing to nurture. Jarryd Hayne went over, had all preseason preparations made roster but failed to perform. At times his rugby came out at the wrong time/place - think blocking vs tackling. If the 49ers were willing to spend a full season on getting him adapted over, then maybe a different story. The big fella, Jordan Mailata is the perfect example of this. Although he had never played top flight RL, when he went over he was driven to succeed as it was basically his last chance to play pro sport, and Eagles were very willing to spend time getting him up to skill.
I think that if rugby was big in the USA and football was big in South Africa/New Zealand/France/the UK etc., many of the same people would be stars; but they wouldn't be exactly as they are now because the requirements of the sport push them in certain directions. Hayne is a good example. He was an elite athlete but didn't make it in the NFL because you can't really start at the elite level of any sport and expect to succeed. If he'd been playing football since he was ten years old, he probably could have succeeded: he had the physical tools. Same thing applies in reverse: I'm sure that if either Kelce had started playing rugby at a young age, they'd have every chance of becoming top players; but if you just dropped them into the RWC or 6 Nations, they wouldn't stand a chance, no matter what their physical gifts.
Exactly, was about to say, if you've made it pro in one of the sports, you're so used to one thing, the muscle memory you've learnt since a kid, now to UN train that is hard for your brain, physical differences like getting bigger or fitter wouldn't take too long. If you switch at 20, & or effort into it is far more easily attainable. League is also far closer than union
Agreed, the younger any athlete goes to a sport the more chance they have to become successful. I think Jarryd Hayne went about 3 years after his physical prime.. and I know he was only playing pre season games in the NFL.. but he was sidestepping dudes and making some great runs with a Rugby style of running. I believe that Rugby's best attacking players or runners would be awesome in the NFL if given space. I believe they're better at running in the open field against defence. Rugby we don't have blockers so many times the great runners run specific lines in open space added in with stepping to beat 3-4 defenders who don't worry about a blocker. Whereas NFL they are coached out of going with their instinct depending on what down it is, what the play is (where the blockers are running) and usually run to sideline or take the tackle if they make first down. Very different games, but some top Rugby players could definitely go beast mode with ball in hand and on defence.. only issue would be running with blockers and the nuances and also getting through the offence to make a tackle as a defender.
Biggest difference is quick snap energy vs endurance. Rugby players are good athletes and they are tough as shit. Also no blocking and the requirement to wrap when you tackle instead of just being a missle
Not true, both sports have different footwork. A top level rugby player doesn't have the same footwork as a running back. Also they would struggle studying the nfl playbook
Not running back, they don't CUT in rugby and aren't FAST ENOUGH... Nobody in rugby is running a sub 4.5 40yard dash... No one. Rugby players are slow.
Key point: These are two VERY different games. Which might sound weird because, from a quick glance, they look very similar. But they really are two completely different games.
Eben etzebeth or rg snyman would be able to put a stint in at o-line if he had the weight and had trained for it. Both 6’8/6’9, and really naturally strong guys
I think some flankers and 8s could transition to linebacker. The physical skill sets are comparable and high level athletes tend to be fairly intelligent and I think they could learn plays and how to read offences with enough time (probably a season or two to become good but not top level starters in the league). The backs in rugby would have a decent chance at converting in to running backs or receivers (again the physical skills are fairly similar). Really it would mostly be how well the individual athlete could learn the more nuanced aspects of whatever position. Physically there would be a lot of potential.
Most forwards in rugby union would be too slow for linebacker. Have a look at the 40 times for linebackers at the draft combine. rugby union forwards are cumbersome and slow. They're built for scrummaging and rucking.
God guys - you don’t watch enough rugby. It is a much more physically demanding, much more violent and much more skilful sport. Having said that, it is of course true that most rugby players wouldn’t do well in the NFL, but neither would most NFL stars do well in top level rugby.
When I coached college Rugby, the best college football players that code switched were usually linebackers (usually, not always). The most of the rugby players that would code switch to college Football, would usually end up playing a 50/50 of running back, safety and/or special teams
I played both sports. Rugby is cardio, and fluid. Contact is on and around the ball - tackles, scrums, mauls, rucks etc. - many players on the filed don't make contact for extended periods of time. /// Football is every player on the field making contact at maximum effort every 10S for 60 minutes. The impacts in football are harder and more frequent and not just limited to tackles. They're both great sports but very different. Anyone who has played both has respect for both but knows they're different. Lots of people who've played one or the other have a lot of opinions but no basis for comparison. If you play rugby - go play football then voice your opinion. If you play football, go play rugby then voice your opinion. It's that simple.
he's not in the league anymore but Christian Wade was another rugby player that made the transition. Maybe have Mailata and Carlin Isles on the show one went Rugby to NFL and the other NFL to rugby.
How you gonna argue that rugby players don't have "toughness"? 😂 They wear no protective gear, pkay for ages at once and take full contact tackles. NFL players wear so much protective gear and actually play for like 15 minutes per game 😂
Andrew Luck's Doctor said “We most commonly see this kind of injury associated with motor vehicle crashes or motorbike crashes,” said Dr. Lewis Jacobson. So Jason is pretty spot on with the being run over
I moved from the US to New Zealand as a 12 year old then moved back to the US two years later. I had the opportunity to play both at school. Both where fun, it all comes down to what you had the opportunity to play. American Samoa is where there is an opportunity to play both sports as children. I believe they still have the highest amount of D-1 and NFL players per capita. Same thing I guess applies here, a kid from Alaska and a kid from Texas wouldn’t have the same access to youth Football or youth Hockey depending on where they grew up.
It's simple guys: Football: Specialized/specific skills, anaerobic endurance Rugby: Generalised/allround skills, aerobic endurance 1. In football all positions are specialized, the roles are more specific. Linebackers don't have to be good at throwing the ball, quarterbacks don't have to be good tacklers. They're the best in the world in the one thing they do. In Rugby everyone has to more or less be able to do everything, which means that for example a prop generally won't be as physically dominant as a linebacker because his allround playing abilities are more important. 2. Like Jason said the energy systems needed are different. In rugby you need aerobic endurance because of the continuous play kinda like in soccer. In football almost everything is anaerobic, which is why NFL players are way more explosive and powerful, while Rugby players can go for longer. I however don't agree that football requires more skill, just different more specific skills.
The arrogance of Americans to think that rugby players wouldnt make it in the NFL. Their example here being some randomer Jordan Mailata, who left aussie rugby league because he wasnt good enough (he had one season at a semi-pro club and the result was: "The South Sydney coaching staff did not believe that Mailata would be able to physically keep up with the pace and nature of professional rugby league"). After leaving Australia and with 0 experience or background in the NFL, he made it to a first team in less than a year.
I think the worlds best rugby players can definitely play in the NFL. They clearly have the athleticism and the build already. The biggest curve is obviously them learning the game but it’s no different than an NFL player trying to play rugby for the first time people forget that American football came from rugby. I understand football is way more high impact because you have pads and the way you are a lot of tackle but in rugby you are playing both offense and defense and you’re making multiple tackles within one game. Certain positions specialize in certain things but anyone can run with the ball pass it or kick it. I wish these guys would go and visit the all blacks or the spring boks.
Rugby fan here. NFL is too specialised for rugby players to be easily transition. With regards to physique, you won’t like this but football players are on average bigger faster and stronger than rugby players.
Skill. Thats where youre wrong.all Rugby players need to be able to Run with the ball, tackle, pass, kick, blow rucks, catch...the list goes on. Also...when you have the ball no ones blocking defenders
The main difference between Rugby & NFL is Rugby requires great stamina and a more general skill set as all the players are on the field all the time, and everyone attacks and defends. Nfl requires extremely fast & high execution in shorter bursts and with more specialised roles where a player only has to attack or defend Talking of a rugby player who probably could have made it the NFL, Uini Antonia the beast of a French prop is 6.5ft and 22 stone it would have been fun to see him at offensive tackle!
The fitness requirements change the body types significantly that are ideal for each sport. NFL players are extremely specialised, while rugby players have to be good at a lot of different things, hence the different bodies that can do these things to a high level. Mailata was unable to get a full contract in league largely because his physique would be a liability, while in the nfl, it is a boon.
I've played rugby for around 8 years and can say it's the other way around I played with over 50 American footballers throughout the years and some asked us if we wanted to learn, We said yes and after around an hour or so My rugby club was versing American footballers *Ages unknown probably around 15-16* at first we thought it would be fun in games But it got competitive because we were doing very very well. At the end we lost by 3 points all my teammates keep forgetting and the reason why we did very well was because of our tackles we mostly kept our defence tight which made it harder for them to get past. It was a very fun game but they won to a field goal. So at the end I think Rugby players have a REAL good chance at playing in the NFL.
I played quite a bit of rugby growing up in South Africa. I can agree and disagree on a few things. 1 I agree rugby has a larger cardio element than American Football, a lot less breaks in an 80 minute game. So a 6'8 350lbs guy struggles to keep up. On the other hand I do disagree with the skill comment. The skills are just wildly different, and yes AF is way more physical in a demolition derby kind of way. With regards to rugby players who could make it, I think locks and flankers, the likes of a guy like Eben Etsebeth a 6'7 270lb monster with speed, strength and hands could convert to a half decent tight end. But in reality the only similarity between the sports is the size of the field, the goal posts and the shape of the ball. One thing I have always thought about though is why the lateral (pass in rugby) isn't ever copied from Rugby. The way a ball is passed makes it easier to catch, more accurate and a lower risk play for when it might be needed in a football game. I think it's something that could add to the game.
Disagree on this I have to say. They should watch any game in the World Cup just finished between South Africa, France, Ireland and the All Blacks. Plenty of 300lb guys smashing into each other in blitz style defence. Rugby has evolved to be for more explosive due to professionalism. What Jason says in terms of each individual impact was true 5/10 years ago but it’s caught up now purely because of money in the game and professional standards improving within rugby.
American overestimation! I bet they would say American football players are more skilled than Association football ones! I can listen to a lot of arguments on favor of American football. It being a (more) SKILLFUL sport is NOT one of them.
You have rot differentiate between Rugby Union and Rugby League, league is a much faster game with much fewer stoppages compared to union, league has a six tackle rule rugby has unlimited tackles etc You get a chance to see two game of league live in Vegas in March of 24
Some great comments in here. I think Jason reckons NFL players are considerably larger. 6 ft 9 and 300 pounds is huge, but its not uncommon to see 300-330 pound props, 250-280 pound middle and back rowers, so its not too dissimilar. I'd say the impact is probably more given the angles that Football players clatter intogether, but the arobic capacity that Rugby players have is much much higher, and thus, the game becomes harder and more attritional in the lower numbers. You'll have guys the size of Jason doing 6-7 scrums a game, running around the park clearing bodies from rucks, lifting blokes in lineouts and doing it for a solid 45-60 mins more ofen that not. The question being, could a rugby player play professional Football and I think there are probably a couple of positions that comepare. - 10/15 in Rugby - Punt/Kicker in Football - 6/7/8 in Rugby - Running back - 4/5/6/8 in Rugby - Tight end. - 11/14 in Rugby - Wide receiver
As rugby transitioned to a professional sport the players became significantly more conditioned even as Forwards, where teams do regularly field players who are 22 stone. But the average weight is definitely higher in football and with the hit rules in football, it definitely allows for more aggressive play.
Definitely couldn’t play in the NFL but look up Nathan Cleary’s performance in the 2023 NRL GF. One of the 40 min stretches by a player of any sport ever.
The reason the best rugby player will fail in American Football, and the opposite would also be true, is reaction speed. Play a game for 20 years, from an early age, and your instincts and response time to the events of that game will be superb. Someone without those instincts, even if they are a better athlete than you, will be half a second slower in reacting as things happen. At the top level that half a second means you fail.
The national rugby league are actually doing a couple games in Vegas to kick off their season. Would be cool too see some nfl players get around it, im pre sure some teams are already
Mad respect for you guys..I grew up playing rugby, never played football when I moved here...I agree NFL doods are monsters in comparison to rugby players but c'mon just look at eben eztebeth..tell me you would want him as an opponent during a football game....
Rugby more skilful across the park than NFL and more mobile but much higher impacts in NFL and skills much more specialised and the NFL players more skilful in their limited roles but don’t have general skills across the different positions. NFL players also low cardiovascular fitness and could not play at 300 plus in rugby as they would gas. That weight means nfl players more force generation and explosive.
Agree with Jason Rugby players are smaller b/c of non stop play and constant getting up from the ground. US of America super league 7’s have NFL players
NFL players are often complete specialists and operate in relatively short periods of time. Rugby each players has to possess a more rounded skill set (comparatively), and the ability to play for extended periods of time with little/no breaks. Both are amazing. Very different sports, glad we can all enjoy both :)
These guys have no idea man! VERY different sports, just similar with physicality. NFL players would be a fish out of water and vice versa. Rugby you’re playing without stopping for 80 minutes. NFL stops after every play. Both great sports, both very different sports. Also, the offensive players in NFL have to play defence also. In rugby, you’re offence, defence at the exact same time
Rugby player in NFL would depend on what position you pick in the NFL and which position from rugby goes there. A winger would play well as wide reciever and an inside centre may do very well as a tight end or running back. The front rower in rugby may do well on either end of the offensive line but a scrum is much different from the lines of scrimmage in football
Christian Wade is probably the closest example. England rugby international, regular winner of domestic trophies for both his team and individual. Top tier rugby player and he gave it up to go try out for the NFL. I think he got picked up as a running back by… the Pats… can’t remember exactly? But it was for pre season trials and he didn’t quite make it. There’s some great clips of him hitting 60+ yard running touchdowns pre season though.
To question the toughness of rugby players is crazy. But I guess the best way for you to get a good look at the game is the NRL is playing a few games in Las Vegas next year 2nd of March
Following the concussion issues in the NFL a study was done on Rugby to quantify the effects of tackles and it was found that Rugby players experienced significantly higher G-forces than in football in an average collision.
Great chat. Just started following nfl this year after 40 odd years of just rugby. I never knew how good the nfl is. I love it. The scope of plays available in nfl is endless. Some of the hits are hard to watch. They give getting smoked new meaning. In both sports men of all different size and shape play. The key diference would be that in rugby you have to play offense and defence. This requires a bigger skill set for every player in rugby. I don't think that the games are close enough in format to have crossover. In Sevens rugby we have some super fast players from the USA. Coulter Niles who is lightening quick is a good 7s player but probably couldn't make it as a great 15 a side player because of the defensive work needed to be done. Love the nfl and I will be supporter for life. Haven't got a favorite team yet but I do like kc due to watching that quaterback doco on netflix. Patrick mahomes is a funny guy.
Jason’s point about the energy systems is the key difference here. Rugby players, regardless of position, need to be fit enough to run for minutes at a time, get down to make tackles / hit rucks and then pop straight back up again for the next phase. That’s why it’s rare to find rugby players with the massive size we see in NFL linemen. They wouldn’t last until halftime and there are no rolling substitutions, so a player like that is a liability. Travis’ point about the skill difference seems misguided - I understand where he’s coming from insofar as the skill positions in football are far more specialised than rugby, but I would say that as a rule rugby players are more rounded athletes. Every player on the pitch needs to be able to run, tackle, catch, carry, pass the ball and constantly reassess their positioning in attack and defence through multiple formations and scenarios. It’s not as clearly structured as football but there’s still a lot of detail in terms of formation and roles that may not be obvious to more casual fans.
Love you guys , please hang with the lads and train with the boys when they come over next year...no one telling you what to do next move any more...will be fun to watch...give heads up ,you will be smashed.
Let’s get you guys doing a training session with an international rugby team during the off season you guys should actually do more rugby coverage how does that sound?
I very much agree with the point on NFL stars being out and out better athletes but I think impact wise rugby is ahead, not just in force of collision but also the frequencies of collisions compared to the NFL. Watch Peter SDT in the World Cup final last weekend and find me another nfl player that could make 28 (mostly dominant hit) tackles (keeping in mind he also had to run, ruck and play an offensive role for 80 minutes) I would love to see what would happen if some of those American D1 athletes chose rugby over nfl (but that will never happen obviously), I think America would rip up international rugby in a new way.
Travis, rugby players are plenty big. The front row payers (props and hookers) are typically upwards of 300 lbs (though perhaps not NFL lineman size). Second row players (locks) tend to be quite large as well (and often tall). Rugby players could play in the NFL but would need a couple of years to make the transition (i.e. spend time in college). If you are making the argument that they could not make an immendiate transition from top-level professional rugby to the NFL, then yeas, I'd say they could not.
and as much as i love Jason Kelce - he wouldn't last 50 mins as a forward. He might do 30-40mins easy. but there's reason those state of origin forwards look like they're made of marble. they are...
Rugby isn’t like car crashes though. NFL is like car crashes. They have done studies on both sports. That’s why he said getting hit in the face 10 times is more like Rugby.
New heights boys would do well to Chat to Andy Goode and Jim Hamilton on The Rugby Pod. I could help to explain the difference, but those guys have a better platform. Hit them up, team Kelce
I will say if you're genuinely interested in this, look up a guy named Monte Gaddis. He made the news a few years back being the guy standing outside the Browns training camp with the "Will do Reps for Food" sign but after that he pivoted into Rugby League and now owns a team in Cleveland. He'd be good for those comparisons. He will also explain the difference between League & Union (League is MUCH more suited to an American Audience imo) You're not gonna see top end Rugby/NFL guys switch code, but like Mailata, you get em young enough, teach out a few of the old habits and put in a few new ones and you got a pathway in both directions. The NRL are going to Vegas 3 weeks after the Superbowl, like the NFL London Games, their regular season Opener in a 2 game double header and they're holding a combine for those thousands of college athletes that don't make it to the big time. The skillsets are close enough.
For me, the difference is football is very scripted with highly specified jobs and body types. Where rugby is a more generalized skill set because they play def and offense and the flow of the game is much more organic.
Lekker pod gents, a South African chap here, played rugga from age of 7 till 24 years of age, follow the NFL as much as I can from here in South Africa. Iv got a honours in Sports science and I am a Biokineticist dealing with Sport Injuries. When it comes to size, besides props in rugby, we don't really want 300lb players as to move around for 60-80min you will be gassed and become slow on the field, the Springboks (our national team) average pack weight is roughly 125kg. So that's about 240lb. In the NFL it seems individuals are selected and conditioned to fulfill very specific rolls and physical tasks, so the NFL is able to maximize size and strength and speed for a individual. With that in mind I thinknits hard to compare the 2 sports and if players can cross over and which is harder and tougher, both in there own right are tough, I am sure a skilled individual who has the range/scope can physically adapt to each sport, it just comes down to learning specific tasks and skills, in SA many players learn the skills from the age of 7 for rugby. So it would be difficult for a rugby player to learn new specific skills for NFL, but I think it's possible, and vica versa.
I really like football and the kelce brother, but i grew up playing rugby and let me tell you that the qb sneak is nothing like a scrum please get a rugby player (a forward) one time on the pod just for a minute so you guys can understand what the scrum is, maybe you can compare ir to a maul but not a scrum. Also al rugby players on the field need to know how to carry the ball and tackle on football you play offense or defense, just two different worlds. Watch some highlights on Bryan Habana and you can se he could have try out for the NFL no problem
A number of rugby players are 6ft 6 plus and the taller flankers could easily play tight end. Some of the bigger fullbacks and centres could also play wide receiver eg J Barrett.
Now Stop right there Brothers Jason and Travis !!! There are 2 (two) types of Rugby… Rugby Union and Rugby League. They are a different game altogether. Union teams have 15 players on field plus reserve players, replacement players for players injured, Rugby League teams have 13 players on field, plus reserve player for the same reason. Both are hard fast and hard hitting tackling games and different rules, But if you really want to watch a couple of Rugby League games live and direct…and your not doing anything around March 2, 2024 at Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas, the Manly Sea Eagles are playing the South Sydney Rabbitohs and the Sydney Roosters are taking on the Brisbane Broncos. I reckon you’d both be welcome in any of the changing rooms, but I can’t help you with a Rugby Union game though ‘cept maybe watch a replay World Cup game, cheers🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺…and go the Chiefs..!
Hi guys-I’m a rugby mum from New Zealand-much respect to your mother for watching the 2of you regularly trying to kill yourselves or others on a weekly basis. Your right the games are 2 different to even compare-my son is a “9” half back nearest comparative might be your quarterback but builds are completely different- 9s are usually smaller, under 6 foot and 100kgs but will regularly tackle guys up to 50kgs heavier than them. They are fast never stop moving and handle the ball more than anyone on the paddock. You dont mess with the halfback-if they dont damage you the rest of there team will!!
The simple truth is the pads are worn for a reason. Collision speeds are higher, hits come from any direction and opponents run at you at full speed. The game would not be safe at all without pads. Rugby guys are built huge but the game is slower and collision speeds are lower as they run in a straight line. Hence when someone breaks loose it’s called a line break. I live in Australia, I watch both religiously
What would make a difference for cross code converts would be if the NFL had a 2nd division - a level which was still professional and elite but just not as elite as the NFL. A division full of players who didn't quite make the NFL and others who did but are coming back from injury or are at the end of their careers. Then converts could be loaned out to learn the skills over maybe 2 or 3 seasons at a high level rather than go on a practise squad. In other countries the major sports usually have 2,3,4 professional divisions so players who have potential can learn at a high level. If you want to play NFL there's only one division and no real pathway after college.
The pads and helmets make Football more dangerous, not safer. Cardio is a massive issue. The other is general ball skills. The pass/ catch skills in the NFL are horrendous. Every player in rugby actually handles the ball and is responsible for its " safe keeping", whereas most football players never even touch the ball in their entire career!!
Nfl players can only play in fits and starts . 60 minutes of what. Spread over 4 hours. Rugby is 80 minutes with one break. You 2 are a great team on NFL , but Lets see you play without going off every every time you change from offense to defence.
Great Vid. Interesting comparison. I'm South African, therefore being pro-Rugby is very natural. I know that American football is much more specialised than rugby and requires less aerobic fitness. NFL players can afford to sacrifice endurance in the name of more pace and power, while for rugby players it is more of a balancing act. Rugby is also less stop-start in nature, bringing a certain demand to the athlete. My view is that its not easy to compare as it is almost two very different sporting codes
Former Rugby star Jarryd Hayne, who was a 49er for a short period, once explained the difference pretty good. He mainly said that the speed and the force of the hit in pads is way higher and he really had to get used to that. He called both sports very though but the collisions is what seperates them, if I remember correctly. Should be somewere on the net. Nice Content by the way and say hi to my 9ers TE George Kittle!!!!!!
I'm from Ireland and play rugby at a level below professional rugby. We had 3 Americans try out for our team (they came to Ireland to study medicine as its so much cheaper than back home). One guy played d2 linebacker, another played d2 tightend (not sure if d2 is a good level or not but the guys were built and they were athletes so i assume its a good level) and the last lad played as a safety in college. They were hardy lads who didn't back down and were happy to smash faces but they were fucked after 15 seconds of action. They had no muscular endurance as the ball could be in play for 2 to 3 mins without break. They were also soft cocks when it came to posts match pints but after a lot of practice they massively upped their drinking game.
Ahhhh the Irish. Lads drinks like fish. Something we have in common. Im from Borneo. We find the the most menial of excuses to drink as a community.
This has always been my experience. Besides a few cases, anytime a football player stepped on the pitch, even for just practice, they hardly last. If they make it through a practice (and most don't) it's def the only one they show up for lol.
Brilliant mate. We used to play at the end of the season a charity game between our local American Football team & our club. One match of each code. Every week crucified them at both codes. They were Fannie’s really as most of our lads were hardened drinkers & smokers 😂😂😂😂
Soft cocks is written into NFL contracts.
“Soft cocks”😂
Average NFL Match - 40 tackles per team, run about 1 mile, about 11min actual play time
Average Rugby Match - 100 tackles per team, run about 6 miles, 80min of play (mostly continuous)
In the recent New Zealand vs Ireland world cup match, New Zealand made almost as many tackles IN THE LAST 4min (37) as the average NFL team would make for an entire game.
Just because football players do one or a small subset of the total skills required to play the sport doesn't mean they are more "specialized" at those skills. Except maybe the QB Pass, each rugby player/position has to be as "specialized" as any football player/position (easily listed) except they also have to be almost as good at every other skill where football players can just "nope" out of those skills.
AKA just because O-line only blocks doesn't mean that's more "specialized" then the skills it takes the tight five to Scrum/Lineout/Ruck/Maul... yes, I cherry-picked that example but it's the same if you run through the positions and compare the skillsets (again, the QB pass being the exception).
There talking bout league not Union…
Rugby players run and tackle more but I would bet football players are exerting more effort in burst because of stoppages. I’d be curious to see accelerometer data of who has a high average speed and average force per collision. I think generally football players are moving faster and consequently colliding at faster speeds. Whereas rugby because it’s 80 minutes of straight play there ends up being a lot of jogging especially toward the 2nd half. I think rugby requires a lot more steady state endurance than football.
Unlikely since being in the US, they would have more exposure to union and probably zero exposure to league.@@mickc3423
@@mickc3423 Pretty sure they don't specify and they don't know enough about rugby to know the difference anyway.
@@DPMixing there have been some data gathering on it and football player impact (speed and force of collision) is higher, but when you account for the pads, it's not clear that the impact from either sport on the player is much different.
Watch or play rugby, they might be jogging off the ball but it's full tilt otherwise.
Agreed that (for the most part) rugby players could not play in the NFL, but that is not due to a lack of skill but more because of how specialized NFL player skill sets are. Rugby players do everything on the field where as football players have one job that they do incredibly well.
I would dare say it's the other way around. Playing without pads is something else. And I love me some American Football.🙄
@@cesco1990I’m not taking a side on his comment about which players could play the other sport better but he’s 100% correct on the specialization of positions. Huge monster ass dudes who really don’t have to be very fast at all vs tiny guys who have to be super fast.
Or then you have a kicker who literally does nothing but kick.
In rugby everyone is essentially a linebacker/running back in American football terms.
Exactly, that, & the issue of stamina ate the main differences. You can't be as big as the biggest guys in nfl in rugby because you wouldn't last am hour
@@HueyPPLongYou are right and wrong at the same time. Absolutely, rugby players can run better than linemen. You are literally like comparing some with 7/10 in all areas to someone with 10/10 in one but 0/10 on the rest. NFL will pick the 10/10 in one area than jack of all trades, master of none. They can always pick another 10/10 on the weak areas of the other player.
@@kurtsudheim825Jonah Lomu, 6’4 ft 270 lbs, comparable position in american football would be WR. Tupou 300lbs RB. Basically each player playing in the center as it would be MLB at top level is at least 250/260. Where you can easly find many, many players even bigger than Jason
Y'all need to get Jordan Mailata on and talk about the differences!
And the differences between League and Union.
Just ask Jordan Milata if a NFL defence could cope with the Australian touch football team.....
Flag football Gold Medal.....
@@Neil_Mackieand the difference between rugby and AFL...
@@Marc_Remillard😂😂😂 to be fair. They would be good at it too
💯💯.. not just for Rugby talk but in general.. Would be an awesome guest to have.. It’s time Jason.. Come on 🙏🏻
The word they’re looking for is “specialization.”
All rugby players have to be able to do a little of everything.
In football, each player has his own job and that doesn’t change at the professional level.
I think your statement is incorrect. Rugby positions are definitely specialised and have their own unique physical traits and skills that they require. Yes, all rugby players have to know how to tackle, pass and catch, just like all NFL players know how to carry the ball, block and tackle. It’s a small set of things that they all have but a wide variety jobs amongst the positions.
@@matthewrogers2521 take place kickers. They’re on the field a total of 1 minute a game. That’s all they do. Nothing else. Or long snappers. Literally a single job. Or punters. Or some members of the special teams unit.
Or an offensive tackle. With the exception of the odd trick play, those guys only do one thing-block.
Rugby has nothing like that.
This idea/take you have on Rugby is pretty funny 😄
@@matthewrogers2521in the modern rugby game, backs and forwards are interchangeable during the game. Backs will join in mauls, rucks, lineouts, which are considered forward dominant roles, and vice versa, forwards can join the backline, or kick the ball when required. The basic skills are the same, i e. Fitness, maneuverability, speed, game sense, tackling etc. But the specialization is less then half when compared to football. Each position has their role, which is true, but the depth of skill required to play rugby is alot more then football, not to mention rugby players arent alternating between offense players and defensive players 😂, as a basic function of the game, theyve gotta be able to do both and play a full 80 mins. Objectively the Kelcis are in denial, they cant bring themselves to admit it, despite their common sense telling them otherwise.
I've played both rugby and padded football at quite low levels. I would say the cardiovascular fitness levels needed for rugby are way in excess of the average American Football player. You can be jogging for about 5 to 10 minutes on a rugby field with intermittent bursts of extreme speed, and if you get out of breath you are toast. The average American football player wouldn't have the conditioning. Conversely, American football has far more high-impact collisions, and players can condition themselves to be good at those close burst impacts. Not many rugby players would be in that kind of shape.
Love you Kelce brothers but as a former rugby union player who’s lived in the US for 20yrs and loves NFL (go CHIEFS!!!) I can tell you there are tons of pro rugby players who could make it in the NFL. To say it’s not as skillful means you don’t understand the game. The similarities between front row forwards and lineman are remarkable, especially the technique and nuances in a scrum. Rucks and mauls are very much like offensive and defensive lines coming together, especially rolling mauls. Flyhalves and inside halves have all the physical and mental skills of QBs but they have to make their plays on the fly - nobody’s calling plays for them from a stationary position. Outside backs are hybrid WRs/RBs. If you question the size of the players take a look at the stats of Taniela Tupou and Eben Etzabeth, to name just two. Let’s not forget that Jordan Mailata (much love Jordan) came to the NFL because he couldn’t get a pro contract in rugby league. I coached U19 rugby in LA and all the boys were high school football players wanting to get “harder”. My brother-in-law was a linebacker who played in two national championships for Michigan and he also played rugby…you wanna chat with him. Love you fellas but learn some more about rugby and then have me on your show for a chat. ❤
Love this, I think Americans not only don't understand rugby but in a way choose to undersell a sport like it as well as other ones they don't know or understand, they do it with football all the time. But in this instance it's rugby, I recently watched the rugby World Cup and just watching the knockout round games had me on the edge of my seat every time. I wont knock these two because I think they're just giving their honest opinion but if they understood how tough and strong willed rugby players had to be then I think they'd understand, and then skill as well we see the same type of footwork when it comes to wide receivers and players who will break ankle in Ruby with their steps there's a lot of different similarities between the sports and I guess I'm just disappointed they didn't come at it with more nuance than they did. But like I said before I think they're both great in their own sport but surely since travis is travelling with Taylor all these places that he would broaden his sports horizons 😂
Now this was an intelligent breakdown get this man on for a chat team. Could open new perspective to you and make you change this video alltogether. Im telling you il put the boys first IV Rotorua boys high up against any college damn team in the US and lets play 80 mins rugby. Our boys will kick your ass at rugby then play YOUR game straight after. Reverse this situation all the US boys would be in the physio room 60 mins in. Theyd call of the game 😂😂😂 and Rotorua Boys is a high school ahahahha levels
That’s only because of the rules in rugby league which changed the defensive ruck positioning and banned the unlimited interchange. Mailata would easily be a top test rugby player as a 2nd row or loose forward if he chose rugby union.
@@hanoitripper1809 big difference between rugby league and rugby union - both in terms of skills and physicality
I coaches club rugby in Santa Monic, CA, for boys who were Seniors in high school…big, strong, athletic boys but they struggled a lot with rugby primarily because every position needs to be able to run, pass, tackle, maul and ruck…unlike NFL every rugby player is both offense and defense, and without the chance to break on the sideline between plays. Very different sports.
When I played rugby in college, one of my teammates said it about as well as anyone. American football is like getting in a car crash almost every play. Rugby is like jumping out of a plane, landing on a tree and hitting every branch on the way down.
The fact you mention the different energy system is brilliant. The impacts are often less but there are more of them. You don't get guys in the NFL making 20+ tackles in a game (Pieter Steph du Toit making 28 in the world cup final)
That’s usually because the ball is moved around more in nfl it might not go to your player
Not only tackles but rucks hit and mauls
@@kazumakiryu3397 how many passes happen in an NFL game because I can tell you around 300 happen in a rugby game not including kicks which could be around 80.
@@davidlee55 the ball is moved more in rugby meaning less nfl tackles can be made just based off of the sport
@@kazumakiryu3397 yeah you said the ball is moved more in the NFL....
As someone who played both in high school and still plays rugby in college, the biggest difference is that rugby takes the head completely out of tackling making it “safer”. Something the nfl is trying to do but isn’t very good at. And I’d say the body on body collisions are on par with each other if not more intense in rugby because of no shoulder pads. the conditioning it takes to play a full 80 minutes of rugby compared to say 60-70 snaps is insane. Like they said though they’re completely different sports that shouldn’t be compared.
Nfl tackles are nearly 50% harder, because there are less rules about tackling & guys have that invincibility complex, but ya, you agent getting hit 30 times in a game
You can compare, they're not completely different, nfl is derived from rugby (though not its current firm, I think it came to us before it even split into league & Union, n how rules change constantly so over the years). You can look at differences, it's if you try to argue one is better/ harder than the other, when there's no metric
ther are not tht many hit ups in nfl as the offensive line and defensive lines dnt collide and 50% harder whts tht based on......th-cam.com/video/nt_SiGWcsiE/w-d-xo.html@@kurtsudheim825
stop wearing helmets and that will take the head out of the tackles - its a weapon not a protection, if people dont have helmets then the wepon has gone
Your head still gets knocked about in rugby, in scrums, mauls, and rucks.
Crazy to me that Travis talks about respecting physicality in rugby players but says they're less skilled, when it's completely the opposite: just to start with, almost every guy on the rugby field absolutely must be able to pass decently, and about a third of them have to be able to kick with both power and accuracy too. They also all have to understand the game well enough to make decisions on the fly - in NFL terms, every player must be at least vaguely capable of playing QB, and a third of them need to be top class punters. NFL players are all extremely skilled in very specific ways, but the breadth of skills required to play any position at rugby (with the possible exception of prop) is so much greater.
What NFL players do dominate them in is power and strength - in rugby, backs are mostly fairly slender to maximise agility, and while forwards are large and strong, they have to be fit and able to recover quickly, so the muscle profile is different. Most rugby players would be quickly overrun on an NFL field due to being less powerful, and correspondingly most NFL players would be collapsing from exhaustion in short order on the rugby pitch due to being unconditioned for extended spells of play.
There are, of course, plenty of athletes able to cross over - get an elite NFL player on the treadmill or a top tier rugby player to train like a powerlifter and their bodies would likely adjust - as well as a few true outliers who could switch with little effort: Jonah Lomu was 6'5, 270 pounds and could run the 100m in 10.6 seconds, he was an absolute alien and would've been the GOAT tight end, while Aaron Donald's ludicrous agility and athleticism at 1.85m, 130kg would similarly make him the best prop rugby has ever seen.
Yes! Neither player is conditioned for the other sport. It's as simple as that. NFL players will get gassed and playing rugby, and rugby players will get smashed playing NFL. With the exception of a few of each sport.
Skill wise I don’t think you’re right, the best rugby player does it all from Kicking, passing, tackling. I think violent was the right way to compare it.
I think the key deepness of skill. Rugby players have to do it all, but they would be worse at each skill individually than their NFL counterparts. Just different games. Kind of like comparing Baseball and Cricket. Look similar, but totally different skill development.
i guess that's why we see so many rugby players transition well to the NFL outside of kicking/punting
@@BPrimeTimeLyeah, that's why we also see so many NFL players play rugby! Great argument!
You guys don't cut, as in vere out of lanes at fast speeds and change direction on a dime... You guys running straight or curving lines... You guys can't catch 45-60mph steamers coming out of a QBs hands... You don't have to remember a play book.... You just don't understand football because you have to be smart to understand football. It's timed chess with people.... You don't get the game because you've never played. The rules of rugby are pretty simple, you guys spend half the game in a scrum, which isn't crazy athletic... There's something lineman do called "firing out" that's when they snap the ball and either have to head forward as fast as they can or retreat as fast as they can as a defensive lineman who is fast as a little guy but weighs 250-300lbs is chasing the QB... I'm not saying football is a better game, but it's definitely more skilled and athletic... The only rugby players to make it in the NFL were decent lineman and punters... Punters aren't football players... They just kick meaning those guys rugby skills were not even close to being able to play in the NFL...
@@Yon_Jon5715why would they give up millions of dollars to make 50grand playing rugby??? Rugby players don't make money...........
I think the hardest thing for rugby players in terms of adaptation would be the scripted nature of NFL. In rugby there is a lot more allowance for individual initiative (its often called 'heads up rugby' -or 'play what you see'), whereas football demands that players execute specific movements called by coaches. QBs have some initiative, but then only the veterans really have the status to make 'adjustments' to the off field call.
Your just referring to learning plays, you don't need to be smart to do that, though it would help, it's just a bit of work, get your head in the books. That's due to the narrow of the play, also why it'd be easier for league than union players, benayoun you have that pause to test for each passage of play. Rugby (Union), not having breaks means you can't plan out a play exactly, it's more about a system of play, & maybe you can have a "in situation x do y or z". Bit you can't have 100 set plays because you can't plan for what might happen, so as you do, you need to be more adaptable. Some might find one easier than the other
What you may think as boring is the actual reason why American Football is exciting, tactics, tactics trick plays, play call to win, etc.
American Football is dynamic and changes a lot. Rugby sometimes is monotonous, they can make plays on the field but not really something far from what we’ve already seen in the earlier part of the game or in the past game.
rugby is dynamic as it is made up on the fly, football is scripted, which is the opposite of dynamic - both sports are different and both have merit@@Somm_RJ
Rugby League players perhaps have a better chance than Rugby Union players as the former tends to be the more impactful game with more hit ups and tackles, which Jason mentions.
I'd also think American Football fans would much prefer the League game (13 man) versus Union (15 man, which most of you think of as "rugby").
League would make more sense to Americans because of the similarities in plays vs downs, you dont really ruck in contact, you don't really have scrums (uncontested), you don't have full on lineouts, lot more tactical kicking for territory too at times & like the NFL is in America it's a sport thats much bigger just in the Oceania area not to say other countries don't play it though..
Couldn’t imagine a nfl player lasting 5 mins in Rugby
Having played both sports rugby is far harder from a cardio perspective but the hits are much harder in American footy because of the padding. Also in rugby, only the ball carrier is getting smashed.
I never got gassed playing American footy but would be hanging after 20 minutes on a rugby pitch.
Rugby is very technical just in a different way.
Both are great sports.
The fact that a league player picked up American football, learnt it in 3/4 years and is arguably top 5 if not 10 left tackles in the league pretty much answers that question
as they said, if you're a 6 foot 8, 350 lbs behemoth of an athlete, you always have a shot in the nfl, doesnt matter where you came from
@@luis-ie3de "a shot" but it aint certain, alot of behemoth players come and go but never become great especially in that small amount of time. He took his league skills applied it to Football and is now one of the top O lineman..
@luis-ie3de and Jordan didn't make it in Rugby league, which is why he went to try football and succeeded. If any of the league players had that time that Jordan did to get use to football, most of them would make the nfl.
@@BlackAndTeal904they’ve tried to get international players into the NFL for years to grow the sport abroad. Jordan is the first to truly make it. But he’s a freak. Most rugby players aren’t 6 foot 8. You’re using an anomaly to justify your point.
@@aztronomy7457 Key words "Theyve tried", but the problem is no ones that interested in NFL. Thats why you'll never see a bunch of pro Rugby/ Rugby league players try out for Nfl, players have to consciously make a choice to go NFl..Jordan didn't even make to the NRL Premiership , and yet hes pancaking dudes in Nfl like he grew up playing. League star Nelson Solomona is a few inches shorter than him, i think if he applied himself to Nfl camp he would've done better than Jordan..Jordans not a anomaly, like you said theres not much interest
Rugby is a 80-minute game with no downs/ stoppages so the game is played on a different energy system, you need a combination of strength, endurance, speed, explosiveness and toughness.
Great debate! And came to a fair and balanced conclusion 👍 Travis mentioned that you don’t get 300lb players which is generally true but as Jason was saying, you have to be aerobically fit to play Rugby, so guys that size would struggle.
Yah I just looked at Toulouse rugby and at my Chiefs, and Toulouse had 1 person over 300 and the Chiefs 16. But yeah don't ask these 330 lb linemen on the Chiefs to race against the rugby players xD xD
Fundamental difference is ENDURANCE and Rigby is played with ONE (SINGULAR) continuous team while 'Merikan football is played with two teams offence and defense. Rugby as gruesome as it sometimes appears requires ENDURANCE, skill and thinking to win while 'Merikan football is big on spectacular hits along with skill and thinking.
I think the problem with rugby converts is at what age they transition over, and more importantly, how much time a team is willing to nurture. Jarryd Hayne went over, had all preseason preparations made roster but failed to perform. At times his rugby came out at the wrong time/place - think blocking vs tackling. If the 49ers were willing to spend a full season on getting him adapted over, then maybe a different story.
The big fella, Jordan Mailata is the perfect example of this. Although he had never played top flight RL, when he went over he was driven to succeed as it was basically his last chance to play pro sport, and Eagles were very willing to spend time getting him up to skill.
I think that if rugby was big in the USA and football was big in South Africa/New Zealand/France/the UK etc., many of the same people would be stars; but they wouldn't be exactly as they are now because the requirements of the sport push them in certain directions.
Hayne is a good example. He was an elite athlete but didn't make it in the NFL because you can't really start at the elite level of any sport and expect to succeed. If he'd been playing football since he was ten years old, he probably could have succeeded: he had the physical tools. Same thing applies in reverse: I'm sure that if either Kelce had started playing rugby at a young age, they'd have every chance of becoming top players; but if you just dropped them into the RWC or 6 Nations, they wouldn't stand a chance, no matter what their physical gifts.
@@JM-kr1tjif it was big here in Australia we would be every nfl teams kickers as we all play AFL which is kicking dominant
Exactly, was about to say, if you've made it pro in one of the sports, you're so used to one thing, the muscle memory you've learnt since a kid, now to UN train that is hard for your brain, physical differences like getting bigger or fitter wouldn't take too long. If you switch at 20, & or effort into it is far more easily attainable. League is also far closer than union
@@kazumakiryu3397I know there's one safa who played for one of the smaller teams, went to usa for university & played nfl
Agreed, the younger any athlete goes to a sport the more chance they have to become successful. I think Jarryd Hayne went about 3 years after his physical prime.. and I know he was only playing pre season games in the NFL.. but he was sidestepping dudes and making some great runs with a Rugby style of running. I believe that Rugby's best attacking players or runners would be awesome in the NFL if given space. I believe they're better at running in the open field against defence. Rugby we don't have blockers so many times the great runners run specific lines in open space added in with stepping to beat 3-4 defenders who don't worry about a blocker. Whereas NFL they are coached out of going with their instinct depending on what down it is, what the play is (where the blockers are running) and usually run to sideline or take the tackle if they make first down. Very different games, but some top Rugby players could definitely go beast mode with ball in hand and on defence.. only issue would be running with blockers and the nuances and also getting through the offence to make a tackle as a defender.
Biggest difference is quick snap energy vs endurance. Rugby players are good athletes and they are tough as shit. Also no blocking and the requirement to wrap when you tackle instead of just being a missle
Rugby is hard core game. Did you watch the Springboks and All blacks World Cup game this last week end
If you take a top-level rugby player and have him go through a full training camp, he would be an unstoppable linebacker, lineman, or running back.
They’ve tried. Jordan is the first to succeed.
Not true, both sports have different footwork. A top level rugby player doesn't have the same footwork as a running back. Also they would struggle studying the nfl playbook
Not running back, they don't CUT in rugby and aren't FAST ENOUGH... Nobody in rugby is running a sub 4.5 40yard dash... No one. Rugby players are slow.
@@namedralphe what rugby are you watching. "Don't cut"? "Aren't fast"?
Key point: These are two VERY different games. Which might sound weird because, from a quick glance, they look very similar. But they really are two completely different games.
Eben etzebeth or rg snyman would be able to put a stint in at o-line if he had the weight and had trained for it. Both 6’8/6’9, and really naturally strong guys
PIeter-Steph du Toit as well
I think some flankers and 8s could transition to linebacker. The physical skill sets are comparable and high level athletes tend to be fairly intelligent and I think they could learn plays and how to read offences with enough time (probably a season or two to become good but not top level starters in the league). The backs in rugby would have a decent chance at converting in to running backs or receivers (again the physical skills are fairly similar). Really it would mostly be how well the individual athlete could learn the more nuanced aspects of whatever position. Physically there would be a lot of potential.
Most forwards in rugby union would be too slow for linebacker. Have a look at the 40 times for linebackers at the draft combine. rugby union forwards are cumbersome and slow. They're built for scrummaging and rucking.
I think the key question is, how many NFL players would be able to play rugby?
@@SiRasputin too many linebackers would be fast for the first sprint in rugby but then dead for the next 20 needed
its the big centres that have the best chance
@@momwole that's not the question. Even nfl bench players get paid more than rugby internationals
God guys - you don’t watch enough rugby. It is a much more physically demanding, much more violent and much more skilful sport. Having said that, it is of course true that most rugby players wouldn’t do well in the NFL, but neither would most NFL stars do well in top level rugby.
When I coached college Rugby, the best college football players that code switched were usually linebackers (usually, not always). The most of the rugby players that would code switch to college Football, would usually end up playing a 50/50 of running back, safety and/or special teams
i would imagine safetys could be good too
I played both sports. Rugby is cardio, and fluid. Contact is on and around the ball - tackles, scrums, mauls, rucks etc. - many players on the filed don't make contact for extended periods of time. /// Football is every player on the field making contact at maximum effort every 10S for 60 minutes. The impacts in football are harder and more frequent and not just limited to tackles.
They're both great sports but very different.
Anyone who has played both has respect for both but knows they're different. Lots of people who've played one or the other have a lot of opinions but no basis for comparison.
If you play rugby - go play football then voice your opinion. If you play football, go play rugby then voice your opinion. It's that simple.
Rugby is a much harder sport as you need to be a more well rounded athlete
he's not in the league anymore but Christian Wade was another rugby player that made the transition. Maybe have Mailata and Carlin Isles on the show one went Rugby to NFL and the other NFL to rugby.
How you gonna argue that rugby players don't have "toughness"? 😂
They wear no protective gear, pkay for ages at once and take full contact tackles. NFL players wear so much protective gear and actually play for like 15 minutes per game 😂
Andrew Luck's Doctor said “We most commonly see this kind of injury associated with motor vehicle crashes or motorbike crashes,” said Dr. Lewis Jacobson. So Jason is pretty spot on with the being run over
I moved from the US to New Zealand as a 12 year old then moved back to the US two years later. I had the opportunity to play both at school. Both where fun, it all comes down to what you had the opportunity to play. American Samoa is where there is an opportunity to play both sports as children. I believe they still have the highest amount of D-1 and NFL players per capita. Same thing I guess applies here, a kid from Alaska and a kid from Texas wouldn’t have the same access to youth Football or youth Hockey depending on where they grew up.
It's simple guys:
Football: Specialized/specific skills, anaerobic endurance
Rugby: Generalised/allround skills, aerobic endurance
1. In football all positions are specialized, the roles are more specific. Linebackers don't have to be good at throwing the ball, quarterbacks don't have to be good tacklers. They're the best in the world in the one thing they do. In Rugby everyone has to more or less be able to do everything, which means that for example a prop generally won't be as physically dominant as a linebacker because his allround playing abilities are more important.
2. Like Jason said the energy systems needed are different. In rugby you need aerobic endurance because of the continuous play kinda like in soccer. In football almost everything is anaerobic, which is why NFL players are way more explosive and powerful, while Rugby players can go for longer.
I however don't agree that football requires more skill, just different more specific skills.
The arrogance of Americans to think that rugby players wouldnt make it in the NFL. Their example here being some randomer Jordan Mailata, who left aussie rugby league because he wasnt good enough (he had one season at a semi-pro club and the result was: "The South Sydney coaching staff did not believe that Mailata would be able to physically keep up with the pace and nature of professional rugby league"). After leaving Australia and with 0 experience or background in the NFL, he made it to a first team in less than a year.
I think the worlds best rugby players can definitely play in the NFL. They clearly have the athleticism and the build already. The biggest curve is obviously them learning the game but it’s no different than an NFL player trying to play rugby for the first time people forget that American football came from rugby. I understand football is way more high impact because you have pads and the way you are a lot of tackle but in rugby you are playing both offense and defense and you’re making multiple tackles within one game. Certain positions specialize in certain things but anyone can run with the ball pass it or kick it. I wish these guys would go and visit the all blacks or the spring boks.
All NRL players can make it in the NFL no 🧢
Rugby fan here. NFL is too specialised for rugby players to be easily transition. With regards to physique, you won’t like this but football players are on average bigger faster and stronger than rugby players.
@@fvalentine25 Jason Taumalolo vs Aaron Donald
@@fvalentine25 But far less cardio.
@fvalentine25 what a load of dog shitt
This convo needs to continue, with others. ASAP!
Skill. Thats where youre wrong.all Rugby players need to be able to Run with the ball, tackle, pass, kick, blow rucks, catch...the list goes on. Also...when you have the ball no ones blocking defenders
The main difference between Rugby & NFL is Rugby requires great stamina and a more general skill set as all the players are on the field all the time, and everyone attacks and defends. Nfl requires extremely fast & high execution in shorter bursts and with more specialised roles where a player only has to attack or defend
Talking of a rugby player who probably could have made it the NFL, Uini Antonia the beast of a French prop is 6.5ft and 22 stone it would have been fun to see him at offensive tackle!
Completely different game. Rugby players are infinitely harder men.
The fitness requirements change the body types significantly that are ideal for each sport. NFL players are extremely specialised, while rugby players have to be good at a lot of different things, hence the different bodies that can do these things to a high level.
Mailata was unable to get a full contract in league largely because his physique would be a liability, while in the nfl, it is a boon.
For the same reason there's no way NFL players have the stamina to play rugby.
I've played rugby for around 8 years and can say it's the other way around I played with over 50 American footballers throughout the years and some asked us if we wanted to learn, We said yes and after around an hour or so My rugby club was versing American footballers *Ages unknown probably around 15-16* at first we thought it would be fun in games But it got competitive because we were doing very very well. At the end we lost by 3 points all my teammates keep forgetting and the reason why we did very well was because of our tackles we mostly kept our defence tight which made it harder for them to get past. It was a very fun game but they won to a field goal. So at the end I think Rugby players have a REAL good chance at playing in the NFL.
I played quite a bit of rugby growing up in South Africa. I can agree and disagree on a few things. 1 I agree rugby has a larger cardio element than American Football, a lot less breaks in an 80 minute game. So a 6'8 350lbs guy struggles to keep up. On the other hand I do disagree with the skill comment. The skills are just wildly different, and yes AF is way more physical in a demolition derby kind of way.
With regards to rugby players who could make it, I think locks and flankers, the likes of a guy like Eben Etsebeth a 6'7 270lb monster with speed, strength and hands could convert to a half decent tight end. But in reality the only similarity between the sports is the size of the field, the goal posts and the shape of the ball.
One thing I have always thought about though is why the lateral (pass in rugby) isn't ever copied from Rugby. The way a ball is passed makes it easier to catch, more accurate and a lower risk play for when it might be needed in a football game. I think it's something that could add to the game.
Disagree on this I have to say. They should watch any game in the World Cup just finished between South Africa, France, Ireland and the All Blacks. Plenty of 300lb guys smashing into each other in blitz style defence. Rugby has evolved to be for more explosive due to professionalism. What Jason says in terms of each individual impact was true 5/10 years ago but it’s caught up now purely because of money in the game and professional standards improving within rugby.
NFL is made more complicated than it actually is...
American overestimation! I bet they would say American football players are more skilled than Association football ones! I can listen to a lot of arguments on favor of American football. It being a (more) SKILLFUL sport is NOT one of them.
You have rot differentiate between Rugby Union and Rugby League, league is a much faster game with much fewer stoppages compared to union, league has a six tackle rule rugby has unlimited tackles etc You get a chance to see two game of league live in Vegas in March of 24
Rugby players are in a completely different league in endurance and toughness! NFL players don't have the same stamina.
Some great comments in here. I think Jason reckons NFL players are considerably larger. 6 ft 9 and 300 pounds is huge, but its not uncommon to see 300-330 pound props, 250-280 pound middle and back rowers, so its not too dissimilar.
I'd say the impact is probably more given the angles that Football players clatter intogether, but the arobic capacity that Rugby players have is much much higher, and thus, the game becomes harder and more attritional in the lower numbers. You'll have guys the size of Jason doing 6-7 scrums a game, running around the park clearing bodies from rucks, lifting blokes in lineouts and doing it for a solid 45-60 mins more ofen that not.
The question being, could a rugby player play professional Football and I think there are probably a couple of positions that comepare.
- 10/15 in Rugby - Punt/Kicker in Football
- 6/7/8 in Rugby - Running back
- 4/5/6/8 in Rugby - Tight end.
- 11/14 in Rugby - Wide receiver
As rugby transitioned to a professional sport the players became significantly more conditioned even as Forwards, where teams do regularly field players who are 22 stone. But the average weight is definitely higher in football and with the hit rules in football, it definitely allows for more aggressive play.
Nfl teams have more players D line and O line where as in rugby D line and O line are the same thing
Definitely couldn’t play in the NFL but look up Nathan Cleary’s performance in the 2023 NRL GF. One of the 40 min stretches by a player of any sport ever.
The reason the best rugby player will fail in American Football, and the opposite would also be true, is reaction speed. Play a game for 20 years, from an early age, and your instincts and response time to the events of that game will be superb. Someone without those instincts, even if they are a better athlete than you, will be half a second slower in reacting as things happen. At the top level that half a second means you fail.
The national rugby league are actually doing a couple games in Vegas to kick off their season. Would be cool too see some nfl players get around it, im pre sure some teams are already
Mad respect for you guys..I grew up playing rugby, never played football when I moved here...I agree NFL doods are monsters in comparison to rugby players but c'mon just look at eben eztebeth..tell me you would want him as an opponent during a football game....
Rugby more skilful across the park than NFL and more mobile but much higher impacts in NFL and skills much more specialised and the NFL players more skilful in their limited roles but don’t have general skills across the different positions. NFL players also low cardiovascular fitness and could not play at 300 plus in rugby as they would gas. That weight means nfl players more force generation and explosive.
An NFL player played pro rugby league in the 90s and it didn’t go well for him. He only lasted a few games.
Any of South African forward pack could probably make it in the NFL…absolute monsters all like 6ft 5 270lbs
Nfl is full of specialists and rugby is all arounders and yes rugby athletes can make the tranfer
Agree with Jason
Rugby players are smaller b/c of non stop play and constant getting up from the ground.
US of America super league 7’s have NFL players
NFL players are often complete specialists and operate in relatively short periods of time. Rugby each players has to possess a more rounded skill set (comparatively), and the ability to play for extended periods of time with little/no breaks. Both are amazing. Very different sports, glad we can all enjoy both :)
A lot of NFL players wouldn’t make it in international rugby
These guys have no idea man! VERY different sports, just similar with physicality. NFL players would be a fish out of water and vice versa. Rugby you’re playing without stopping for 80 minutes. NFL stops after every play. Both great sports, both very different sports.
Also, the offensive players in NFL have to play defence also. In rugby, you’re offence, defence at the exact same time
Rugby player in NFL would depend on what position you pick in the NFL and which position from rugby goes there. A winger would play well as wide reciever and an inside centre may do very well as a tight end or running back. The front rower in rugby may do well on either end of the offensive line but a scrum is much different from the lines of scrimmage in football
Rugby players are beasts
a good rugby player is like a wrestler. you ain't getting away from them
Will Skelton sums that up
Christian Wade is probably the closest example. England rugby international, regular winner of domestic trophies for both his team and individual. Top tier rugby player and he gave it up to go try out for the NFL. I think he got picked up as a running back by… the Pats… can’t remember exactly? But it was for pre season trials and he didn’t quite make it.
There’s some great clips of him hitting 60+ yard running touchdowns pre season though.
To question the toughness of rugby players is crazy. But I guess the best way for you to get a good look at the game is the NRL is playing a few games in Las Vegas next year 2nd of March
Following the concussion issues in the NFL a study was done on Rugby to quantify the effects of tackles and it was found that Rugby players experienced significantly higher G-forces than in football in an average collision.
Great chat. Just started following nfl this year after 40 odd years of just rugby. I never knew how good the nfl is. I love it. The scope of plays available in nfl is endless. Some of the hits are hard to watch. They give getting smoked new meaning. In both sports men of all different size and shape play. The key diference would be that in rugby you have to play offense and defence. This requires a bigger skill set for every player in rugby. I don't think that the games are close enough in format to have crossover. In Sevens rugby we have some super fast players from the USA. Coulter Niles who is lightening quick is a good 7s player but probably couldn't make it as a great 15 a side player because of the defensive work needed to be done. Love the nfl and I will be supporter for life. Haven't got a favorite team yet but I do like kc due to watching that quaterback doco on netflix. Patrick mahomes is a funny guy.
Jason’s point about the energy systems is the key difference here. Rugby players, regardless of position, need to be fit enough to run for minutes at a time, get down to make tackles / hit rucks and then pop straight back up again for the next phase. That’s why it’s rare to find rugby players with the massive size we see in NFL linemen. They wouldn’t last until halftime and there are no rolling substitutions, so a player like that is a liability. Travis’ point about the skill difference seems misguided - I understand where he’s coming from insofar as the skill positions in football are far more specialised than rugby, but I would say that as a rule rugby players are more rounded athletes. Every player on the pitch needs to be able to run, tackle, catch, carry, pass the ball and constantly reassess their positioning in attack and defence through multiple formations and scenarios. It’s not as clearly structured as football but there’s still a lot of detail in terms of formation and roles that may not be obvious to more casual fans.
These guys haven’t played rugby at an elite level, respectfully. Opinion, play against the Springboks or All Blacks then see what you have to say 😂
Kentucky had a really good Australian rugby player, punter who won the punter award and was really good.
Love you guys , please hang with the lads and train with the boys when they come over next year...no one telling you what to do next move any more...will be fun to watch...give heads up ,you will be smashed.
Let’s get you guys doing a training session with an international rugby team during the off season you guys should actually do more rugby coverage how does that sound?
I very much agree with the point on NFL stars being out and out better athletes but I think impact wise rugby is ahead, not just in force of collision but also the frequencies of collisions compared to the NFL. Watch Peter SDT in the World Cup final last weekend and find me another nfl player that could make 28 (mostly dominant hit) tackles (keeping in mind he also had to run, ruck and play an offensive role for 80 minutes) I would love to see what would happen if some of those American D1 athletes chose rugby over nfl (but that will never happen obviously), I think America would rip up international rugby in a new way.
You are delusional!
Travis, rugby players are plenty big. The front row payers (props and hookers) are typically upwards of 300 lbs (though perhaps not NFL lineman size). Second row players (locks) tend to be quite large as well (and often tall). Rugby players could play in the NFL but would need a couple of years to make the transition (i.e. spend time in college). If you are making the argument that they could not make an immendiate transition from top-level professional rugby to the NFL, then yeas, I'd say they could not.
Respectfully, playing 80 straight minutes of car crashes is harder than 20-30 minutes of potential car crashes
Without a doubt
Yeah, you summarised it well.
and as much as i love Jason Kelce - he wouldn't last 50 mins as a forward. He might do 30-40mins easy. but there's reason those state of origin forwards look like they're made of marble. they are...
Rugby isn’t like car crashes though. NFL is like car crashes. They have done studies on both sports. That’s why he said getting hit in the face 10 times is more like Rugby.
@@sspacegghosthe wouldn’t last 5 minutes in a League game lmao
New heights boys would do well to Chat to Andy Goode and Jim Hamilton on The Rugby Pod. I could help to explain the difference, but those guys have a better platform. Hit them up, team Kelce
Would deffo want someone, maybe Mailata, to show them games from the NRL to see the hits, the speed, the skill ...
Thing is Mailata never played in the NRL. So it would be hard to compare unless your Jarryd Hayne lmao
Missed opportunity by not watching the actual final of finals this past weekend to see 6ft5 guys running faster and tackling harder than DBs
I will say if you're genuinely interested in this, look up a guy named Monte Gaddis. He made the news a few years back being the guy standing outside the Browns training camp with the "Will do Reps for Food" sign but after that he pivoted into Rugby League and now owns a team in Cleveland. He'd be good for those comparisons. He will also explain the difference between League & Union (League is MUCH more suited to an American Audience imo)
You're not gonna see top end Rugby/NFL guys switch code, but like Mailata, you get em young enough, teach out a few of the old habits and put in a few new ones and you got a pathway in both directions.
The NRL are going to Vegas 3 weeks after the Superbowl, like the NFL London Games, their regular season Opener in a 2 game double header and they're holding a combine for those thousands of college athletes that don't make it to the big time. The skillsets are close enough.
For me, the difference is football is very scripted with highly specified jobs and body types. Where rugby is a more generalized skill set because they play def and offense and the flow of the game is much more organic.
Lekker pod gents, a South African chap here, played rugga from age of 7 till 24 years of age, follow the NFL as much as I can from here in South Africa. Iv got a honours in Sports science and I am a Biokineticist dealing with Sport Injuries.
When it comes to size, besides props in rugby, we don't really want 300lb players as to move around for 60-80min you will be gassed and become slow on the field, the Springboks (our national team) average pack weight is roughly 125kg. So that's about 240lb.
In the NFL it seems individuals are selected and conditioned to fulfill very specific rolls and physical tasks, so the NFL is able to maximize size and strength and speed for a individual.
With that in mind I thinknits hard to compare the 2 sports and if players can cross over and which is harder and tougher, both in there own right are tough, I am sure a skilled individual who has the range/scope can physically adapt to each sport, it just comes down to learning specific tasks and skills, in SA many players learn the skills from the age of 7 for rugby. So it would be difficult for a rugby player to learn new specific skills for NFL, but I think it's possible, and vica versa.
Jason cracked me up 😂😂😂 bagging on Centers 😂😂😂😂.
When sports analysis becomes poetry.
I really like football and the kelce brother, but i grew up playing rugby and let me tell you that the qb sneak is nothing like a scrum please get a rugby player (a forward) one time on the pod just for a minute so you guys can understand what the scrum is, maybe you can compare ir to a maul but not a scrum. Also al rugby players on the field need to know how to carry the ball and tackle on football you play offense or defense, just two different worlds. Watch some highlights on Bryan Habana and you can se he could have try out for the NFL no problem
I agree, with Travis different sports, stop comparing the two. Just enjoy the fact that you can watch both.
A number of rugby players are 6ft 6 plus and the taller flankers could easily play tight end. Some of the bigger fullbacks and centres could also play wide receiver eg J Barrett.
Now Stop right there Brothers Jason and Travis !!! There are 2 (two) types of Rugby… Rugby Union and Rugby League. They are a different game altogether. Union teams have 15 players on field plus reserve players, replacement players for players injured, Rugby League teams have 13 players on field, plus reserve player for the same reason. Both are hard fast and hard hitting tackling games and different rules, But if you really want to watch a couple of Rugby League games live and direct…and your not doing anything around March 2, 2024 at Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas, the Manly Sea Eagles are playing the South Sydney Rabbitohs and the Sydney Roosters are taking on the Brisbane Broncos. I reckon you’d both be welcome in any of the changing rooms, but I can’t help you with a Rugby Union game though ‘cept maybe watch a replay World Cup game, cheers🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺…and go the Chiefs..!
Hi guys-I’m a rugby mum from New Zealand-much respect to your mother for watching the 2of you regularly trying to kill yourselves or others on a weekly basis. Your right the games are 2 different to even compare-my son is a “9” half back nearest comparative might be your quarterback but builds are completely different- 9s are usually smaller, under 6 foot and 100kgs but will regularly tackle guys up to 50kgs heavier than them. They are fast never stop moving and handle the ball more than anyone on the paddock. You dont mess with the halfback-if they dont damage you the rest of there team will!!
The simple truth is the pads are worn for a reason. Collision speeds are higher, hits come from any direction and opponents run at you at full speed. The game would not be safe at all without pads. Rugby guys are built huge but the game is slower and collision speeds are lower as they run in a straight line. Hence when someone breaks loose it’s called a line break. I live in Australia, I watch both religiously
What would make a difference for cross code converts would be if the NFL had a 2nd division - a level which was still professional and elite but just not as elite as the NFL. A division full of players who didn't quite make the NFL and others who did but are coming back from injury or are at the end of their careers.
Then converts could be loaned out to learn the skills over maybe 2 or 3 seasons at a high level rather than go on a practise squad.
In other countries the major sports usually have 2,3,4 professional divisions so players who have potential can learn at a high level.
If you want to play NFL there's only one division and no real pathway after college.
World champions at a sport that no one els plays sums it up
The pads and helmets make Football more dangerous, not safer.
Cardio is a massive issue.
The other is general ball skills. The pass/ catch skills in the NFL are horrendous.
Every player in rugby actually handles the ball and is responsible for its " safe keeping", whereas most football players never even touch the ball in their entire career!!
Thank you for the skill comment! Can't believe what I heard!
Nfl players can only play in fits and starts . 60 minutes of what. Spread over 4 hours. Rugby is 80 minutes with one break. You 2 are a great team on NFL , but Lets see you play without going off every every time you change from offense to defence.
I would pay for these two legends watch or react to rugby highlights u knw. But respect tho, all love.
Dude! Travis as a flanker would be an absolute problem! And Jason as a lock!! 😮💨
Rugby is alot more physical than the NFL, and rugby players are tougher
You guys should head to Las Vegas next year in March for the Rugby League games that will be played at the New Stadium
Great Vid. Interesting comparison. I'm South African, therefore being pro-Rugby is very natural. I know that American football is much more specialised than rugby and requires less aerobic fitness. NFL players can afford to sacrifice endurance in the name of more pace and power, while for rugby players it is more of a balancing act. Rugby is also less stop-start in nature, bringing a certain demand to the athlete. My view is that its not easy to compare as it is almost two very different sporting codes
Former Rugby star Jarryd Hayne, who was a 49er for a short period, once explained the difference pretty good. He mainly said that the speed and the force of the hit in pads is way higher and he really had to get used to that. He called both sports very though but the collisions is what seperates them, if I remember correctly. Should be somewere on the net. Nice Content by the way and say hi to my 9ers TE George Kittle!!!!!!