If you got Ladanian Tomlinson and a few of his closest friends...

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]
i also think youre at least a disingenous prick and at possibly a complete fraud.

[/ QUOTE ]

This actually sheds some light on why you are so quick and eager to label Bonds, and just about anyone who has a different opinion than you a "prick".

I mean, hey....I mentioned a similar factual situation that actually happened 80 years ago....so obviously in your mind that makes me a "prick" or "complete fraud".

Lemme guess, you're one of those guys who thinks anyone who doesn't agree with him must be a "prick"?

Yikes...good luck with that. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i also think youre at least a disingenous prick and at possibly a complete fraud.

[/ QUOTE ]

This actually sheds some light on why you are so quick and eager to label Bonds, and just about anyone who has a different opinion than you a "prick".

I mean, hey....I mentioned a similar factual situation that actually happened 80 years ago....so obviously in your mind that makes me a "prick" or "complete fraud".

Lemme guess, you're one of those guys who thinks anyone who doesn't agree with him must be a "prick"?

Yikes...good luck with that. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

we've been over this a bunch of times, but the reason youre disingenuous is bc you deliberately left out very important details that mitigate the results of usa winning that gold.

also, just to return the nittiness, you are made multiple assumptions about me in this post and the one a few back. but im starting to better understand your argument techniques. its ok for redbean to do it but noone else.

[JaredL]

I'm not going through and reading the whole thing but I don't think the US players would have much of a chance. They would probably be better than the US national team though.

For full disclosure, I'm sure I know more about rugby than the average American, but I still don't know that much about it. Most of I watched 3 or 4 matches from the 2003 World Cup with a friend who is a big fan and explained what was going on.

In addition to not having enough of a tactical understanding - something that is pretty devastating since the game is free flowing with few if any set plays by a coach - the NFL guys would have to change their exercise regime. The same would be true the other way. The difference is that rugby involves a lot of running (both jogging and sprinting) with tackling as well as some stoppages for kicks, line-outs, and scrums. This is quite different than (American) football which features short plays that are essentially at full effort with breaks in the middle.

This difference has caused football players to develop bodies for that type of game. They are very explosive, being both ridiculously strong and quick for their size. If you could sub the whole team on for a scrum near either goal line you would probably want the NFL guys over the rugby guys. The problem is stamina. I think the NFL players would get worn out and would be destroyed in the late stages of any game they played. They could improve this in 6 months, but I don't think by enough to overcome it especially as they will need to spend a lot of time learning the game.

I don't think comparing the two is like comparing an sprinter and a marathoner since they aren't that different but it's like giving Asafa Powell a couple months to train to beat Jeremy Wariner in the 400 or Gary Reed in the 800.

The reverses obviously holds too. I think a team of the rugby players best suited for the NFL would be dogs to a good college team if they had a year or whatever to train.

[jtown1010]

I don't know [censored] about Rugby other than a few clips from TV, but come on guys, NFL players are at least close in terms of stamina. I realise the actual game is more geared towards short bursts of speed and power, but actually training for the NFL requires an unreal amount of stamina. I'm sure the basic strategies and small nuances of the game would be the biggest obstacle the NFL players would have, not the stamina factor.

[Butcho22]

[ QUOTE ]
I also find it completely LOL to see how so many Americans think that our country is the only one capable of producing world class athletes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Jesus...it's like you guys have small-mans syndrome. Who here said that America is the only country capable of producing world class athletes?
The only ones making this, "usa vs the world" are the ones who aren't from america.

Yeti,

I realize this, but the guy I was responding to probably doesn't. I mean, he told me I wouldn't like his country because I'm not being open-minded. lol wtf. Talk about getting too defensive.

[dknightx]

stamina shouldn't be an issue. you would be surprised how well top 100m runners could do in a mile run. Also, its not difficult to work on stamina just focusing on it for an hour or two a day. (while the rest can be spent focusing on rugby skills, etc).

Also, how popular is rugby in other countries? Do the players there make a lot of money? What you are missing is that in the US, most of the BEST athletes in the country play in the NFL. I'm sure a lot of rugby teams have some good athletes, but is every player on the team a world class athlete? If the answer is yes, then the rugby players would have the advantage. Otherwise, 6 months is plenty of time to learn a new (very similar) sport ... but we ARE talking about football players here.

[anatta]

Like I said, I am quite certain the rugby shirt was a gift, but I assumed Christmas, it might have been a birthday gift. Its more fall-winter fashion, but my girlfriend might have birthday shopped at Marshall's, and my birthday is in the spring (Pisces - FTW), Marshall's has stuff that's like a season behind for good prices, like bathing suits in September. (End of Summer for our friends down below, earth tilt)

[PartyGirlUK]

[ QUOTE ]
stamina shouldn't be an issue. you would be surprised how well top 100m runners could do in a mile run. Also, its not difficult to work on stamina just focusing on it for an hour or two a day. (while the rest can be spent focusing on rugby skills, etc).

**right but then you have to lose fat and muscle which means they are no longer these all encompassing beasts**

Also, how popular is rugby in other countries? Do the players there make a lot of money? What you are missing is that in the US, most of the BEST athletes in the country play in the NFL.

**really? Top basketball players get paid 30 mil a year, same for baseball right? And then people who are very good rather than great get 13/14 mil as standard. Whereas in NFL, VERY few people are getting 8 figs a year. Peyton is on 2007 Salary: $10,004,400 **

I'm sure a lot of rugby teams have some good athletes, but is every player on the team a world class athlete? If the answer is yes, then the rugby players would have the advantage.



Otherwise, 6 months is plenty of time to learn a new (very similar) sport ... but we ARE talking about football players here.


**level?????**

[/ QUOTE ]

[SuperUberBob]

You could be the most athletic man in the world, but if you haven't played the game on a regular basis, you'd get crushed.

Just because a basketball player might be faster than a wide receiver doesn't mean he would be a Pro Bowl W in the NFL.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
You could be the most athletic man in the world, but if you haven't played the game on a regular basis, you'd get crushed.

Just because a basketball player might be faster than a wide receiver doesn't mean he would be a Pro Bowl W in the NFL.

[/ QUOTE ]

But you have played it on a regular basis. Every day for 6 months. Or 10 years depending on which argument you are interested in.