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

[sixfour]

[ QUOTE ]
...and paid them enought money to make them drop everything and train daily in rugby for 6 months, could they win the Rugby world cup?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd take the over and it wouldn't even be close. People who don't watch rugby probably don't appreciate how easily they would get dominated at set plays and tactically, ignoring the fact that your average NFL player would need to learn a whole new set of skills. Your average RB/WR probably has no idea how to pass, kick or tackle.

[MCS]

I think NFL guys would lose pretty handily.

[ArcticKnight]

I have played Football and Rugby (university Rugby - St. Mary's Halifax), so I undertsand a bit about the different size and skills sets. I could make several comments, but one I want to make is about the build/shape/muscularity of football players versus rugby players.

Rugby players are not cut-up, bodybuiling types because the sport requires strength and endurance. Most NFL positions require powerful bursts of speed/power and strength for relatively shorter durations, with recovery time factored in. Thus, the shape of the NFL players are optimum for their sport and positions.

If rugby players could be built like NFL players and be sucessful, they would be. But, you can't carry (and maintain) that kind of muscularity around in a strength/endurance game like rugby. For many positions rugbyplayers have builds that cross between american football players and soccer players, but that is what we should expect, becuase rugby has attributes of both soccer and american football.

I should add that some of the posters make it sound like countries like Australia, South Africa, etc, lack the ability to have althetes that are built like many of the RBs, CBs. LBs, in the NFL. America does not have a monopoly on weight rooms, heavy conditioning, fast athletes, etc.
South Africa could build a rugby team team that was built the NFL football players, but there is is a reason they don't.

PS. Tactically it would take more than 6 months to prepare anyway. Perhaps two or three years...I'm not sure.

[Pudge714]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lomu ran a 10.89 100m at his peak, which translates to about a 4.75-4.80 in the 40.


[/ QUOTE ]
Can anyone comment on this? 10.9 is much better than 4.75 imo. Breakdown of 40 times: http://athletesacceleration.blogspot...yard-dash.html

[/ QUOTE ]
Ya I was thinking this as well.
Also while we are naming random guys who would make good rugby players Kevin Williams FTW

[Omniheart]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

he is obv a good athlete, but there are plenty of defensive ends who are bigger and faster than this guy

[/ QUOTE ]

Bigger than 265lbs yet able to run 100 metres in less than 10.9 + also super well coordinated?

[/ QUOTE ]

Lomu ran a 10.89 100m at his peak, which translates to about a 4.75-4.80 in the 40.

A guy 6'5", 265lbs, running a 4.8 in the 40 can be found on every NFL roster, and even more of them left in the unemployment line after the final cutdown day, because it just isn't that impressive on it's face.

In fact, a 265-pounder running a 4.8 is considered "slow", and would need to bulk up to keep his job, because he just won't cut it as a "speed guy" with those times.

Consider Tommie Harris is 295lb, and ran a 4.68 at the combine, that's like asking Lomu to put on a 30 pound rucksak, and then suddenly be able to run 5 or 6 steps faster than he's ever done in his life.

I mean, Rugby is great and all, but let's don't get ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry it doesnt work like that. 40 and 100 are totally different. you can't just divide and come up with 40 times. Reggie Bush ran a 10.42 100 meter dash in HS and he has 4.2-4.3 speed. So 10.9 is prob 4.5-4.7 range.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

OK so your point was purely that there exists people in the world who both weigh more and can run 40 metres faster than Lomu?

[/ QUOTE ]

Was just answering your previous question, asking if their were any DE's that were bigger and faster:

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="red">tarheeljks said:</font>
he is obv a good athlete, but there are plenty of defensive ends who are bigger and faster than this guy
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="red">PartyGirlUK said:</font>
Bigger than 265lbs yet able to run 100 metres in less than 10.9 + also super well coordinated?


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

To cut to the point, yes, there are a lot of them.

[RedBean]

[ QUOTE ]

sorry it doesnt work like that. 40 and 100 are totally different. you can't just divide and come up with 40 times. Reggie Bush ran a 10.42 100 meter dash in HS and he has 4.2-4.3 speed. So 10.9 is prob 4.5-4.7 range.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't just "divide it up". Most kids who run a 10.9 in the 100m run a 4.7-4.8 in the 40.

And Bush has never clocked a 4.2 time in any official 40....he ran a 4.38 at the combine, which is nothing to be shy about...but it isn't a 4.2.

[PartyGirlUK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

OK so your point was purely that there exists people in the world who both weigh more and can run 40 metres faster than Lomu?

[/ QUOTE ]

Was just answering your previous question, asking if their were any DE's that were bigger and faster:

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="red">tarheeljks said:</font>
he is obv a good athlete, but there are plenty of defensive ends who are bigger and faster than this guy
[ QUOTE ]
<font color="red">PartyGirlUK said:</font>
Bigger than 265lbs yet able to run 100 metres in less than 10.9 + also super well coordinated?


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

To cut to the point, yes, there are a lot of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, I really, really doubt that Bears dude could beat Lomu over 100m. Refer to the blog article linked above. Secondly, I really find it incredibly unlikely that there are all these 265 lb super fast super athletic guys out there with amazing cardio.

Now, I think this argument is pretty silly. There's no way that the best NFL players would ever be the best in the world at rugby. If they had started from a young age, there is a very good chance they would be. Guys like LT, Hester, Moss etc. But also I'm sure that Johnny Wilkinson could walk into the NFL right now, and that guys like Lomu and Martin Johnson could have succeeded in the NFL if they were American raised etc.

[samsonh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

sorry it doesnt work like that. 40 and 100 are totally different. you can't just divide and come up with 40 times. Reggie Bush ran a 10.42 100 meter dash in HS and he has 4.2-4.3 speed. So 10.9 is prob 4.5-4.7 range.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't just "divide it up". Most kids who run a 10.9 in the 100m run a 4.7-4.8 in the 40.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is extremely incorrect RedBean. Those kids would run a football 40 in the 4.5 range. If you mean they would split 4.7 or 4.8 at the 40 yard mark in a 100 you are correct.

[FUJItheFISH]

if they dont wear pads they lose some protection. who cares? they also gain the freedom to exert their athletic superiority in its entirety.