World Cup athletes vs. NFL athletes

[frankbones]

Comparing the two sports is asanine as far as endurance goes. Its like comparing the endurance of a 10k runner vs a 200m sprinter. AS for the athletic side. THe soccer player, imo, is the better overall athlete.

Here is your 2004 Olympic gold medalist in the 200m

[GAYJOKE] insert here [/GAYJOKE]

Here is your 2004 Olympic 10k winner.

You tell me who the better athlete is.

[jasimpson]

I'll concede that soccer players are probably more conditioned, but in terms of which sport has the best athletes, the answer is American Football, period. When you have men that weigh 200-300lbs with 10% or less body fat, look at Broderick Bunkley, Julius Peppers, Jevon Kearse, Joey Porter, Sean Taylor, etc that run, jump, and possess the lateral capabilities that they have, it's hard to argue.

[shawn]

If you think Brazil is good, just wait till an industralized nation of over 300 Million starts producing 11 Reggie Bush Soccer players.

as much as I like to agree with you, you couldn't be more wrong. Soccer is quite a bit different than Football, Baseball or Basketball. there are no set plays, there are no plays to run, a lot of it is inate. you just learn where to move to, where the open spots are, what routes to run and how to play give and go. the field is so wide and the play moves so quickly at times that you can't do anyof the traditional things you can do with football or baseball or basketball. these brazilians play soccer in the back streets from the time they are just a few years old. its like the kids playing basketball in the inner city.....the competition is high and you can't throw money at it and expect to win in this game...unless you do what france has done...import them

[Xameil]

You are correct. Except that on this side of the pond we play 80 minute games, with 40 minute halfs.

Rugby is a combination of soccer conditioning and football conditioning. You are in constant motion, except when you slam into someone else. The sudden stopping/starting is extremely hard. Don't believe me? Run a few laps around a grass field, but every 10 meters or so just drop to the ground, full-impact, and then pop back up and keep running. It will be the hardest workout you've ever done (unless you're already a rugger and you probably have this in your training routine already).

to the Ruggers on board!!

my rugger brother. People just don't think of the Rugby players tho. They should really look at a NZ vs Aussie game, they'll see what it's all about. Even if you goto the ground, there is no real stoppage..the ruck/maul takes ALOT out of you (yes even us wings ruck and maul).

Excorsising??? :rubeyes:

I don't care who ya are...that's funny

I'll concede that soccer players are probably more conditioned, but in terms of which sport has the best athletes, the answer is American Football, period. When you have men that weigh 200-300lbs with 10% or less body fat, look at Broderick Bunkley, Julius Peppers, Jevon Kearse, Joey Porter, Sean Taylor, etc that run, jump, and possess the lateral capabilities that they have, it's hard to argue.

Seriously...check out a rugby match...hands down Rugby players are the better athletes. I would put Bunkley again Lomu (look him up) any day of the week. The guy was a beast. I would love to see those guys take the pads off and play a rugby match. I bet ST would make a killer Wing Forward...what do ya say my fellow ruggers

[Nomadskin11]

Depends on the definition of athlete, but... in a non-contact sport, the decathletes take the conditioning cake. In a contact sport, you have to go with the aussie-rules rugby players; they're basically playing NFL soccer. They run full speed constantly and they take and deliver big time hits.

The NFL is still by far my favorite to watch though!

Speaking of soccer, as a long time high level soccer player, I have a couple of notes on some of the comparison statements from above.

I guess the best analogy is that NFL players are conditioned for multiple consecutive 100 yard dashes while soccer players are conditioned for one long marathon.

but when soccer players arent around the ball, theyre walking a lot of the time. so its not like theyre going 100% non-stop for 90 minutes.

Football is a game based on sprints, soccer a game based on jogging.

Soccer players are conditioned to maintain a steady jog with sprint bursts every few seconds. Walking is a precious commodity and must be used wisely as a choice, like a chess match; also, much depends on which position you are playing. For example, the forwards may choose to hang near the midfield during a defensive series, hoping to explode for a counter attack run; usually, a coach will choose one, maybe two, to stay at the point. Likewise, the defenders may choose to hang back during an offensive attack, defending against a counter-attack; however, defenders often make the biggest runs of the game when they choose (on an offensive) to run along the sideline past a player with ball (called on overlap) to present an extra offensive option. (Whenever I played defense, I loved those runs). The midfielders, however, hardly ever stop running or playing very hard. You are responsible for attacking and defending at all times. I played center midfielder for most of my career, and in 90 minutes of gametime, I don't know that I ever stopped running, nor did I want to.

Football athletes are men amongst boys. Some tip in the scales at 250 lbs plus and can run circles around some soccer players. Would anyone else be embarrassed when both you and I get smoked in a footrace with Derrick Dockery?

Speak for yourself. Some NFL players may very well be able to "run circles around some soccer players." I would guess that the opposite would be true as well. Soccer requires incredible and repeatable bursts of speed throughout the course of a ninety minute game with very few stops. The men amongst boys statement, at least as it relates to "run circles," is pretty ignorant. I dare you to try playing center midfielder in a ninety minute game without coming out. And I'm only daring you for the sake of the running; I won't even mention the slide tackles, the pushing, punching, cleating, elbows and other genuinely and generally dirty gritty stuff that goes down, often when the ref isn't looking.

Aussie Rules Footballers are way less pansy ass than Soccer players.

The thing about soccer and football is that soccer doesn't have linemen who have to push each other around as much, nor is someone trying to tackle the soccer players. I think any soccer player would go down without so much as a tap from Deion Sanders.

soccer players = cardio bunnies at the gym

you can't compare women to men (football players)

BTW, I heard Randy Moss on the radio on Saturday and he was talking about the World Cup. In his opinion, "the best athlete in the World Cup could only be a kicker in the NFL." John Clayton agreed with him.

Wow. Good ones. Hard to come up with those statements. Grade-A thought going into every word. Seriously, GFunk, have you ever played in a REAL soccer game? If you ever do, it's not going to be fun for you the first time you take a kick to the nuts, an elbow to the head or a kick to the knee. You can't play soccer if you aren't ready to be really physical, and really tough.

The posters I quote in this section (hkHog, I know you are just quoting Randy Moss ) might not know that you can't possibly go up for a header with the intention of winning the ball without knowing somebody is going to go up in the air against you probably to punch you in the back or hit you in the head.

So no, I don't think a tap from Deion Sanders will do anything to most soccer players, and conversely, I think many soccer players, if not for their size (it is much better to be smaller for the skill set required in soccer),

would make great NFL players. Don't forget that slide tackles and jostling for position while running full speed are big parts of soccer. When done correctly, you can take a guy out big-time as long as you hit the ball first . The hitting, pushing, and fighting were as important (and fun) for me as any other parts of the game.

All of that said...

I agree as well, since none of them seem capable of taking a hit. With the amount of dives they take, punter works too. :laugh:

The few morons who take those dives really, really tick a guy like me off. I love getting tackled by some big idiot only to get up and act like he did nothing. You'll still get the penalty called, but you won't look like a cry baby.

Non-soccer players need to know that those guys are not the norm, and that most soccer players despise that kind of behavior. I, for one, am ecstatic that they've started handing out red-cards for that crap.

peace -

nomad

[Ghost of]

Studies have been done that show that David Beckham, although he is a midfielder and MFs run more, runs over 7 miles per 90 minute match.

Why is this amazing? Basketball players run around that in a game. Centers and forwards run the most, actually, with guards behind them(at least in terms of up and down the floor, not counting drives to the hoop or movement without the ball.) And I'd make the argument that there is more 'other activity' in a basketball game that puts it over the top of soccer.

Plus, one need only look at most of the athletes in the NBA, physically and in terms of measurables to see the difference.

Endurance is a great trait but it is not as if soccer players don't have relatively long breaks where they jog, stand or something like that. People act like soccer is just one long marathon, it isn't. 4-7 miles in an hour and a half is not even jogging pace, guys. 5-8 miles in 48 minutes is far more running in a more concise period of time--more intense.

[tehhunter]

Rugby is catching on in America too... it's amazing, really. It takes the skill and determination of soccer with the speed and strength of football, combines them, removes all semblances of pads, and lets the teams go at it.

I read a quote once, it went something like this:

Soccer is a gentlemen's game played by beasts

Football is a beastly game played by gentlemen

Rugby is a beastly game played by beasts

Ain't it the truth, rugby brothers?

[Ghost of]

Comparing the two sports is asanine as far as endurance goes. Its like comparing the endurance of a 10k runner vs a 200m sprinter. AS for the athletic side. THe soccer player, imo, is the better overall athlete.

LOL Ok, I played soccer in high school. I actually got some time on the field too, despite being a TOTAL NOVICE! I could have tried out for cross country.

Most of the basketball team was on the cross country team. A couple of them were on track. Our goalkeep was on the basketball team.

Anecdotes about who was in how many sports is silly. It will vary from school to school and some guys need to give more practice time to playing a sport like basketball because of the skills needed to become an impact player.

Anyways, I didn't get a shot at the basketball roster yet I got time on the field in soccer and wasn't terrible. I had played one of those sports all my life and the other only a couple of occasions. You tell me who the better athletes are again...

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

Let me also add that I think it's funny how defensive soccer fans get over the sport. Yet, they fail to realize many critics DID PLAY soccer (I played indoor and outdoor soccer intramural at Michigan and played in high school) and have come to hold these views BASED on that experience. One could just as easily ask the soccer fellas if they've played football or basketball competitively.

As for the passion of the fans, most of the time they're making noise just to make noise. So the hell what? The basketball fans in Europe and SAmerica are noisier and more 'passionate' than they are here too. It indicates nothing about the sport. It's not as if all that noise is some kind of big distraction or will cause a miscommunication or delay of game. Noise in basketball and football makes a difference in the game itself. That singing and nonsense they do for soccer is just part of the atmosphere. More like NASCAR in its impact on the result.

[panel]

Soccer Players generally will have better stamina, they Sprint and jog, sprint and job.

NFL players will Sprint and rest, sprint and rest.

But in every over catigory other than Stamina, the NFL players got them beat.

[909997]

nfl are stronger and faster

[Xameil]

Rugby is catching on in America too... it's amazing, really. It takes the skill and determination of soccer with the speed and strength of football, combines them, removes all semblances of pads, and lets the teams go at it.

I read a quote once, it went something like this:

Soccer is a gentlemen's game played by beasts

Football is a beastly game played by gentlemen

Rugby is a beastly game played by beasts

Ain't it the truth, rugby brothers?

actually the way I heard it was "Soccer is a gentlemens sport played by hooligans. Rugby is a Hologans sport played by gentlemen"

Of course the evolution of the sports go Soccer, which sprouted Rugby, which was brough to America and called football. Look at the old rules...you'll notice some similarities....drop goal anyone?

[pjfootballer]

Soccer is the poor man's sport and I don't have time for that. All you need is a ball, 2 trash cans and 2 parked cars to play soccer. :laugh:

[InTikiITrust]

Football players are just physical freaks. Look at Vernon Davis...size, speed, strength, agility, toughness, quickness, he's got it all.

[JoeSkins]

Soccer players are conditioned to maintain a steady jog with sprint bursts every few seconds. Walking is a precious commodity and must be used wisely as a choice, like a chess match; also, much depends on which position you are playing. For example, the forwards may choose to hang near the midfield during a defensive series, hoping to explode for a counter attack run; usually, a coach will choose one, maybe two, to stay at the point. Likewise, the defenders may choose to hang back during an offensive attack, defending against a counter-attack; however, defenders often make the biggest runs of the game when they choose (on an offensive) to run along the sideline past a player with ball (called on overlap) to present an extra offensive option. (Whenever I played defense, I loved those runs). The midfielders, however, hardly ever stop running or playing very hard. You are responsible for attacking and defending at all times. I played center midfielder for most of my career, and in 90 minutes of gametime, I don't know that I ever stopped running, nor did I want to.

I wasn't clear when I said that football was a game of sprints and soccer a game of jogging. What I meant was that football is a game of 6-8 second bursts with 40 seconds inbetween, where as in soccer, a jog is about as slow as it gets. I played football in high school, and in pickup soccer games I had to play goal because I couldn't keep up. I understand, though, the conditioning required in a sport where the ball/puck is constantly in play as I was also a hockey player. Granted, my hockey years consisted of me being in the crease with a ton of gear on, so I didn't have to take part in the suffering (as I was football conditioned, the goalie job of bursts and breaks while wearing heavy gear was well-suited for me).

I still stick by my original opinion though; decathletes and pentathletes are the best in the world, since their events are simply measurements of physical aptitude in its most basic form.

[Awesome2]

I think basketball players are getting a little short-changed in this arguement.

NBA players, shooting guards and power forwards in particular, need to be in this arguement. Guys like Tracy McGrady, Kobe Bryant, Vince Carter, Allen Iverson, Dwyane Wade.

Look at guys like Nate Robinson. He runs a 4.35 40 and has about a 45 inch vertical. I'm sure most guys in the league aren't that fast, but even the best football players don't have the kind of explosiveness that a Vince Carter/Andre Iguodala type player has.

[ashburnskinsfan]

And the winner is ... water polo.

Australian Rules gets a favorable mention. Decathlon has to be high on any list.

http://www.sptimes.com/2004/02/08/Sports/World_s_Greatest_Athl.shtml

I don't think football should be listed high. Footballers do a lot of training for short explosive effort but are out of gas before they could cover even 100m. A few footballers (such as Santana Moss) were college track stars, but I have spoken to several current and former Redksins (at running back and corner back positions) who hated the intensity of track training.

Another sport that requires an incredible level of conditioning but would not be considered in the USA is field hockey. Like a hybrid between soccer (played at an intense pace) and ice hockey, but with no breaks. The modern game is played on astroturf so the ball is never out of play for more than a few seconds. Lacrosse also requires a very high degree of fitness.

[bedlamVR]

You know we had a show over her in the UK called supssar or sports star or something like that and it pitted all different sports superstars at a range of sporting related tasks that involved speed co- ordination endurance strength etc etc and the ones that really supprised were the rowers, and the skiers .

Other highly tonned athelites which you wouldn't think so since they spend most of thier sport on thier asses are F1 motor raing drivers .

[jasimpson]

I respect Rugby players and what they do, but you can't sit here and tell me they are better ATHLETES than what we have in the NFL. In terms of speed, acceleration, deceleration, lateral movement, leaping ability, there is nothing really close to the NFL ATHLETE. The Vernon Davis, Reggie Bush, Sean Taylor, Clinton Portis, Brian Urlacher, Ladainian Tomlinson, etc types possess a combination of the aforementioned attributes that is unparralled in the world of sports.

[pjfootballer]

What about Hockey players? pretty demanding sport also.

[Rawdawg]

How about ultramarathon runners?? They run 100-200 miles per race, and do it in under two days. Plus you have to consider the elevation changes in most races, they aften run up and down the mountain ranges of the South West.

Rock climbers are freaks of nature as well, but probably not in the overall ridiculous athlete category.

For the record I believe that distance runners are tops for overall athletic ability. I played football, cross country, swimming, track and worked with the jv soccer team in high school. I trained with the football team, and ran distance workouts for cross country in the fall, cross country was always much more taxing, I swam long distance for the State Champion Tabb Tigers in the winter, and ran track in the spring. While working with the soccer players, they were not even close in two mile run. I know I had a talent for distance running, but the best finisher for the soccer team wasn't even under 12 minutes. I was in at around 10:30. Also, soccer players couldn't high jump or long jump with me (I am a 6'3 white dude with no hops by the way). Soccer players are definitely not the best athletes in the world. They play because of their unchallenged coordination with their feet, not their athletic ability. Football players are very athletic as well, but they suffer in many categories because of their specialized training. The explosiveness and bursts of speed and strength are unparalled, but they are also things that cannot be sustained. A football player would win the 40M, 100M probably the 200M, but from 400 on up, most are toast. They could bench a lot more weight than I, but I could bench 150lbs many more times than they could. It's all give and take. I don't really know what to say about rugby as i never player, but try completing a triathlon, even the small ones hurt. you swim a mile or so, then bike about 30 miles, then run a 10K (6.2 miles). Once you get off the bike, you legs are jello and don't want to move.

Overall, my vote is for Ironman triathletes or ultramarathoners.

150 miles running, or 2.5 miles swim, 100 mile bike, 26.2 mile run....ridiculous

[NavyDave]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, soccer player pulls a Vlade Divac and flops, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Majority Americans like myself see this as a four year nusiance of an event that preempts PaintBall and Poker on ESPN2

NFL Football players no contest

[NavyDave]

Soccer is never going to catch on here as in other places we have too many options for our best athletes and the money, sponsors and our attention are in those sports.

Every sportstalk radio tries to talk soccer and the callers talk about Brunell's thumb or the Bulllets two Euro draft picks

[TGI Jef]

as someone who has played fairly high level (olympic development program) soccer, I would argue against your reasoning - soccer players run far more than basketball players. a basketball court is 94 feet long (about 31 yards compared to 110 yards of many soccer fields) and most of what is considered "running" in soccer is a sprint...most of what is considered "standing around" to non-soccer fans is in all actuality a tense jog

also, it has not yet been mentioned that if you are substituted for in soccer, your day is over. it is a psycologically conditioned sport as well. you know going in that you have no breaks. when you get tired in the 60th minute, you force yourself to not be tired so taht you dont have to come out for good. american sports in general do not have that level of mental conditioning.

jeff

Why is this amazing? Basketball players run around that in a game. Centers and forwards run the most, actually, with guards behind them(at least in terms of up and down the floor, not counting drives to the hoop or movement without the ball.) And I'd make the argument that there is more 'other activity' in a basketball game that puts it over the top of soccer.

Plus, one need only look at most of the athletes in the NBA, physically and in terms of measurables to see the difference.

Endurance is a great trait but it is not as if soccer players don't have relatively long breaks where they jog, stand or something like that. People act like soccer is just one long marathon, it isn't. 4-7 miles in an hour and a half is not even jogging pace, guys. 5-8 miles in 48 minutes is far more running in a more concise period of time--more intense.

[dxtrmanlee]

I have to agree about ultra-marathon runners and tri-atheletes. If the decathalon took place with no breaks, that would be a pretty interesting sport. The biathalon is a really cool event cross-country skiing is proven to be the BEST way to get a cardio vascular workout, and it is done for a very long distance, then you are forced to cool your nerves, slow down your pulse enough to focus on a target and shoot it, requires more touch than shooting a 3, or throwing a touchdown. I was also going to mention UFC fighters as being incredibly trained atheletes, they have to run forever to build endurance, not just for their legs but for their whole body, build muscle, and keep their body fat low, all while training under several different techniques of fighting. I guess it all depends on how you value the different aspects of athleticism : speed, strength (and in which area(s) of the body), endurance, agility, acceleration, hand-eye coordination, reflexes, and then the decision to include technical as well as strategic elements of the sport must be factored in too. On a side note, I do think soccer will grow in this country someday, it is too popularand imporant around the rest of the world not to be important here. If we are going to globalize and americanize the rest of the world, it wouldn't make sense for us not to embrace the Worlds game. Ronaldihno makes more money that any other athelete, that should be reason enough for the next "reggie bush" to become the next pele instead, but I dont think America will "get it" until our club teams are able to compete financially with the European teams, and then maybe be able to have teh MLS champ compete with teams in the Champions League.

[MartinC]

I'm from the UK and played both sports - 'soccer' to a professional level and then when I was let go at age 20 I started playing football. This was in the mid 80's when the NFL was really taking off here in the UK and there was a bit of money floating around.

I was a goalkeeper at soccer - so not the most physically demanding position on the field from a pure fitness point of view but I did all the training the outfield players did and all the same fitness tests. At football I played mostly QB but also played some WR.

You really are comparing apples and oranges as the demands of the sports are very different - in football you also have a much greater degree of specialisation with very different physical atributes demanded of lineman and say a corner back.

However there is no question that soccer players have better endurance than a 'typical' football player but much less strength.

If you really want to look for a better comparison look at Rugby - especially Rugby League (as comapred to Union which is what you will probably have seen) in which there are almost no stoppages - no lineouts if the ball goes out of play just a tap and get on with it - and the physical contact is very similar to the NFL but with no helmets and pads. Those guys are amazing and are hands down fitter than either NFL or soccer players.

If you ever get the chance to watch a Rugby League game take it - not the most sophisticated game in the world but you will respect the players.