Are NFL Player the Best OVERALL Athletes

Don't think centre backs, you can get by there with very poor athleticism if you have good positional play...and it doesn't require a whole lot of running. Modern day wing backs though, for sure are some of the best athletes in soccer.

There are some centre backs that can flat out fly and be agile. They are pretty tall be normal human standards. In modern day top flight soccer, the traditional centre forward or target man is kind of disappearing. There is a really good article by ESPN about Giroud and Mandzukic as they meet in the WC final. The centre backs would usually defend against tall strikers who are like equivalent to BBall centers and PFs, but thats changing

http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-wor...atia-owe-a-lot-to-old-school-giroud-mandzukic

The centre backs nowadays have to do a lot of chasing around and be very agile. These guys are also the tallest players on the team too often than not.



 
There are some centre backs that can flat out fly and be agile. They are pretty tall be normal human standards. In modern day top flight soccer, the traditional centre forward or target man is kind of disappearing. There is a really good article by ESPN about Giroud and Mandzukic as they meet in the WC final. The centre backs would usually defend against tall strikers who are like equivalent to BBall centers and PFs, but thats changing

http://www.espn.com/soccer/fifa-wor...atia-owe-a-lot-to-old-school-giroud-mandzukic

The centre backs nowadays have to do a lot of chasing around and be very agile. These guys are also the tallest players on the team too often than not.





Well suppose it depends on the system a lot, with a high press they would need to be mobile.
 
Soccer was my second pick, what sport would you say?

I already called it: Rugby. Because to be successful requires a combination of strength, power, speed, stamina and mental toughness. There are many sports where people are stronger, faster or more explosive than Rugby players. I cannot think of any which require superior levels of all those attributes.
 
High level MMA has the best athletes. You have to be profiecent in no less than 3 separate individual combat sports preferably more, and you have to be an expert in a minimum of at least one of those sports in order to asend to the the highest levels of the MMA.

As everyone here already knows some of those individual sports encompass multiple feats of physical strength and endurance in order to master, and also encompass multiple skill sets that must be learned/mastered before the practioner can become profiecent in said art.
 
I already called it: Rugby. Because to be successful requires a combination of strength, power, speed, stamina and mental toughness. There are many sports where people are stronger, faster or more explosive than Rugby players. I cannot think of any which require superior levels of all those attributes.

Lol, wut? NBA players are superior in all of those attributes as well as being bigger and taller.
 
I would say on average no, but imo the defensive back is the most Athletic position in all of sport.
 
Lol, wut? NBA players are superior in all of those attributes as well as being bigger and taller.

{<jordan}

Basketball is a semi-contact sport. NBA players wouldn't last the first quarter of a Rugby match. They'd break like twigs as soon as they were hit by Rugby Forwards. Average weight for a Rugby Forward in the top flight is north of 250lbs. At that weight they are expected to run at high speed for 80 minutes, and hit with the same power as NFL players. I've seen injured Rugby players during rehab Bench 50 kilo dumbbells for sets of 10 reps. Bare in mind, this the kind of training they do when injured.
 
{<jordan}

Basketball is a semi-contact sport. NBA players wouldn't last the first quarter of a Rugby match. They'd break like twigs as soon as they were hit by Rugby Forwards. Average weight for a Rugby Forward in the top flight is north of 250lbs. At that weight they are expected to run at high speed for 80 minutes, and hit with the same power as NFL players. I've seen injured Rugby players during rehab Bench 50 kilo dumbbells for sets of 10 reps. Bare in mind, this the kind of training they do when injured.

I'm sure most NBA players couldn't last long in Rugby, just like Rugby players wouldn't last a quarter in the NBA. The would tire out from constantly trying to defend or attempt to get shots off.

They're trained for their sport and they're bodies get used to what the physical demands are. I think you're confusing toughness with athleticism.

Are rugby players tough, definitely. Are they better athletes than NBA players? <{MingNope}>{<jordan}
 
I'm sure most NBA players couldn't last long in Rugby, just like Rugby players wouldn't last a quarter in the NBA. The would tire out from constantly trying to defend or attempt to get shots off.

They're trained for their sport and they're bodies get used to what the physical demands are. I think you're confusing toughness with athleticism.

Are rugby players tough, definitely. Are they better athletes than NBA players? <{MingNope}>{<jordan}

The difference is, Rugby players would walk off the court after losing to the Basketball players. The Basketball players would be carried off the Rugby pitch on stretchers. If not in body-bags:)

The only area in which Basketball players would be superior is vertical jumping. In sprint speed, endurance and sheer brute strength, Rugby players would besmirch them. Rugby is played over a much larger area - three times the length of a Basketball court - so the ability to run fast while avoiding or catching opposing players is vital. The cardiovascular demands of Rugby are far higher than Basketball. And the need for power and strength is so far above that of Basketball players it's not even funny. Rugby players have to tackle very large, strong men moving at high speed. The NBA Combine "strength test" requires the draftee to Bench 185 for AMRAP. For any decent Rugby player, 185 is a warm up, not a test. You might as well ask one of the top Forwards to Bench the empty bar as 185<Lmaoo><45>
 
The difference is, Rugby players would walk off the court after losing to the Basketball players. The Basketball players would be carried off the Rugby pitch on stretchers. If not in body-bags:)

The only area in which Basketball players would be superior is vertical jumping. In sprint speed, endurance and sheer brute strength, Rugby players would besmirch them. Rugby is played over a much larger area - three times the length of a Basketball court - so the ability to run fast while avoiding or catching opposing players is vital. The cardiovascular demands of Rugby are far higher than Basketball. And the need for power and strength is so far above that of Basketball players it's not even funny. Rugby players have to tackle very large, strong men moving at high speed. The NBA Combine "strength test" requires the draftee to Bench 185 for AMRAP. For any decent Rugby player, 185 is a warm up, not a test. You might as well ask one of the top Forwards to Bench the empty bar as 185<Lmaoo><45>

Again, Rugby is a contact sport and basketball isn't, this is known.

Basketball players indeed have a better vertical jump, spring speed wise they're also better imo, endurance is debatable and brute strength is as well. You're also forgetting explosiveness and agility in which I give in favor to NBA players.

Like soccer, just because you play for a certain amount of time on that huge field doesn't mean you're running the whole thing for 80+ minutes straight. Whether it's soccer or rugby, if there isn't action on your part of the field, you're walking or light jogging to get to where you need to be.

Again, I know that rugby players are tough brutes but imo they're not better athletes.
 
Again, Rugby is a contact sport and basketball isn't, this is known.

Basketball players indeed have a better vertical jump, spring speed wise they're also better imo, endurance is debatable and brute strength is as well. You're also forgetting explosiveness and agility in which I give in favor to NBA players.

Like soccer, just because you play for a certain amount of time on that huge field doesn't mean you're running the whole thing for 80+ minutes straight. Whether it's soccer or rugby, if there isn't action on your part of the field, you're walking or light jogging to get to where you need to be.

Again, I know that rugby players are tough brutes but imo they're not better athletes.

Sorry, but I disagree on several points. Particularly brute strength. I can provide examples of many Rugby players who Bench well north of 400lbs. How many Basketball players can do that? Sprinting speed: off hand I can name at least four players who run the 100 in less than 11 seconds. Again, how many Basketball players could match that? And Basketball players aren't sprinting full out either. Many times it's a fast run to one end of the court, then stop while waiting for the guy with the ball to make his move.

A Rugby game lasts 80 minutes of regular time. A basketball match just over half that. On a playing surface less than a third as long and about a fourth as wide. Trying to claim that Basketball players have better endurance than Rugby players is like saying Usain Bolt could win a 5,000 meter race against Mo Farah. It's utterly ridiculous.

In vertical jumping ability, Basketball players are unarguably superior. In everything else, Rugby and it's not even close.
 
Sorry, but I disagree on several points. Particularly brute strength. I can provide examples of many Rugby players who Bench well north of 400lbs. How many Basketball players can do that? Sprinting speed: off hand I can name at least four players who run the 100 in less than 11 seconds. Again, how many Basketball players could match that? And Basketball players aren't sprinting full out either. Many times it's a fast run to one end of the court, then stop while waiting for the guy with the ball to make his move.

A Rugby game lasts 80 minutes of regular time. A basketball match just over half that. On a playing surface less than a third as long and about a fourth as wide. Trying to claim that Basketball players have better endurance than Rugby players is like saying Usain Bolt could win a 5,000 meter race against Mo Farah. It's utterly ridiculous.

In vertical jumping ability, Basketball players are unarguably superior. In everything else, Rugby and it's not even close.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.
 
Again, Rugby is a contact sport and basketball isn't, this is known.

Basketball players indeed have a better vertical jump, spring speed wise they're also better imo, endurance is debatable and brute strength is as well. You're also forgetting explosiveness and agility in which I give in favor to NBA players.

Like soccer, just because you play for a certain amount of time on that huge field doesn't mean you're running the whole thing for 80+ minutes straight. Whether it's soccer or rugby, if there isn't action on your part of the field, you're walking or light jogging to get to where you need to be.

Again, I know that rugby players are tough brutes but imo they're not better athletes.

They are more than 'tough brutes'...they are also excellent athletes in their own right. Don't know if they are better than NBA, which has many incredible athletes, like anything else they are tuned for their sport.
 
They are more than 'tough brutes'...they are also excellent athletes in their own right. Don't know if they are better than NBA, which has many incredible athletes, like anything else they are tuned for their sport.

I said this in another post. It's two different sports, Rugby players are great in what they do, just like NBA players are in basketball.
 
I already called it: Rugby. Because to be successful requires a combination of strength, power, speed, stamina and mental toughness. There are many sports where people are stronger, faster or more explosive than Rugby players. I cannot think of any which require superior levels of all those attributes.


If you had to pick which race has produce the best athletes of all time what would you say?
 
If you had to pick which race has produce the best athletes of all time what would you say?

I wouldn't. Different nations excel at different sports. Kenyans rule Long Distance Running. Icelanders excel at Strongman. New Zealand is consistently the best Rugby playing nation and Brazil dominates Soccer. The Soviet Union was undisputed champion of Olympic Weightlifting and China is rapidly improving in that area along with their traditional dominance of Gymnastics. The USA has produced more World Champions in Boxing than anyone else.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't. Different nations excel at different sports. Kenyans rule Long Distance Running. Icelanders excel at Strongman. New Zealand is consistently the best Rugby playing nation and Brazil dominates Soccer. The Soviet Union was undisputed champion of Olympic Weightlifting and China is rapidly improving in that area along with their traditional dominance of Gymnastics.


So you can't pick which race produces the best athletes but you can pick which sport produces the best athletes?
 
So you can't pick which race produces the best athletes but you can pick which sport produces the best athletes?

You asked which country produces the best athletes. That covers a broad spectrum. The specialised athleticism required to total elite at Powerlifting is at the opposite end of the scale from an Endurance Athlete who runs sub - 2: 30 Marathons, but both are equally valid.

If you wish to narrow the field to best all round athletes, then I stand by my comments on Rugby and therefor New Zealand is the only logical choice.
 
Back
Top