Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Who's The Better Tackler

wicked_wayz

wicked_wayz

all blacks
hey i've been a fan of nfl for quite a while now and one question always comes to mind - "who's the better tackler between a nfl player and a rugby league player" i ain't here to cause a riot between nfl and rugby fans is just that i'm pretty much bored and thought i'd start a new thread.

so let me know what you think
 
wicked_wayz said:
hey i've been a fan of nfl for quite a while now and one question always comes to mind - "who's the better tackler between a nfl player and a rugby league player" i ain't here to cause a riot between nfl and rugby fans is just that i'm pretty much bored and thought i'd start a new thread.

so let me know what you think
Click to expand...


No pads, full speed ahead..............Rugby plaers are insane........Rugby hands down. Put them in an NFL uniform and they might try to tackle a tank.
 
I have played both Rugby and Football and the tackeling style is very different between the two.

Oh how you might ask?

The Rugby league (nothing to formal) I played in, you were not allowed to spear another player, or lead with your head. To me this forces a person to be a better tackler buy having to square up and wrap up not to mention to win the battle of leverage by getting lower than your opponent.

Where as football you tend to use your head as a weapon by planting the face mask square in the chest and use that momentem to wrap up and knock your opponent down. You will leave the field with a bloody nose if you tried that in rugby. Not to mention getting blind sided by a 250 pound man flying thru the air.

So to answer your question I think the best pure tackeling comes from rugby but the harder hits come from football.

I would have to say I have been hit harder in football than in rugby. However being in a scrum sucks.

Playing primarly D-Line or Linebacker I wasen't used to having the football but in Rugby anybody at any time will touch the ball to score. I loved running over people. The backwards pass is somthing to get used to and not as easy as it sounds. I still can't drop kick.
 
TEXANRED said:
I have played both Rugby and Football and the tackeling style is very different between the two.

Oh how you might ask?

The Rugby league (nothing to formal) I played in, you were not allowed to spear another player, or lead with your head. To me this forces a person to be a better tackler buy having to square up and wrap up not to mention to win the battle of leverage by getting lower than your opponent.

Where as football you tend to use your head as a weapon by planting the face mask square in the chest and use that momentem to wrap up and knock your opponent down. You will leave the field with a bloody nose if you tried that in rugby. Not to mention getting blind sided by a 250 pound man flying thru the air.

So to answer your question I think the best pure tackeling comes from rugby but the harder hits come from football.

I would have to say I have been hit harder in football than in rugby. However being in a scrum sucks.

Playing primarly D-Line or Linebacker I wasen't used to having the football but in Rugby anybody at any time will touch the ball to score. I loved running over people. The backwards pass is somthing to get used to and not as easy as it sounds. I still can't drop kick.
Click to expand...

Right on, it is two different kinds of tackling so it's hard to compare. Put football players on a rugby field and I don't expect they'd be able to succeed especially well, put rugby players on a football field and I don't expect they'd do overly well. Having pads also enables you to tackle people a lot harder. Football players are generally more athletic but rugby players are probably a little tougher.
 
Rugby seems to have a much more violent style of tackling, and a lot less regulation. Why do they always slide when they score? Is it a rule of sorts? I think I'm going to start my kids off w/rugby before moving them to football. They need to learn how to take a hit and deliver it back harder.
 
^^vinny its 2 different sports....rugby players would definitely be better tacklers, the most missed tackles you'd ever see in rugby would be nearly always 1....i have these kind of arguments with friends all the time. where im from rugby is the oval-ball game and my friends are always saying 'nfl is for ******* etc' because of the pads etc but i say that the nfl players are bigger and faster than rugby plyers and therefore its too dangerous to not play with pads and that shuts them up

and to answer your question about why rugby players dont convert..well the main reason is just because they're good tacklers(which can be thought easier than other aspects) doesnt mean they'll cut it playing in the nfl ie..they probably wont have the coverage skills or experience/instincts to stop running plays very well....its a bit like asking why dont formula 1 cars enter rally's

and YTF...the reason they dive most of the time is because the rule is that you have to touch the ball down on the ground in the 'endzone' so to speak...and diving is the safest way of doing this without 'fumbling'
 
Rugby is mostly about the wrap tackle. I would say that the average rugby player is a more secure tackler. The tackle is pretty well legislated against.

Football is a lot more chipping and throwing the body. Also the hits are much more vicious in football.

There are tons of reasons rugby players don't end up trying football. Body shape, lack of exposure to the sport, Rugby/League being an obsession in the places where they are played.
 
YoungTexanFan said:
Rugby seems to have a much more violent style of tackling, and a lot less regulation. Why do they always slide when they score? Is it a rule of sorts? I think I'm going to start my kids off w/rugby before moving them to football. They need to learn how to take a hit and deliver it back harder.
Click to expand...

you have to touch the ball down in the endzone for the try to count.. otherwise you dont score any points.
 
"Where as football you tend to use your head as a weapon by planting the face mask square in the chest and use that momentem to wrap up and knock your opponent down. You will leave the field with a bloody nose if you tried that in rugby. Not to mention getting blind sided by a 250 pound man flying thru the air."

very true but in my view the impact in rugby league is more devasting, remember in league you have guys running straight at you full speed from 10 yards back and you got to tackle them in a standing position (extremely hard) and believe me you'll get more than a bloody nose if you tried to tackle with your head....you'll get concussed the F out for a week...lol

but thanxs for posting your opinion much appreciated
 
"but i say that the nfl players are bigger and faster than rugby plyers and therefore its too dangerous to not play with pads and that shuts them up"
i don't really agree with you on this one i believe the players on both rugby league and football are basically at the same speed.

because in league you play
- 2 full 40min halfs without breakdown running at full speed consistantly
- you tackle as much as 20 times if not more PER GAME
- you carry the ball as much as 10 to 20 times PER GAME
- you play both offense and defence

but other than size its basically the same except for the o line, but then in league they are not best suited to play, for they will not be able to do the above actions. but then again its the same for league players too, they will not be able to do what o line men can do or even be good at coverage.

but you are right they are two COMPLETELY different sport

thanxs for posting me ur opinion much appreciated

what ever you americans do...don't ever watch rugby league being played by euro countries for they make the sport look wussy
 
wicked_wayz said:
"but i say that the nfl players are bigger and faster than rugby plyers and therefore its too dangerous to not play with pads and that shuts them up"
i don't really agree with you on this one i believe the players on both rugby league and football are basically at the same speed.

because in league you play
- 2 full 40min halfs without breakdown running at full speed consistantly
- you tackle as much as 20 times if not more PER GAME
- you carry the ball as much as 10 to 20 times PER GAME
- you play both offense and defence

but other than size its basically the same except for the o line, but then in league they are not best suited to play, for they will not be able to do the above actions. but then again its the same for league players too, they will not be able to do what o line men can do or even be good at coverage.

but you are right they are two COMPLETELY different sport

thanxs for posting me ur opinion much appreciated

what ever you americans do...don't ever watch rugby league being played by euro countries for they make the sport look wussy
Click to expand...

i can assure you, there are not any randy moss' or deion sanders playing rugby...

rugby has some good white athletes, but the good black ones (the best ones) play football
 
stevo3883 said:
i can assure you, there are not any randy moss' or deion sanders playing rugby...

rugby has some good white athletes, but the good black ones (the best ones) play football
Click to expand...

i tell you this like i've told everyone else, don't watch rugby played by euro countries, watch how NZ and AUS plays it

and by the way those two are not made to play Rugby league neither will the good black ones we have in rugby would be able to play nfl
 
Instead of running a hail mary for 50-70 yards. I think teams should line up there best athletes at the oline positions and play rugby style to get to the endzone.

i think rugby players are better tacklers, they are pretty much in a train wreck on every possessions.
 
wicked_wayz said:
"but i say that the nfl players are bigger and faster than rugby plyers and therefore its too dangerous to not play with pads and that shuts them up"
i don't really agree with you on this one i believe the players on both rugby league and football are basically at the same speed.

because in league you play
- 2 full 40min halfs without breakdown running at full speed consistantly
- you tackle as much as 20 times if not more PER GAME
- you carry the ball as much as 10 to 20 times PER GAME
- you play both offense and defence

but other than size its basically the same except for the o line, but then in league they are not best suited to play, for they will not be able to do the above actions. but then again its the same for league players too, they will not be able to do what o line men can do or even be good at coverage.

but you are right they are two COMPLETELY different sport

thanxs for posting me ur opinion much appreciated

what ever you americans do...don't ever watch rugby league being played by euro countries for they make the sport look wussy
Click to expand...

i dont really watch rugby league that much, more rugby union and i know the league athletes, in some cases, are better athletes. however, from what
ive seen, most rugby players dont nearly have the size/speed combination as nfl athletes for obvious reasons-they are more focused on durability(running around for 80 minutes), whereas in the nfl, they focus on short spurts of optimum performance
 
ive seen, most rugby players dont nearly have the size/speed combination as nfl athletes for obvious reasons-they are more focused on durability(running around for 80 minutes), whereas in the nfl, they focus on short spurts of optimum performance[/QUOTE]

i disagree with this cause look at our wingers they can run the 100m in 11 seconds take for example look at jonah lomu hes almost 2m meters tall, thats like 6'5 or 6'6 and weighs like 260 - 270 pounds and can run in the 100m in 11sec thats pure power and speed. the main difference when it comes to body shape is the muscle mass
 
Rugby is a great sport. The endurance of a soccer player and the toughness of a football player. Can't go wrong there.

Never make it in America though. Like soccer, there is no where to fit in a T.V. time out.
 
wicked_wayz said:
ive seen, most rugby players dont nearly have the size/speed combination as nfl athletes for obvious reasons-they are more focused on durability(running around for 80 minutes), whereas in the nfl, they focus on short spurts of optimum performance
Click to expand...


i disagree with this cause look at our wingers they can run the 100m in 11 seconds take for example look at jonah lomu hes almost 2m meters tall, thats like 6'5 or 6'6 and weighs like 260 - 270 pounds and can run in the 100m in 11sec thats pure power and speed. the main difference when it comes to body shape is the muscle mass[/QUOTE]

can he also leap tall buildings? faster than a speeding bullet?

bogus times my friend, trust me.
 
stevo3883 said:
[/I]

i disagree with this cause look at our wingers they can run the 100m in 11 seconds take for example look at jonah lomu hes almost 2m meters tall, thats like 6'5 or 6'6 and weighs like 260 - 270 pounds and can run in the 100m in 11sec thats pure power and speed. the main difference when it comes to body shape is the muscle mass
Click to expand...

can he also leap tall buildings? faster than a speeding bullet?

bogus times my friend, trust me.[/QUOTE]

Jonah was a freak. He is not a typical rugby player. He grew up down the road from me and I saw him every now and then at the shops.

Jonah was an exceptional athlete.

I think what someone else said about explosion vs endurance is an important point. Rugby players in general don't have the pop that footballl players do.

Even look at muscle tone. Football players are huge and cut. Rugby players are well muscled but generally are better padded.
 
Hey for all you guys who want to see some of good rugby action check out this video.

http://ww.youtube.com/watch?v=PD1_puuceg0

It features the All Blacks, New Zealands national team.

Keep an eye for the #11's. The real big guy is Jonah Lomu. THen you have the smaller darker one Joe Rokocoko, and one other who is Sitiveni Sivivatu.

Brings a tear to the eye and smile to the face seeing some of those moments again.
 
kiwitexansfan said:
Hey for all you guys who want to see some of good rugby action check out this video.

It features the All Blacks, New Zealands national team.

Keep an eye for the #11's. The real big guy is Jonah Lomu. THen you have the smaller darker one Joe Rokocoko, and one other who is Sitiveni Sivivatu.

Brings a tear to the eye and smile to the face seeing some of those moments again.
Click to expand...
That makes me wanna hit someone after seeing that!:sumo: :taz:
 
stevo3883 said:
[/I]

i disagree with this cause look at our wingers they can run the 100m in 11 seconds take for example look at jonah lomu hes almost 2m meters tall, thats like 6'5 or 6'6 and weighs like 260 - 270 pounds and can run in the 100m in 11sec thats pure power and speed. the main difference when it comes to body shape is the muscle mass
Click to expand...

can he also leap tall buildings? faster than a speeding bullet?

bogus times my friend, trust me.[/QUOTE]

no the times and measurables are fairly accurate... he was 1 of, if not, the best ever, a true athletic freak before his kidneys got bad....im talking more in general terms where alot of nfl wrs are built like centers but are as fast as wingers etc.. the wingers and maybe some of the centers that are near nfl athletes in terms of athleticism...look at the front rows and o-linemen as an example
 
can he also leap tall buildings? faster than a speeding bullet?

bogus times my friend, trust me.[/QUOTE]

mate if you think they are bogus then go look at jonah lomu bio and see for yourself, why do you think it was so devastating when he had the ball because he had power and speed, i dare you to go have a look at our wingers bio on a rugby site you will be suprised, trust me. oh and by the way i don't know if you believe me or not, but jonah lomu was scouted by the cowboys in his second year of rugby, but he declined cause he didn't know any thing about football:confused:
trust me stevo i know its hard to believe those times especially for a guy that size but mind you hes a freak :)

oh by the way jonah is the guy in my avatar
 
stevo3883 said:
im sorry but without proof I refuse to believe there is a 260lb man that can run an 11 second 100m
Click to expand...

somebody should find the vid of his try against england(maybe '99 world cup?)..that would be a good example of his pace and power. anyway i dont know why its so hard to believe when Vernon Davis whos similiar in stature showed some big freaks can run really fast
 
Maddict5 said:
somebody should find the vid of his try against england(maybe '99 world cup?)..that would be a good example of his pace and power. anyway i dont know why its so hard to believe when Vernon Davis whos similiar in stature showed some big freaks can run really fast
Click to expand...

It's simply because most everyone has seen those VD freak vidoes around the net, where as hardly anyone has seen the freak Rugby guy.
 
stevo3883 said:
i dont think yall get it. Andre Johnson runs a 10.5 100 meter.
Click to expand...

yeah i agree johnson a great athlete but he ain't 6-6 to 6-7 tall and carrying 260 - 270 pounds to run with and also no way near having the explosive power that jonah has. although in johnsons defence jonah is not as athletic
 
i would like to see a video or a website that shows this bc that is crazy[/QUOTE]

i know its hard to believe but just take a look at his bio on the net he ain't no freak for nothing lol imagined if he accepted to play for the cowboys when they came to recruit him :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top