NRL vs NFL debate

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Can't recognize the pronunciation to faux pas?

No, it's funny when you spell faux pas, phopah..

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

A lame, singular example from the 70's? Even the NFL athletes from then are different than from today. Examples, plural.

There's a couple more named in this thread, all dead losses.

Find them yourself dickwit.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Sorry, I'm going to use blue ink for my responses as I haven't figured out how to do the multiple quote thing yet.

We understand, you’re Canadian. Martin Short etc….

Fair enough, it was your choice.

Comparing the NRL to English Union Competition is like comparing the NFL to High School American Football in terms of professionalism.

Surely that's an exaggeration. I know the talent in English club rugby is more spread out, as Yankeeboy has pointed out, but they are still professional clubs. I know England RU has fallen a lot since their WC win, but still the best English union players play in the Zurich Premiership.

Hardly.

The best English Union players are still Union players.

They get paid to play, there ends the comparison.

You sound like a Canadian trying to understand the differences.;-)

Club Union is, and even Union people would probably agree, far below the next level up.

Just because the NRL and club Union in England are the highest club level either has doesn't mean they are comparable in terms of skill, fitness levels etc.
You see the similarity between Union and American Football, both are technical games that get bogged down in the technical aspects rather than just getting on with it.

League is as tough as Union to learn. In fact, I found League a hell of a lot harder to learn and play than Union. Yes, I played both, a long time ago.

I thought union would be harder to learn (not harder to play) becuse it is a more technical game as you say.

Like I said, I’m basing that on when I played, back in the 1970’s.

And I didn’t say it was more technical. If anything, it’s more bogged down in specifics than more technical.

We have 4 major Winter ball sports here Steve, Rugby League, Australian Rules Football, Rugby Union and Soccer. How many does Canada have?

In our winter, hockey is by far the main sport, and in our summer, Canadian football, baseball, and soccer are the main ones, though far behind hockey. RU is a minor sport, and RL is not on the radar. Of course we do have those few amateur Aussie Rules clubs which you posted pictures of a while back.

I’ll try again.

We have 4 major Winter ball sports here Steve, Rugby League, Australian Rules Football, Rugby Union and Soccer. How many does Canada have?

Did I warn you that you'd f**k it up? lol

You're confusing the words "able to" for the words "that did".

Three high-profile Australian League players went to Union, all poached by the way, and all three represented in their first season.

I'm sure more NRL players could switch successfully if they chose to. But the 2 games are fairly close to each other compared to "gridiron", and still there is a big adjustment for league players to pick up the technical aspects of union.

Gridiron has no relevance in the Union v League debate.

3 “very good” Australian League players went to Rugby and all 3 represented in year #1. That doesn’t scream “big adjustment” to me.

The last player who came to League from Union and represented in the same year was a bloke named Thornett and that was in the 1960's.

But now high-profile union players don't switch to league because there's more money in union, right? Maybe not in Aus, but hypothetically I bet a number of All Blacks could switch to league and play for the Kiwis within a year.

The Kiwis don’t have anywhere near the same number of players to choose from as Australia. How they even get close to us is a mystery at times.

Player numbers alone mean that a Union convert would be a chance at playing for the NZ League team.

That’s not the same in Australia.

Wendell is still playing representative Rugby Union. Your opinion on him obviously isn't shared by Union selectors...

I know, and I like Wendell. But recently Eddie Jones was quoted saying something like Wendell doesn't have the "magic feel" for the game that Rogers does. I think Wendell gets by more on his physical ability and size.

That wouldn’t happen in League in Australia. That’s one reason why Union is crap compared to League here.

A chance?

sh*t, I've got a chance so he definately has a chance. Nothing's impossible.

In reality, probably no, for both of us.

Well, I'm sure you could stand on the sidelines and insult the opposition very well. But hypothetically, let's take Michael Vick, a big QB who runs as well as a running back. Or some other NFL star who's bigger, faster and more agile than Wendell or Lote. Say he was willing to give up the NFL fame and money and go to Aus to train with a club. Maybe play Jersey Flegg for a year. Don't you think someone like that could make it to the NRL club as a wing eventually? (I agree that no player could just walk in to the NRL in a month.)

I’ve never said or even suggested that with time an NFL player couldn’t make it in League. But it wouldn’t be one season either. No one would bother though, on both sides…

 

[redVgirl]

:bdh: :bdh: :bdh: :bdh:

 

[madunit]

:lol:

 

[CanadianSteve]

Originally posted by EA

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianSteve
In our winter, hockey is by far the main sport, and in our summer, Canadian football, baseball, and soccer are the main ones, though far behind hockey. RU is a minor sport, and RL is not on the radar. Of course we do have those few amateur Aussie Rules clubs which you posted pictures of a while back.



I’ll try again.

We have 4 major Winter ball sports here Steve, Rugby League, Australian Rules Football, Rugby Union and Soccer. How many does Canada have?

I'm trying to figure out where I haven't answered your question, and also wondering what's the point of your question. But I'll re-try. I assume you mean professional sports, not amateur or youth sports.

In our summer we have one major professional sport, the Canadian Football League. We have some professional soccer teams, more like semi-pro, that play in a league with US teams, one notch below the best US soccer comp, the MLS. There is talk of Toronto getting a team in the MLS. We have the Toronto Blue Jays who play in Major League Baseball.

The CFL is the only pro sport with Canadian teams only. There are 9 teams, and it is a national league, not regional as in Aus. The economics of the CFL are similar to the NRL. The rules are different from the NFL, but the 2 games are closer than RU and RL.

Other sports have amateur comps, like rugby and baseball.

 

[CanadianSteve]

BTW, EA, I'm thinking of going to this upcoming show:

http://www.ticketmaster.ca/event/10003AA73ECDB729?artistid=821458&majorcatid=10001&minorcatid=51

What do you think?

 

[yankeeboy]

For summer sports, Canada's "official" sport is lacrosse, but it doesn't have the exposure of the CFL. I think that the Toronto lacrosse team won the MLL (major league lacrosse) title, but I'm not sure.

Canada really doesn't have a winter ball sport. Their national passion (which they haven't had for over a year) is ice hockey.

In the Americas, professional soccer is a summer sport. American football is more of a fall sport than a winter sport (the high school season runs from the beginning of September to the beginning of November, with the championships usually mid-December). The CFL runs a summer schedule, but I think that lower level Canadian football teams play in the fall and winter.

Rugby league is either non-existant in Canada, or they might have a few clubs playing "pub footy." RU has much more of a profile, but it is not a major sport there.

To put it short, Canada has no winter ball sports. The USA has American football as a fall/winter sport, and Basketball and hockey as a winter/spring sport.

There are 6 Canadian teams in the NHL (Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottowa, Montreal, and Toronto). There used to be more in the smaller cities, but they all left for greener pastures south of the border.

There is one NBA team, the Raptors. The Vancouver Grizzlies moved a couple years ago to the States.

There is one MLB team, the Blue Jays. The Montreal Expos were moved by the league to Washington, because nobody watched them in Montreal (it wasn't like Souths, the league actually were the owners of the Expos).

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

BTW, EA, I'm thinking of going to this upcoming show:

http://www.ticketmaster.ca/event/10003AA73ECDB729?artistid=821458&majorcatid=10001&minorcatid=51

What do you think?

I think you should save your dough and go and see someone who is actually funny.

It's been all downhill since Innerspace. ;-)

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Originally posted by EA


I'm trying to figure out where I haven't answered your question, and also wondering what's the point of your question. But I'll re-try. I assume you mean professional sports, not amateur or youth sports.

In our summer we have one major professional sport, the Canadian Football League. We have some professional soccer teams, more like semi-pro, that play in a league with US teams, one notch below the best US soccer comp, the MLS. There is talk of Toronto getting a team in the MLS. We have the Toronto Blue Jays who play in Major League Baseball.

The CFL is the only pro sport with Canadian teams only. There are 9 teams, and it is a national league, not regional as in Aus. The economics of the CFL are similar to the NRL. The rules are different from the NFL, but the 2 games are closer than RU and RL.

Other sports have amateur comps, like rugby and baseball.

Well, for the most part, Club Union world-wide is amateur in comparison to the NRL. I think NZ probably have the toughest Union comp of any type comp outside of S12 and 6/7 nations or whatever its called, but NZ is really the only place where Union is the #1 sport and it's pretty small in relative terms.

Canada isn't big on what we'd call Winter Ball Sports like League, Union, Soccer etc, with really only the CFL to use as a measure.

Hard to get perspective from that and the bullsh*t that goes on from both sides of the arguments here and biased journalism doesn't help. I know you like to read about them. lol

Union isn't a threat to League here and Club Union anywhere isn't within cooee of the NRL.

BTW, Soccer in the US is proably their second biggest code but is so far behind American Football it's laughable. The thing to remember is that they have 250 million people and American Football is really the only game in town.

We have 20 million people and I'd guess that the NRL, AFL and S12 would probably have average crowds larger than the CFL or MLS*. (S12 is hardly a club comp but I didn't think their sweet FA average for club games here would be a fair comparison)

I'll stand corrected if that is wrong.*

 

[yankeeboy]

Yes, MLS crowds average around 8-12k. So, the NRL has higher crowd averages than everyone but the Storm. It'll be interesting to see what the A-League's crowds are like with just one Sydney team. It soccer as tribal in Australia as league and Aussie rules are?

However, the crowd averages aren't really comparable. The major difference is that Australian sport is still very suburban, whereas the closest American sport has ever come to suburban teams is the Dodgers, Giants, and Yankees before 1957.

The major equivalant to suburban sport in America is high school football. Crowds are usually at least 5,000, and can get up to 40,000 for really big games. There are the inner city schools who win on athletics, and then there are the outer suburbs who either buy their teams or shoot up roids to get them. Then there are the private schools, like mine, which would be like Brothers in the Brisbane A-Grade.

 

[Everlovin' Antichrist]

Yes, MLS crowds average around 8-12k. So, the NRL has higher crowd averages than everyone but the Storm. It'll be interesting to see what the A-League's crowds are like with just one Sydney team. It soccer as tribal in Australia as league and Aussie rules are?

However, the crowd averages aren't really comparable. The major difference is that Australian sport is still very suburban, whereas the closest American sport has ever come to suburban teams is the Dodgers, Giants, and Yankees before 1957.

The major equivalant to suburban sport in America is high school football. Crowds are usually at least 5,000, and can get up to 40,000 for really big games. There are the inner city schools who win on athletics, and then there are the outer suburbs who either buy their teams or shoot up roids to get them. Then there are the private schools, like mine, which would be like Brothers in the Brisbane A-Grade.

I've seen College Fooball crowds in the US upwards of 70k too, impressive.

Soccer was tribal here but unfortunately that was the big problem for Soccer. Ethically based teams had supporters that brought their political rivalries with them from Europe and Soccer pretty much ended up something that no one would bother with unless they had some sort of connection with the team ethnically.

The A League hasn't started yet, I know Soccer fans have high hopes but I'm not convinced that it'll work for more than a season or two for a few reasons. Soccer at anything but World Cup qualifier level really has never taken hold here. At a senior level anyway. It has huge participation rates at junior level, but that doesn't transfer to senior level.

 

[yankeeboy]

That's pretty much the story in the States.

However, soccer is going from an almost non-existant participation or spectator sport in the 1980's, to the most popular junior sport and a sport growing in crowd appeal. The games can be deathly boring, but people still go to them.

The current trend in soccer here is to build "soccer specific stadiums" which are home only to the soccer team. 3 of the 12 MLS teams currently play in SSS's (LA Galaxy and Chivas USA at the Home Depot Center, and Columbus Crew at the CC Stadium), and FC Dallas will inagurate their SSS in a month.

This is sort of like Hindmarsh Stadium and Members Equity Stadium is Australia.

Soccer may be on the fringe of becoming a true "major league," but its popularity can't come near even the lowest of the big four (baseball, football, basketball, and ice hockey).

 

[ozhawk66]

Thanks, us aussies always have a fair go at things. Thats probly why you see the backline to the forwards (in the NRL) kicking and being imaginative with the ball, whereas NFL is very speicalised (although surprisingly still not very good) and in most instances lazy. What????? linesmen cant kick and run? and widerecievers cant tackle?.

Nice try. All that has been debunked before.

 

[ozhawk66]

Its called earning their money, they actually run around and play running football i.e. more like proper athletes. NFL players gets paid millions to what? stand around and look pretty - for the cameras (see pic below)

. Hey oz the red stuff are not blood, its smudged LIPSTICKS

.

NFL= funny game thats become the laughing stock of world football. Sumo wrestlers are better athletes than NFL linesmen.


Thats because theyre too busy actually traning, not talking to the medias (with their bling bling) and pretend to be training.

Typical NFL training = wake up early (5am)
6am - eat macdonalds burger (at least 5)
7am - powder nose (ooopps its a secret)
9am - eat main breakfast, consisting of pizzas with all the topping
10am - practice pose (important for interviews)
11am - watch TV, otherwise known as the video session
1pm - eat one whole pig with veggies (aparently those green stuff are healthy yuk)
2pm - beer session, drinking copious amount of beer increases bulk and weight (very important when stopping an opponent).
3pm - interviews (where they talk about their strenious training session)
5pm - little dinner 3 whole chickens
6pm - specially develouped food specially delivered to players house. Consists of 1 fresh whole cow, 1 sheep (from NZ) and one leaf of veggie.
9pm - steriod injection session
10pm - party/ clubbing and showing off their bling bling
2am - sleep

__________________

 

[ozhawk66]

Give it up oz your well and truely beaten.......................youve got nothing.



Actually your quite funny , we are all laughing at you (oppps i was meant to say with you).

Yawn.

 

[ozhawk66]

Originally Posted by Everlovin' Antichrist
Post #1156 2.02am
Post #1157. 2.07am

You mean those?

Twat. I said you posted at 2am and you did.

Your argument against that is?



f**kwit.

I said you posted at 2am I didn’t say you did a song and dance as well?


Like I said, you can't find where I claimed to leave then come back at 2 AM. Ignat, that wasn't the 1st time I've posted at 2 AM. Try stupid with someone else.














I knew exactly what you were on about immediately. Typos are all you have to pick on because they’re the only errors you seem to understand.

:lol: Backtracing again :lol: If you did, you wouldn't have replied the way you did.



Except your own typos of course…

Otherwis
chance

Imp.

 

[ozhawk66]

lol

Are you still that stupid?

I thought that maybe you might have gotten a bit and had some sense f**ked into you...

No 18 year old has ever played in the NFL, therefore you can't say that they can't physically handle it in any form other than "opinion".

You have no one to confirm your opinion because no 18 year old has played in the NFL.


No one has confirmed that "opinion"? Maybe you missed that post on coaches broaching the stupid subject of kids that age playing in the NFL.

You've twisted yourself in such a tizzy on this one you don't know how to answer it. That's cause you DON'T have a real answer.

Here's another lil tidbit for yuh Jack....do you realize that most 18/19 year old kids are 'red-shirted' when they first enter college? Do you know what this means? It means they can do everything with the team except PLAY in a varsity game. Why? CAUSE THEY AREN'T GOOD ENOUGH TO HANG WITH THE BIGGER/FASTER BOYS!

Now, one more time. Lets see if you can answer this: how are 18/19 year old kids going to play in the NFL when they can't even get playing time on the collegiate level at this age?

Don't be so stupid with your next response.

 

[ozhawk66]

No, it's funny when you spell faux pas, phopah..

It's funny when you keep trying to amuse thyself when you can't recognize why 'fO-"pä was used in that last one.

 

[ozhawk66]

There's a couple more named in this thread, all dead losses.

Find them yourself dickwit.

You're the one that made the claim. I didn't. Prove your own BS. You can't and you won't.