Searching for Players in unusual places

Englands Team · Post by **Englands Team** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:19 pm

It would appear that Football teams are looking to sports like Basketball to recruit players.

I presume there is also a small amount over cross over between the NFL and CFL.

I personally think that there could be some mileage in casting the net further afield to the Sport of Rugby League.

I have been a Redskins fan since they beat the Raiders in the regular season in 1983. I ahve been a St Helens RLFC fan since birth.

Rugby League is heavily influenced by the coaching techniques that were introduced originally by the NFL. The sport has some fine athletes.

In general Rugby league players are smaller they averaged 6 feet and 215 pounds. They game is played with few breaks in play over 80 minutes that is split into 2 halfs.

The majority of players will spend the entire game on the field, the game is more dynamic than the NFL, but there less power in it. Therefore the players have to be smaller.

There is however I believe p Rugby League players who can make it in the NFL as kickers, On special teams and in the secondary. Some players could bulk up and play Linebacker as well.

They would come very cheap. A top player will earn $200k per season. There are several players on each team only earning $40k a season.

I personally feel that there would be value in working out some of the players and I am sure you turn up a gem.

PLayers can play in the top end of the competion, Superleague from 16 years old.

I have attached a video from a recent game to show the kind of hit that is dished out in this game. The hit is of Sean Taylor proportions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iynB3IWI ... 20anderson

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:03 pm

I have always thought this. Rugby players are also better fundamental tacklers than NFL players who often just go for knockout hits. I have always thought that Rugby players would make excellent LBs. Rugby backs would also make excellent RB/FB/TEs and excellent kickers and punters.

Also, why just stick to League. If anything, Union is where you find the more impressive athletes. The Cowboys offered Jonah Lomu a multi-million contract to try out eight or nine years ago. Fortunately, he was smart enough to tell them to shove it and he signed a deal to play Rugby that only paid him $100,000!

I found a video where you can see his highlights here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... jonah+lomu

These are not even close to his most spectacular highlights either, he has some very famous ones that I can't find on the internet where he is just running people over. The guy was like Riggo times ten! 6'5", 265 lbs but he ran like a sprinter! He was clocked in the 100M at 10.6 seconds!

Englands Team · Post by **Englands Team** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:22 pm

Rugby Uniion has some freakish backs like Lomu. He is a once a generation type of player who had everything. Unfortunately he also had a serious illness that pretty much finished him, it at least made him just a good player.

I think there is scope for looking for players. At St Helens we have a 20 year old Prop forward who is awesome. This guy pancakes people when he has the ball and muders them when he is tackling. I think he would make a fine Full Back.

The coaching in Rugby League now is a straight lift from the NFL coaching and althogh the games are very different patience will have its rewards.

I think that Rugby union can also be used to search for Tight Ends and Defensive ends. Your Union back row forwards are massive and much heavier than there league counter parts.

Union is not as dynamic and has more power requirements for the athletes.

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:27 pm

Oh, I also think that Rugby forwards would make fantastic offensive guards. They are all big but even better they can all RUN! They would make great pulling guards!

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:32 pm

hkHog wrote:I have always thought this. Rugby players are also better fundamental tacklers than NFL players who often just go for knockout hits. I have always thought that Rugby players would make excellent LBs. Rugby backs would also make excellent RB/FB/TEs and excellent kickers and punters.

I would think that the Props would make good o linemen.

Chad

p.s. I played the B team weakside prop at college. I wieghed 175 lbs.....we sucked!

*edit*

Oh, I also think that Rugby forwards would make fantastic offensive guards. They are all big but even better they can all RUN! They would make great pulling guards!

You beat me to the punch.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:32 pm

I dont think rugby drag down tackels would work in the NFL. I think good backs like Ladanian Tomlinson would just shuck them off and because the rugby blokes are tiny theyd just get run over. Nor do I think Rugby is played with anywhere near the same speed and intensity as NFL football. One of the main reasons the collisions are so violent in the NFL is because guys wear pads and are alot more willing to throw thier bodys around.

Maybe rugby could supply some good punters but IMO thats about it.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:38 pm

Californiaskin wrote:I dont think rugby drag down tackels would work in the NFL. I think good backs like Ladanian Tomlinson would just shuck them off and because the rugby blokes are tiny theyd just get run over. Nor do I think Rugby is played with anywhere near the same speed and intensity as NFL football.

Have you ever played Rugby?

Chad

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:42 pm

Californiaskin wrote:I dont think rugby drag down tackels would work in the NFL. I think good backs like Ladanian Tomlinson would just shuck them off and because the rugby blokes are tiny theyd just get run over. Nor do I think Rugby is played with anywhere near the same speed and intensity as NFL football. One of the main reasons the collisions are so violent in the NFL is because guys wear pads and are alot more willing to throw thier bodys around.

Maybe rugby could supply some good punters but IMO thats about it.

You have to realize that Rugby is a stamina sport. You play FORTY minute halfs with no stoppages or timeouts. Football players only have to be on the field for about 30 minutes a game with LONG rests in between plays and often the clock is running even when the ball isn't in play. Therefore, the conditioning of Rugby players is VERY different. If you take rugby players and allow them to train differently and give them pads they will be much more explosive. They are already great athletes and they are very technichally sound tacklers.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:44 pm

no.......but Ive played football and watched rugby. Different techniques for tackilng for sure.......no where near as fast or violent......especially when considering the athaletes for the NFL.......

Maybe the best rugby pplayers in the world (like 1%-5%) are athletic enough to play D-1 college ball.

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:47 pm

Californiaskin wrote:no.......but Ive played football and watched rugby. Different techniques for tackilng for sure.......no where near as fast or violent......especially when considering the athaletes for the NFL.......

Maybe the best rugby pplayers in the world (like 1%-5%) are athletic enough to play D-1 college ball.

I do not buy that asserion at all. There are far more amateur rugby players in the world. To buy that theory you have to think that American kids are inherently three times more athletic.....and with cheetos and nintendo....I'm not buying it.

I also don't beleive that Rugby is slower than football. But the piles and rucks might make the game look slower.

Chad

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:50 pm

"stamina sport"

yeah more like soccer than football. I mean come on do you guys really think one of those guys could be a linebacker in the NFL and take a roster spot from even an unheralded guy like a Lemar Marshell coming out of college. I don't see it ever happening unless rugby dude comes over here, plays 4 years of college ball some where, trains and eats right, and then maybe he could have a good college career and move into the pros. But then he would be more of a football player than a rugby player now would'nt he.

I'm not buying the rugby thing.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:54 pm

The guys playing linebacker in the NFL are some of the greatest atheletes in the world despite the cheetos and video games.[/b]

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:56 pm

Californiaskin wrote:"stamina sport"

yeah more like soccer than football. I mean come on do you guys really think one of those guys could be a linebacker in the NFL and take a roster spot from even an unheralded guy like a Lemar Marshell coming out of college. I don't see it ever happening unless rugby dude comes over here, plays 4 years of college ball some where, trains and eats right, and then maybe he could have a good college career and move into the pros. But then he would be more of a football player than a rugby player now would'nt he.

I'm not buying the rugby thing.

I agree that there is a steep learning curve, and that a rugby player would have to retrain there bodies. But I do think that a guy could make an immediate impact on special teams and then take a few years to learn a regular position. I think that a rugby player would be a liability in coverage. But I also think that they would make an excellent passrusher, FB, TE...

Chad

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:57 pm

Californiaskin wrote:no.......but Ive played football and watched rugby. Different techniques for tackilng for sure.......no where near as fast or violent......especially when considering the athaletes for the NFL.......

Maybe the best rugby pplayers in the world (like 1%-5%) are athletic enough to play D-1 college ball.

Like I said above, if you put the 22 best NFL athletes together and made them play a game of rugby they would look terrible. There is no way they could last for even the first half of the game. Each half is 40 minutes long with no stoppages.

However, if they had an offseason to train for the game and get more stamina they could play the entire game but would not be as explosive on the football field. The human body is very interesting, it has been shown that marathon runners have much better vertical jumps when they are "out of shape" than when they have been training. In training for sports, one must always balance stamina and explosiveness because it is IMPOSSIBLE to train for both.

If you gave top rugby players just one offseason to get into football shape they would certainly be fast and powerful enough to play football.

HEROHAMO · Post by **HEROHAMO** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:10 pm

Englands Team wrote:Rugby Uniion has some freakish backs like Lomu. He is a once a generation type of player who had everything. Unfortunately he also had a serious illness that pretty much finished him, it at least made him just a good player.

I think there is scope for looking for players. At St Helens we have a 20 year old Prop forward who is awesome. This guy pancakes people when he has the ball and muders them when he is tackling. I think he would make a fine Full Back.

The coaching in Rugby League now is a straight lift from the NFL coaching and althogh the games are very different patience will have its rewards.

I think that Rugby union can also be used to search for Tight Ends and Defensive ends. Your Union back row forwards are massive and much heavier than there league counter parts.

Union is not as dynamic and has more power requirements for the athletes.

Rugby players would never play for the NFL. They consider the NFL a panzie sport because they wear pads and Rugby players dont. I have seen the athletes and they are tremendous. I just dont think theyre euro pride would allow them to Join the NFL many athletes have been offered contracts just to be turned down by the players.

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:22 pm

Yeah herohamo thats exactly opposite of what I think. I think Rugby is a pansy sport cuz they don't wear pads.......They are less inclened to lay out and smash into each other at jarring rates because they dont have the pads on. Thats why there are a lot more better, bigger, faster and stronger athletes making 100's of thousands of dollars playing football than playing rugby.

Ladanian tomlinson or Clinton with little training would DOMINATE a rugby field alot faster than the best rugby players would ever be able to convert to American football and even have a slight impact.

Sorry......I like rugby its just not played anywhere close to the same intensity level as NFL football.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:34 pm

There is no such penalty in Rugby called:

"Unnecessary Roughness" :wink:

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:37 pm

Californiaskin wrote:Yeah herohamo thats exactly opposite of what I think. I think Rugby is a pansy sport cuz they don't wear pads.......They are less inclened to lay out and smash into each other at jarring rates because they dont have the pads on. Thats why there are a lot more better, bigger, faster and stronger making 100's of thousands playing football than playing rugby.

Ladanian tomlinson or Clinton with little training would DOMINATE a rugby field alot faster than the best rugby players would ever be able to convert to American football and even have a slight impact.

Sorry......I like rugby its just not played anywhere close to the same intensity level as NFL football.

I'm sorry but I've seen much more blood and many more broken teeth in Rugby than in Football. I love football. Its my favorite sport. But Rugby is no less intense. Its just different. I get the feeling that you're not quite as up on how rugby works as you might think.

Chad

Californiaskin · Post by **Californiaskin** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:09 pm

Blood and broken teeth= no helmets/pads........Ive seen plenty of rugby.........nowhere near the same violent collisions by the nature of the two different sports.

Most NFL teams carry 5-7 linebackers. there are 32 teams. thats roughly around 180 linebackers total. I dont think there is a single rugby player that could crack the top 180 linebackers in the NFL even with a year of training. At least not one worth wasting a roster spot on.

Maybe a punter or kicker but not a linebacker......No one else agrees?

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:19 pm

Californiaskin wrote:Blood and broken teeth= no helmets/pads........Ive seen plenty of rugby.........nowhere near the same violent collisions by the nature of the two different sports.

Most NFL teams carry 5-7 linebackers. there are 32 teams. thats roughly around 180 linebackers total. I dont think there is a single rugby player that could crack the top 180 linebackers in the NFL even with a year of training. At least not one worth wasting a roster spot on.

Maybe a punter or kicker but not a linebacker......No one else agrees?

I think that there are several players who could come in and play FB/RB right away. Guys like Joe Rokocoko and Lote Tuqiri could come in and make an NFL squad right away just based on their size, strength, speed, and their great moves running with the ball.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:21 pm

Redskin in Canada wrote:There is no such penalty in Rugby called:

"Unnecessary Roughness"

You guys should see all the skin I lost off of my knee from playing football Saturday. My coworker asked me if I got attacked by a pitbull. :lol:

At least I didnt lose any nails this time!

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:17 pm

Californiaskin wrote:Ive seen plenty of rugby.........nowhere near the same violent collisions by the nature of the two different sports.

Are you sure you're not watching my college rugby team??? :wink:

Seriously, you assertion that Rugby players are inherently less athletic than football players is laughable. You assert that you know about rugby but you seem to forget that there are several times more amateur and professional rugby players than there are football players in the world. We aren't just talking about the states here....

Chad

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:49 pm

I know i've seen a few rugby matches, I believe the "All Blacks" and they are way tougher than football players. Football players have the luxury of pads rugby players do not. Also they get close lined. And I hear there is all kind of punching in the scrums.

Fios · Post by **Fios** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 11:54 pm

I have whole slew of punters who frolic in a wooded area filled with gypsies which is accessed via a magic closet in my house.
Oh, wait, this for unusual places. Sorry to go off topic.

Side note: The music there sucks ... unless you enjoy the lute ... I am NOT a fan

frankcal20 · Post by **frankcal20** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:44 am

Fios
I have whole slew of punters who frolic in a wooded area filled with gypsies which is accessed via a magic closet in my house.
Oh, wait, this for unusual places. Sorry to go off topic.

What?????