Life Expectancy of a NFL Player

[NeoV]

"Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong. "

Train, I'm not going to get personal with this - but in terms of conditioning, only NBA players are probably in better shape than NFL players, and NFL players absolutely dwarf NBA players in terms of size and strength. However - your "it's no secret that footballers are the least in shape of all pro sports" is absolutely a laughable statement - I'd take any DB, RB, WR, or LB and put them into any type of athletic competition against other pro athletes, and they would be bigger/stronger/faster than just about anyone. They are in ridiculously good shape.

O linemen, and a handful of D-linemen, are excessively heavy and don't look like they are in great shape, but that's maybe 7-9 guys on a roster of 55 that you could call out of shape - and most of the guys in that range get considerably lighter after their playing days are over - yes, the Fridge is an exception, but for the most part they drop weight when their playing days are over. I'm not saying Shaun Rodgers or Ted Washington are going to do it, but most of them do.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: NeoV
some of you have obviously never even picked up a football, much less played football

There are really two topics here - how much of a toll does playing in the NFL take on a body - and how much of the reason for the very low average life-expectancy comes from performance enhancing drug use? The mid 70's and early 80's were awash with steroids in the NFL, and once steroid testing starting, players shifted to other performance enhancing methods, none of which are exactly recommended to stay fit.

As for the idiot telling former NFL players to 'get out of McDonalds and into the gym' - do you feel better taking out your jealousy behind an internet post? Get a clue - NFL players have spent more time in the gym and no more about keeping in shape than you will ever hope to.

Yes there are some 'fat' NFL linemen, and there are some former NFL players who let themselves get out of shape - but they are the minority, not the majority.

Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong.

Is that so? Giant 300 pound defensive ends can still run the 40 in under 5 seconds. I guess they're not in good shape? :roll: Get real dude. And you must not have ready Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding if you think bodybuilders don't spend obscene amounts of time in the gym, or that you don't build mass that way.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

Yeah, that's my point. It's nothing like the modern game, it was closer to rugby if anything. To say that the American Football was so dangerous Ted was pushing to ban it is misleading as the game at the time was far more dangerous than the modern version.

I guess I just find it amusing, as I'm a big fan of rugby. And in the rugby forums whenever the two games are compared, they always say Teddy thought rugby was so dangerous he tried to ban it from the US. And here you are saying the exact opposite The reality is that both games were so totally different back then that compared to their modern games they aren't really the same game at all.

Oh, you're one of those whiny rugby people screaming about NFL players and their armor, I guess?

The NFL has evolved over the past 100 years largely because of safety concerns (and more recently, what makes the networks money), which is my point - so thank you for agreeing with me while telling me I'm wrong? It was indeed FOOTBALL and not RUGBY that Roosevelt was attacking. Did American football evolve from rugby? Yes! No one denies that. But it still wasn't rugby - anyone on your boards that is saying that is incorrect.

Regardless of whatever football vs rugby crap you're invariably going to spew, and I'm not going to care about - football is an incredibly violent game. If they didn't wear the pads they did, we would see dozens of crippling injuries and likely multiple deaths every year.

edit: Wiki link

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: NeoV
some of you have obviously never even picked up a football, much less played football

There are really two topics here - how much of a toll does playing in the NFL take on a body - and how much of the reason for the very low average life-expectancy comes from performance enhancing drug use? The mid 70's and early 80's were awash with steroids in the NFL, and once steroid testing starting, players shifted to other performance enhancing methods, none of which are exactly recommended to stay fit.

As for the idiot telling former NFL players to 'get out of McDonalds and into the gym' - do you feel better taking out your jealousy behind an internet post? Get a clue - NFL players have spent more time in the gym and no more about keeping in shape than you will ever hope to.

Yes there are some 'fat' NFL linemen, and there are some former NFL players who let themselves get out of shape - but they are the minority, not the majority.

Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong.

Is that so? Giant 300 pound defensive ends can still run the 40 in under 5 seconds. I guess they're not in good shape? :roll: Get real dude. And you must not have ready Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding if you think bodybuilders don't spend obscene amounts of time in the gym, or that you don't build mass that way.

OMG a 5 second 40? 40 yds = 36.576 meters... so that works out to a 13.6 second 100 meter dash.. basically what the avg 12 year old girls and 10 year old boys can run at your local junior high track meet. I'm not impressed. To make this out as some sort of feat of human ability is hilarious.

Compared to sports like Hockey, Soccer, Wrestling(real), Boxing, MMA, footballers are far and away the least conditioned.

And Arnold didnt have todays nutrition, not to mention he's a bit of a special case. You dont have to spend more than 2 hours a day, 3 or 4 times a week in the gym to pack on muscle weight, as long as you are getting good nutrition and rest.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: NeoV
"Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong. "

Train, I'm not going to get personal with this - but in terms of conditioning, only NBA players are probably in better shape than NFL players, and NFL players absolutely dwarf NBA players in terms of size and strength. However - your "it's no secret that footballers are the least in shape of all pro sports" is absolutely a laughable statement - I'd take any DB, RB, WR, or LB and put them into any type of athletic competition against other pro athletes, and they would be bigger/stronger/faster than just about anyone. They are in ridiculously good shape.

O linemen, and a handful of D-linemen, are excessively heavy and don't look like they are in great shape, but that's maybe 7-9 guys on a roster of 55 that you could call out of shape - and most of the guys in that range get considerably lighter after their playing days are over - yes, the Fridge is an exception, but for the most part they drop weight when their playing days are over. I'm not saying Shaun Rodgers or Ted Washington are going to do it, but most of them do.

Do you know how many miles a pro soccer player runs in a game? And they burst into full speed at any point. your avg NFL player wouldnt make it through the first period. And soccer players dont stop, neither does Hockey, most of the time the clock is ticking in a footbakll game the players are in between plays doing nothing.

 

[preslove]

I've seen stories by 60 minutes and that HBO sports show with brian gumble (forget the name) on this issues. Autopsies of players who died young (40's to 50's) show that they had the brains of 70 or 80 year olds. All the concussions and head injuries lead to scar tissue in the brain, which leads to problems down the road, like depression & dementia.

Also, all the hits to the body lead to major problems like acute arthritis and major back pain etc.

It's not obesity or steroids that's killing these middle aged men, it's the fact that they played a blood sport for too long. You can only be thrown to the ground or hit by a guy running and jumping into you at 20 mph, so many times until you do permanent damage to your body.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: NeoV
some of you have obviously never even picked up a football, much less played football

There are really two topics here - how much of a toll does playing in the NFL take on a body - and how much of the reason for the very low average life-expectancy comes from performance enhancing drug use? The mid 70's and early 80's were awash with steroids in the NFL, and once steroid testing starting, players shifted to other performance enhancing methods, none of which are exactly recommended to stay fit.

As for the idiot telling former NFL players to 'get out of McDonalds and into the gym' - do you feel better taking out your jealousy behind an internet post? Get a clue - NFL players have spent more time in the gym and no more about keeping in shape than you will ever hope to.

Yes there are some 'fat' NFL linemen, and there are some former NFL players who let themselves get out of shape - but they are the minority, not the majority.

Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong.

Is that so? Giant 300 pound defensive ends can still run the 40 in under 5 seconds. I guess they're not in good shape? :roll: Get real dude. And you must not have ready Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding if you think bodybuilders don't spend obscene amounts of time in the gym, or that you don't build mass that way.

OMG a 5 second 40? 40 yds = 36.576 meters... so that works out to a 13.6 second 100 meter dash.. basically what the avg 12 year old girls and 10 year old boys can run at your local junior high track meet. I'm not impressed. To make this out as some sort of feat of human ability is hilarious.

Compared to sports like Hockey, Soccer, Wrestling(real), Boxing, MMA, footballers are far and away the least conditioned.

And Arnold didnt have todays nutrition, not to mention he's a bit of a special case. You dont have to spend more than 2 hours a day, 3 or 4 times a week in the gym to pack on muscle weight, as long as you are getting good nutrition and rest.

No, no, no. You couldn't be any more wrong.

Are you familiar with the concept of acceleration vs the concept of velocity? I'm going to assume no, otherwise your silly little translation into the 100m dash would never have happened. The fastest NFL players ever run in the 4.1-4.2 range. Here are the best numbers for wide receivers in this year's combine:

Jackson, DeSean 4.35
Caldwell, Andre 4.37
Franklin, Will 4.37
Jackson, Dexter 4.37
Royal, Eddie 4.39
Thomas, Devin 4.40
Shields, Arman 4.44
Simpson, Jerome 4.47
Breazell, Brandon 4.47
Bennett, Earl 4.48
Garcon, Pierre 4.48

Now, here are the best numbers for defensive linemen:

Howard, Marcus 4.45
Groves, Quentin 4.57
Crable, Shawn 4.64
Gholston, Vernon 4.67
Johnson, Curtis 4.69
Ellis, Chris 4.71
Gatewood, Curtis 4.74
Thompson, Jeremy 4.75
Long, Chris 4.75

Not to mention you lack comprehension that when you weigh 300 pounds, yes, it IS harder to run that fast. Strap on a 50-100 pound vest to simulate the extra muscle weight they're carrying, and see how fast YOU run the 40.

Now that that's been completely shot down, your comment on Arnold is also off base. Arnold's book is not a journal of what he did. It was written in 1999 and is a guide for TODAY'S bodybuilders. It has nothing to do with him in the 60s and 70s. And most weight lifters only go to the gym 3-4 times a week, you're correct, but not competative bodybuilders.

Cliffs - you're wrong, stop making a fool of yourself.

 

[RichardE]

When I finished High school about 6 years ago I weighed in at 460 pounds due to bulking up (from 280) to play Offensive line. A lot of highschoolers going into uni for offensive line are weighing that much.

Anyway, I was offered a position to play at UWO and a few months before training camp a lady came to our school to talk about University sports. Her and I started talking and she told me about all the 400+ pound guys she had met who didn't make pro and were left super obese with a shitty life usually working in an office because 10+ years of trying to be big made sure they didn't know how to be small.

That story really hit home with me, really hard and I forgo training camp and instead spent a year loosing weight before going off to Israel for a few years. By the time I was 21 (4 years later) I had lost most of the weight (was done to 270-280) and now (23) I am between 200-205 and trying out for the team again though at a different position.

Anyway, short little story about how I can see that the strain of athletic sports depending can have an impact, from the guy who blow up to play O line, or the endurance athletes who at 45 need to use walkers because of knee replacements. Professional and even University/College level sports require so much dedication and ignoring the signals the body tries to send you.

 

[finite automaton]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: NeoV
some of you have obviously never even picked up a football, much less played football

There are really two topics here - how much of a toll does playing in the NFL take on a body - and how much of the reason for the very low average life-expectancy comes from performance enhancing drug use? The mid 70's and early 80's were awash with steroids in the NFL, and once steroid testing starting, players shifted to other performance enhancing methods, none of which are exactly recommended to stay fit.

As for the idiot telling former NFL players to 'get out of McDonalds and into the gym' - do you feel better taking out your jealousy behind an internet post? Get a clue - NFL players have spent more time in the gym and no more about keeping in shape than you will ever hope to.

Yes there are some 'fat' NFL linemen, and there are some former NFL players who let themselves get out of shape - but they are the minority, not the majority.

Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong.

Is that so? Giant 300 pound defensive ends can still run the 40 in under 5 seconds. I guess they're not in good shape? :roll: Get real dude. And you must not have ready Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding if you think bodybuilders don't spend obscene amounts of time in the gym, or that you don't build mass that way.

OMG a 5 second 40? 40 yds = 36.576 meters... so that works out to a 13.6 second 100 meter dash.. basically what the avg 12 year old girls and 10 year old boys can run at your local junior high track meet. I'm not impressed. To make this out as some sort of feat of human ability is hilarious.

Compared to sports like Hockey, Soccer, Wrestling(real), Boxing, MMA, footballers are far and away the least conditioned.

And Arnold didnt have todays nutrition, not to mention he's a bit of a special case. You dont have to spend more than 2 hours a day, 3 or 4 times a week in the gym to pack on muscle weight, as long as you are getting good nutrition and rest.

No, no, no. You couldn't be any more wrong.

Are you familiar with the concept of acceleration vs the concept of velocity? I'm going to assume no, otherwise your silly little translation into the 100m dash would never have happened. The fastest NFL players ever run in the 4.1-4.2 range. Here are the best numbers for wide receivers in this year's combine:

Jackson, DeSean 4.35
Caldwell, Andre 4.37
Franklin, Will 4.37
Jackson, Dexter 4.37
Royal, Eddie 4.39
Thomas, Devin 4.40
Shields, Arman 4.44
Simpson, Jerome 4.47
Breazell, Brandon 4.47
Bennett, Earl 4.48
Garcon, Pierre 4.48

Now, here are the best numbers for defensive linemen:

Howard, Marcus 4.45
Groves, Quentin 4.57
Crable, Shawn 4.64
Gholston, Vernon 4.67
Johnson, Curtis 4.69
Ellis, Chris 4.71
Gatewood, Curtis 4.74
Thompson, Jeremy 4.75
Long, Chris 4.75

Not to mention you lack comprehension that when you weigh 300 pounds, yes, it IS harder to run that fast. Strap on a 50-100 pound vest to simulate the extra muscle weight they're carrying, and see how fast YOU run the 40.

Now that that's been completely shot down, your comment on Arnold is also off base. Arnold's book is not a journal of what he did. It was written in 1999 and is a guide for TODAY'S bodybuilders. It has nothing to do with him in the 60s and 70s. And most weight lifters only go to the gym 3-4 times a day, you're correct, but not competative bodybuilders.

Cliffs - you're wrong, stop making a fool of yourself.

4 times a day? :Q

 

[Deeko]

haha quiet you, I meant per week.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Deeko
No, no, no. You couldn't be any more wrong.

Are you familiar with the concept of acceleration vs the concept of velocity? I'm going to assume no, otherwise your silly little translation into the 100m dash would never have happened.

I know its not a perfect comparison, but only in football do people run such short distances, so hard to grab direct ones, I still think the comparison I made puts things in perspective. 5 seconds really aint shit.

The fastest NFL players ever run in the 4.1-4.2 range. Here are the best numbers for wide receivers in this year's combine:

Well no shit, they are pro's, the 1% of the 1% of the 1%. Does raw speed mean they are in great shape? Heres another one that will piss you off: people off the street who havent lifted a finger in years can run sub 4.5's. Fuck, explain that one.

Not to mention you lack comprehension that when you weigh 300 pounds, yes, it IS harder to run that fast. Strap on a 50-100 pound vest to simulate the extra muscle weight they're carrying, and see how fast YOU run the 40.

How about a 100 pound flack jacket full of ammo and water? in 125 degree desert? Ya I know its difficult, but regular people (millions of them) manage it with a little training. And it wasnt in t-shirts and running shoes. And I a lot of them were D1 college players who didnt get drafted... guess which they said was harder? There is no amazing conditioning going on in the NFL, get over it. Compared to Pro Hockey, Soccer, MMA, etc, they are just a bunch of big guys throwing weight around.

Now that that's been completely shot down, your comment on Arnold is also off base. Arnold's book is not a journal of what he did. It was written in 1999 and is a guide for TODAY'S bodybuilders. It has nothing to do with him in the 60s and 70s. And most weight lifters only go to the gym 3-4 times a [week], you're correct, but not competative bodybuilders.

Cliffs - you're wrong, stop making a fool of yourself.

no, I made some pretty good points, and you knee jerk reactions to them, I take it you played football and have a complex? its understandable. But get over it.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: finite automaton

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: NeoV
some of you have obviously never even picked up a football, much less played football

There are really two topics here - how much of a toll does playing in the NFL take on a body - and how much of the reason for the very low average life-expectancy comes from performance enhancing drug use? The mid 70's and early 80's were awash with steroids in the NFL, and once steroid testing starting, players shifted to other performance enhancing methods, none of which are exactly recommended to stay fit.

As for the idiot telling former NFL players to 'get out of McDonalds and into the gym' - do you feel better taking out your jealousy behind an internet post? Get a clue - NFL players have spent more time in the gym and no more about keeping in shape than you will ever hope to.

Yes there are some 'fat' NFL linemen, and there are some former NFL players who let themselves get out of shape - but they are the minority, not the majority.

Oh please, it's not a secret footballers are the least in shape of all the pro sports. Besides mass does not come from time in the gym. Even body builders will tell you too much time in the gym is bad for weight gain. Other than wide outs and corners, its pretty much bigger is better. Having an ass ton of muscle from protien loading and pumping massive amounts of weight doesnt mean your in shape, it just means your heavy and strong.

Is that so? Giant 300 pound defensive ends can still run the 40 in under 5 seconds. I guess they're not in good shape? :roll: Get real dude. And you must not have ready Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding if you think bodybuilders don't spend obscene amounts of time in the gym, or that you don't build mass that way.

OMG a 5 second 40? 40 yds = 36.576 meters... so that works out to a 13.6 second 100 meter dash.. basically what the avg 12 year old girls and 10 year old boys can run at your local junior high track meet. I'm not impressed. To make this out as some sort of feat of human ability is hilarious.

Compared to sports like Hockey, Soccer, Wrestling(real), Boxing, MMA, footballers are far and away the least conditioned.

And Arnold didnt have todays nutrition, not to mention he's a bit of a special case. You dont have to spend more than 2 hours a day, 3 or 4 times a week in the gym to pack on muscle weight, as long as you are getting good nutrition and rest.

No, no, no. You couldn't be any more wrong.

Are you familiar with the concept of acceleration vs the concept of velocity? I'm going to assume no, otherwise your silly little translation into the 100m dash would never have happened. The fastest NFL players ever run in the 4.1-4.2 range. Here are the best numbers for wide receivers in this year's combine:

Jackson, DeSean 4.35
Caldwell, Andre 4.37
Franklin, Will 4.37
Jackson, Dexter 4.37
Royal, Eddie 4.39
Thomas, Devin 4.40
Shields, Arman 4.44
Simpson, Jerome 4.47
Breazell, Brandon 4.47
Bennett, Earl 4.48
Garcon, Pierre 4.48

Now, here are the best numbers for defensive linemen:

Howard, Marcus 4.45
Groves, Quentin 4.57
Crable, Shawn 4.64
Gholston, Vernon 4.67
Johnson, Curtis 4.69
Ellis, Chris 4.71
Gatewood, Curtis 4.74
Thompson, Jeremy 4.75
Long, Chris 4.75

Not to mention you lack comprehension that when you weigh 300 pounds, yes, it IS harder to run that fast. Strap on a 50-100 pound vest to simulate the extra muscle weight they're carrying, and see how fast YOU run the 40.

Now that that's been completely shot down, your comment on Arnold is also off base. Arnold's book is not a journal of what he did. It was written in 1999 and is a guide for TODAY'S bodybuilders. It has nothing to do with him in the 60s and 70s. And most weight lifters only go to the gym 3-4 times a day, you're correct, but not competative bodybuilders.

Cliffs - you're wrong, stop making a fool of yourself.

4 times a day? :Q

I got 2-3 :Q

And I'm just athletic training. :laugh:

 

[91TTZ]

Originally posted by: Train


OMG a 5 second 40? 40 yds = 36.576 meters... so that works out to a 13.6 second 100 meter dash.. basically what the avg 12 year old girls and 10 year old boys can run at your local junior high track meet. I'm not impressed.

That was truly an idiotic statement.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

Yeah, that's my point. It's nothing like the modern game, it was closer to rugby if anything. To say that the American Football was so dangerous Ted was pushing to ban it is misleading as the game at the time was far more dangerous than the modern version.

I guess I just find it amusing, as I'm a big fan of rugby. And in the rugby forums whenever the two games are compared, they always say Teddy thought rugby was so dangerous he tried to ban it from the US. And here you are saying the exact opposite The reality is that both games were so totally different back then that compared to their modern games they aren't really the same game at all.

Oh, you're one of those whiny rugby people screaming about NFL players and their armor, I guess?

The NFL has evolved over the past 100 years largely because of safety concerns (and more recently, what makes the networks money), which is my point - so thank you for agreeing with me while telling me I'm wrong? It was indeed FOOTBALL and not RUGBY that Roosevelt was attacking. Did American football evolve from rugby? Yes! No one denies that. But it still wasn't rugby - anyone on your boards that is saying that is incorrect.

Regardless of whatever football vs rugby crap you're invariably going to spew, and I'm not going to care about - football is an incredibly violent game. If they didn't wear the pads they did, we would see dozens of crippling injuries and likely multiple deaths every year.

edit: Wiki link

LOL. Whiny rugby people? I actually prefer NFL you numpty.

Just correcting your obvious errors, that's all. Football in 1900 is not the same as Football in 2009, so a comparision between the two is ridiculous.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Deeko
No, no, no. You couldn't be any more wrong.

Are you familiar with the concept of acceleration vs the concept of velocity? I'm going to assume no, otherwise your silly little translation into the 100m dash would never have happened.

I know its not a perfect comparison, but only in football do people run such short distances, so hard to grab direct ones, I still think the comparison I made puts things in perspective. 5 seconds really aint shit.

Not a perfect comparison? It wasn't even remotely close! The first 40 yards are while you're doing most of your acceleration. That comparison was godawful. A 5 second 40 is not slow, especially not for someone that weighs 300 pounds.

The fastest NFL players ever run in the 4.1-4.2 range. Here are the best numbers for wide receivers in this year's combine:

Well no shit, they are pro's, the 1% of the 1% of the 1%. Does raw speed mean they are in great shape? Heres another one that will piss you off: people off the street who havent lifted a finger in years can run sub 4.5's. Fuck, explain that one.

You just said above that you can't even find a comparison to the 40 yard dash, how are you finding people off the street running 4.5's? I backed up my answer with raw data electronically timed at the combine. You are pulling numbers out of your ass.

Not to mention you lack comprehension that when you weigh 300 pounds, yes, it IS harder to run that fast. Strap on a 50-100 pound vest to simulate the extra muscle weight they're carrying, and see how fast YOU run the 40.

How about a 100 pound flack jacket full of ammo and water? in 125 degree desert? Ya I know its difficult, but regular people (millions of them) manage it with a little training. And it wasnt in t-shirts and running shoes. And I a lot of them were D1 college players who didnt get drafted... guess which they said was harder? There is no amazing conditioning going on in the NFL, get over it. Compared to Pro Hockey, Soccer, MMA, etc, they are just a bunch of big guys throwing weight around.

I do not believe you that you can run a sub 5 second 40 yard dash with a 100 pound flack jacket in 125 degree heat. Not for one second.

Now that that's been completely shot down, your comment on Arnold is also off base. Arnold's book is not a journal of what he did. It was written in 1999 and is a guide for TODAY'S bodybuilders. It has nothing to do with him in the 60s and 70s. And most weight lifters only go to the gym 3-4 times a [week], you're correct, but not competative bodybuilders.

Cliffs - you're wrong, stop making a fool of yourself.

no, I made some pretty good points, and you knee jerk reactions to them, I take it you played football and have a complex? its understandable. But get over it.

No, you have not. You have, and still continue, to pull things out of your ass and have no evidence or numbers to back it up. Oh, and try this on for size - Michael Jordan, the best NBA player of all time who was known to be pretty damn fast on the court, is rumored to have run a 4.3. So the best NBA player ever, timed in the days of stopwatches, not electronic timers, isn't as fast as a random college draftee in the NFL. You're right though...NFL players aren't in good shape.

NFL players are very fast, very strong, very tough, and very coordinated. And yet for some asinine reason, you think they are the most unfit athletes out there? Please. And for the record I never played football. I played soccer and volleyball and am currently a competitive powerlifter.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: StinkyPinky

Originally posted by: Deeko

Oh, you're one of those whiny rugby people screaming about NFL players and their armor, I guess?

The NFL has evolved over the past 100 years largely because of safety concerns (and more recently, what makes the networks money), which is my point - so thank you for agreeing with me while telling me I'm wrong? It was indeed FOOTBALL and not RUGBY that Roosevelt was attacking. Did American football evolve from rugby? Yes! No one denies that. But it still wasn't rugby - anyone on your boards that is saying that is incorrect.

Regardless of whatever football vs rugby crap you're invariably going to spew, and I'm not going to care about - football is an incredibly violent game. If they didn't wear the pads they did, we would see dozens of crippling injuries and likely multiple deaths every year.

edit: Wiki link

LOL. Whiny rugby people? I actually prefer NFL you numpty.

Just correcting your obvious errors, that's all. Football in 1900 is not the same as Football in 2009, so a comparision between the two is ridiculous.

I was just poking fun with the rugby thing. However, there is no error in my statement.

 

[oznerol]

You know why America generally sucks at soccer? Because all our best athletes play football. It pays more.

You take all of the NFL's best CBs, HBs, and WRs - teach them the rules of soccer, pay them millions of dollars, and the US will never lose a World Cup.

NFL players are the best athletes in the world.

 

[Deeko]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/...layton_john&id=2779980

Calvin Johnson - 6'4", 239 pounds, 4.33 40, 11 ft 7 in broad jump, 43" vertical....spends his day getting popped by 230+ pound safeties and catching balls thrown as hard as a MLB fastball. What a poor athlete! If only he were in better shape!

 

[StinkyPinky]

Originally posted by: ducci
You know why America generally sucks at soccer? Because all our best athletes play football. It pays more.

You take all of the NFL's best CBs, HBs, and WRs - teach them the rules of soccer, pay them millions of dollars, and the US will never lose a World Cup.

NFL players are the best athletes in the world.

Oh please.

 

[Train]

Gotta run, but I'll reply to this for now...

Originally posted by: Deeko
NFL players are very fast, very strong, very tough, and very coordinated.

Yes, they are.

And yet for some asinine reason, you think they are the most unfit athletes out there?

Of the major sports, and on the pro level, like Hockey, Soccer, Boxing, MMA... least fit, HANDS DOWN

 

[NeoV]

Train, you really couldn't end up looking like a bigger idiot here.

If you are looking for the best candidates for a marathon - sure, I'll take a soccer player over an NFL player.

if you are looking for the best candidate for a decathalon, where simply running for a long time isn't the only thing you are basing this on, an NFL player wins, it's not even close.

Do you know what position in football soccer players get? Kicker/punter. Almost every single kicker in the NFL has a soccer background - ask them how 'athletic' their teammates are.

Just because the NFL is a stop/start game, to think these players aren't fit is moronic.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: chuckywang
It could be the steroids

This is the answer.

You can't be 350lbs of muscle without steroids. No way. Might be an occasional physical freak of nature that can do it....everyone else is on 'roids.

Think about it: 20 years ago, a 6'4", 275lb lineman was BIG. Now that same 6'4" guy is 325-360 all through the league.

Does anyone REALLY think that people are just that much bigger? Hell, no. And don't tell me it's the modern training techniques....that's a bunch of bullshit. Lifting weights is lifting weights. Same as it was 20-30 years ago.

Only difference is the performance enhancers. Steroids, HGH, etc.


I have a friend who played in the NFL for about 7 years, an offensive lineman. Played in the ACC in college.

He was about 240lbs in college. 6'3". When I was in HS and he was in college, he was considered a BIG dude. He was a bit bigger in the NFL, then during his last couple of years, the coach told him he wanted him to be up around 275lbs. Steroids was how he did it.
Dude is now about 225-230. I'm bigger than he is. But he was a giant back then.

If he came through the college and pro ranks now, he'd easily top 300 with the performance enhancers available these days.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: TallBill
Some big fail at math here. If the average age of death of a player that plays 5 years is 55 and the average years played in the NFL is 3.5, then the average age of death of an NFL player is not 55.

Regardless of what the exact numbers are - its still off putting that football puts that much of a toll on a players' body. I assume you're not saying its ok that if someone makes a career out of the NFL, they die in middle age?

have you seen stories on aging linemen and defensemen? most of them "retire" in obscurity, living in assisted living, with walkers, and under constant pain for the rest of their lives.

I hear guys like Montana and Elway will lose sensation in their throwing arms for days on end.

Not Tom Brady, though. That guy hasn't taken a hit in his life.

No, I've never taken a hit in my career.

Regards,

Tom Brady's Knee

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Train, you really couldn't end up looking like a bigger idiot here.

dude, footballers get pwned in cross competition all the time. Size does not equal athleticism. Nether does a 40 time.

If you are looking for the best candidates for a marathon - sure, I'll take a soccer player over an NFL player.

if you are looking for the best candidate for a decathalon, where simply running for a long time isn't the only thing you are basing this on, an NFL player wins, it's not even close.

Did I say marathon? Did I say running only? Besides, do you realize theres a 1500 meter run as one of the events in a Decathalon? lol let me see a linemen score points in that

Let me a see a linemen POLE VAULT, HIGH JUMP, LONG JUMP

Get a fuckin' Clue Size would kill you in most of those events. Other than a lanky reciever , CB, or saefty, most football players would get killed in simple agility tests like the jumps.

Do you know what position in football soccer players get? Kicker/punter. Almost every single kicker in the NFL has a soccer background - ask them how 'athletic' their teammates are.

I bet you are pulling that out of your ass. How many pro kickers have you talked to? How many of them played pro or even D1 college soccer? Or were they just high school soccer kids who got into a college football program and then to the pros? I would bet the opposite, some would say thier teamates are a bunch of whiners.

Just because the NFL is a stop/start game, to think these players aren't fit is moronic.

Not only is it 4 seconds of play followed by 20 seconds of standing around... you only have to be in for half the plays!

 

[Train]

dp