Anti-Super bowl

bobwilliams · 01-02-2014 02:01AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Rugby players play the ball, American footballers play the man. I'd rather watch a game where they play the ball.

not true,maybe 10 years ago you would be close to being correct but the game has moved on a bit,they don't get away with what they used to.

In fairness they're 2 really different sports so hard to really have a serious fair
comparison

major bill · 01-02-2014 02:03AM

bobwilliams wrote: »

this shows how much you know.......nada.
The AF players would leave premiership footballers and rugby players for dead in terms of their fitness.
yes there's the big guys aswell but they do serve a purpose and in fact the bigger guys are so strong and fast it's hard to believe at times.

Really??? A Premier League player would run miles in 90 Minutes, I would love to see both Sportsmen go head to head but I'd doubt they would leave any PL player for Dead.

Barney92 · 01-02-2014 02:03AM

Deleted User wrote: »

Rugby players play the ball, American footballers play the man. I'd rather watch a game where they play the ball.

Play the man? What? What would you describe interceptions and attempted interceptions as then? Missing the man but somehow catching the ball? What about clearing players out from a ruck in rugby? Is that playing the ball or the man?

You can't really make such broad statements about the two games because both games have elements where you are trying to get the ball or just trying to tackle the opponent. It's not really one or the other.

P_1 · 01-02-2014 02:04AM

bobwilliams wrote: »

this shows how much you know.......nada.
The AF players would leave premiership footballers and rugby players for dead in terms of their fitness.
yes there's the big guys aswell but they do serve a purpose and in fact the bigger guys are so strong and fast it's hard to believe at times.

Much different types of fitness to be fair. AF is all about short and intense bursts of energy whereas the likes of rugby are about a more measured exertion over the 80 minutes.

AF players would be 100m sprinters whereas rugby players would be 10,000m runners.

Both are great sports in my eyes, no real need for the animosity between fans of the other.

The Backwards Man · 01-02-2014 02:07AM

And now a word from our sponsors. .

bobwilliams · 01-02-2014 02:08AM

major bill wrote: »

Really??? A Premier League player would run miles in 90 Minutes, I would love to see both Sportsmen go head to head but I'd doubt they would leave any PL player for Dead.

you don't really know what you're talking about,a premiership player is fit yes but some of these guys in AF are 14 or 15 stone and can run 100 metres in 10.5 ish seconds.

Darkglasses · 01-02-2014 02:10AM

If you don't like american football that's fair enough, but claiming that the players aren't in incredible physical shape is pure ignorance. The NFL draft definitely sorts out the ordinary from the extraordinary athletes.

Uriel. · 01-02-2014 02:12AM

Cheerleaders cheerleader Cheerleaders.

Can't really understand why anyone would get upset by superbowl. You actually have to go seriously and purposely trying to hunt the thing down to see it.

It's not like it's one Rte 1 at 9pm

major bill · 01-02-2014 02:13AM

bobwilliams wrote: »

you don't really know what you're talking about,a premiership player is fit yes but some of these guys in AF are 14 or 15 stone and can run 100 metres in 10.5 ish seconds.

I refer to the above posters point

Lets see one of those 15 stone players last 90 minutes playing at a very high tempo the Barca players play,

I am not saying they are any less fit but leaving PL and Rugby players for dead in terms of Fitness is a ridiculous statement.

So many stops in AF aswell that Football does not have.

bobwilliams · 01-02-2014 02:14AM

Uriel. wrote: »

Cheerleaders cheerleader Cheerleaders.

Can't really understand why anyone would get upset by superbowl. You actually have to go seriously and purposely trying to hunt the thing down to see it.

It's not like it's one Rte 1 at 9pm

sky sports every week give approx. 10 hours airtime

freedominacup · 01-02-2014 02:17AM

bobwilliams wrote: »

you don't really know what you're talking about,a premiership player is fit yes but some of these guys in AF are 14 or 15 stone and can run 100 metres in 10.5 ish seconds.

So they have the same physical attributes as a rugby centre or winger

.

I enjoy american football always have but I reckon at this point there's not much to choose between the elite of either sport. Rugby players probably have more of an endurance type fitness where AF players are all about short bursts of extreme power but both are tuned to the tee for the rigours of their sport.

bobwilliams · 01-02-2014 02:21AM

major bill wrote: »

I refer to the above posters point

Lets see one of those 15 stone players last 90 minutes playing at a very high tempo the Barca players play,

I am not saying they are any less fit but leaving PL and Rugby players for dead in terms of Fitness is a ridiculous statement.

So many stops in AF aswell that Football does not have.

premiership football isn't played at a high tempo for 90 mins ,lets just agree they are different types of fitness.
A premiership player runs approx. 9-11 k in 90 mins(I think)

major bill · 01-02-2014 02:23AM

bobwilliams wrote: »

premiership football isn't played at a high tempo for 90 mins ,lets just agree they are different types of fitness.
A premiership player runs approx. 9-11 k in 90 mins(I think)

We shall

Enjoy yer night on Sunday

Frank Lee Midere · 01-02-2014 02:32AM

major bill wrote: »

I refer to the above posters point

Lets see one of those 15 stone players last 90 minutes playing at a very high tempo the Barca players play,

I am not saying they are any less fit but leaving PL and Rugby players for dead in terms of Fitness is a ridiculous statement.

So many stops in AF aswell that Football does not have.

They spend about 20 seconds running in a 3 hour game.

The funny thing about the NFL is that it's sh1te and it knows it's sh1te. It's designed for TV. Americans don't take it seriously. If the Super Bowl is on in the US most people at home care about

1) the ads
2) the half time act
3) the cheerleader'a bottoms
4) a cold bud
5) or a warm Sierra Nevada
6) a burger or hot dog
7) company at a ( possibly ironic) Super Bowl party
8) the FLYOVER( USA! USA!)
9) maybe the game if they are NFL fans and fans of the team. Therefore not most people.

It's kinda like an American Eurovision.

uch · 01-02-2014 02:32AM

The Backwards Man wrote: »

And now a word from our sponsors. .

"Yiz are shíte"

cena · 01-02-2014 02:37AM

American sports are the greatest. Feck the gaa and soccer etc.

All hail american sport.

Winter Olympics this week too.

01-02-2014 02:49AM

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

They spend about 20 seconds running in a 3 hour game.

The funny thing about the NFL is that it's sh1te and it knows it's sh1te. It's designed for TV. Americans don't take it seriously. If the Super Bowl is on in the US most people at home care about

You should look up the figures for which sport has the highest average attendance so

Noxin · 01-02-2014 02:50AM

Beer - check.
Venue - check.
Following day off work - check.

Nope, can't say I'm anti-Superbowl I'm afraid.

errlloyd · 01-02-2014 03:07AM

I watch the superbowl most years, and it's a good sport and a pretty amazing spectacle. I think Irish people buy into it in the same kind of mob mania that makes American's buy into St Patricks day, so I can't complain. But I generally find the inconsistencies in how people watch sport pretty interesting, ponder these.

1: Why do Irish people watch Wimbledon and not Rolland Garros? - Its not as if we have some issue with clay and we're defo not tied to BBC's broadcasting anymore, its not the 90s...

2: I'd argue AFL is a more interesting sport than NFL, truly amazing all rounder athletes in a fast end to end game and yet hardly anyone watches the grand final.

3: The Monaco Grand Prix is arguably the most boring on the F1 calendar yet garners the most attention.

4: Athletics as a concept doesn't seem to exist at all outside of the Olympics.

5: The ashes is the most tiresome of cricket series. A sport often criticised for being long and dull has re-invented itself with one day and 20/20 versions, and yet the most popular is still a 5 test slog contested between the same two nations every time.

6: The Tour de France is literally the only cycling event to ever happen. Do people even ride bikes anywhere else in the world?

I'm mostly a rugby and F1 fan, but I do enjoy the big sporting occasions from all over the place (particularly team sports). In the last couple of years I've made an effort with.

Cricket World Cup
Americas Cup (personally my favourite, I got mad into it)
Ryder Cup
Irish Olympic Hockey Qualifiers
Grand Slam Tennis
AFL Grand Final
Super Bowl
State of Origin Rugby League
Tour De France
Amateur Boxing

uch · 01-02-2014 03:10AM

Can you whittle that down a bit ?

errlloyd wrote: »

I watch the superbowl most years, and it's a good sport and a pretty amazing spectacle. I think Irish people buy into it in the same kind of mob mania that makes American's buy into St Patricks day, so I can't complain. But I generally find the inconsistencies in how people watch sport pretty interesting, ponder these.

1: Why do Irish people watch Wimbledon and not Rolland Garros? - Its not as if we have some issue with clay and we're defo not tied to BBC's broadcasting anymore, its not the 90s...

2: I'd argue AFL is a more interesting sport than NFL, truly amazing all rounder athletes in a fast end to end game and yet hardly anyone watches the grand final.

3: The Monaco Grand Prix is arguably the most boring on the F1 calendar yet garners the most attention.

4: Athletics as a concept doesn't seem to exist at all outside of the Olympics.

5: The ashes is the most tiresome of cricket series. A sport often criticised for being long and dull has re-invented itself with one day and 20/20 versions, and yet the most popular is still a 5 test slog contested between the same two nations every time.

6: The Tour de France is literally the only cycling event to ever happen. Do people even ride bikes anywhere else in the world?

I'm mostly a rugby and F1 fan, but I do enjoy the big sporting occasions from all over the place (particularly team sports). In the last couple of years I've made an effort with.

Cricket World Cup
Americas Cup (personally my favourite, I got mad into it)
Ryder Cup
Irish Olympic Hockey Qualifiers
Grand Slam Tennis
AFL Grand Final
Super Bowl
State of Origin Rugby League
Tour De France
Amateur Boxing

Meangadh · 01-02-2014 03:16AM

If you were living in America and not into it, then I'd say complaining about it is fair game cos it's everywhere. You could be blissfully unaware about it here though- I've seen little to no reference to it anywhere- so I don't know how you could get annoyed by it on this side of the Atlantic.

osarusan · 01-02-2014 03:24AM

I'll watch it.

It goes on for way too long, but it's decent to watch (I prefer to watch a one-hour highlights package, which is actually still the whole game, minus all the breaks). Some fascinating and very very technical elements to the game.

The comments on fitness and strength are nonsense too. These guys get paid millions and millions. You will not find any sport anywhere in which millions are being paid and the players aren't the best in the world at what they do.

Sure they couldn't run for 90 minutes like an EPL footballer or even rugby player, but iof you think either of those sports players could do what NFL players do, you're deluded.

Frank Lee Midere · 01-02-2014 03:30AM

osarusan wrote: »

I'll watch it.

It goes on for way too long, but it's decent to watch (I prefer to watch a one-hour highlights package, which is actually still the whole game, minus all the breaks). Some fascinating and very very technical elements to the game.

The comments on fitness and strength are nonsense too. These guys get paid millions and millions. You will not find any sport anywhere in which millions are being paid and the players aren't the best in the world at what they do.

Sure they couldn't run for 90 minutes like an EPL footballer or even rugby player, but iof you think either of those sports players could do what NFL players do, you're deluded.

Run into each other? Kick conversions from 5 feet away.

Let's cede that no rugby player could do the quarter back thing. That's it.

MonaPizza · 01-02-2014 03:50AM

uch wrote: »

Who else thinks the Super Bowl is jumped up american shíte ?

2 teams split into 2 and they never (we'll be right back after these messages) face each other.

Most dopes watch this for the tailgate parties and the commercial breaks .... oh and wardrobe malfunctions.

MonaPizza · 01-02-2014 03:54AM

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The influence of the world's superpower and a tiny country on the propriety of Europe is hardly equal.

Eeeeeewww!

Did you mean "periphery"?

Too many corn-dogs there, sportboy.

Super-Rush · 01-02-2014 04:02AM

Weed Bowl ftw.

herdygerdyerdy · 01-02-2014 04:06AM

cornbread dammit, cornbread.... hut!

herdygerdyerdy · 01-02-2014 04:08AM

uch wrote: »

Who else thinks the Super Bowl is jumped up american shíte ?

The teams not in the super bowl i guess.

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo · 01-02-2014 04:25AM

bobwilliams wrote: »

premiership football isn't played at a high tempo for 90 mins ,lets just agree they are different types of fitness.
A premiership player runs approx. 9-11 k in 90 mins(I think)

What does the average American Football player run during a game??? 500 metres to 1km?!?!

On the pitch, stop, start, off the pitch, stop, start, compared to the constant intensity and power in rugby.

Basketball is the only proper USA sport, Baseball (rounders) and American Football make snooker look exciting.

MonaPizza · 01-02-2014 04:34AM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Yeah once I actually sat down and got to know the game properly I started enjoying it. Like you said, you have to give it a chance. I don't like when people completely dismiss sports they don't understand. Cricket is another example.

Cricket is class. Slow but strategic....like chess.

Ice hockey is a fantastic game. If you watch the Russians or the Swedish play it. Unfortunately in the US people don't appreciate the almost balletic skill of the participants. Americans don't give a fuck about the score in an ice hockey match. They just want to see people rammed into the boards and unsportsmanlike conduct where guys pull each other's shirts over their heads so they can't punch back and then there's a ref trying to break it up...as the crowd cheer at this sh!t.

Basketball? An absolutely BRILLIANT game. I just wish it was played outdoors. A good game should have both opponent and weather conditions to contend with...much like war....which is what sports are all essentially based about. I know we can't play pool or tabletennis in the lashing rain but still...a game as fast and as powerful as basketball could be played outside instead of squeaking up and down the wooden court.

Soccer/Real Football is the greatest team game of all. Don't want to hear about people moaning because they get hurt just because some baboon can withstand being hit at XYZ speed by ABC apes. Doesn't make him an athlete. Go stand in front of a train and get launched into a tree if that's your benchmark for sporting prowess. And that's what the Superbowl is...a complete pantomime. An embarrasment of a game that nobody plays except bubblegum chewers who think it's actually real all the while they're just yapping back to each other in the stadium and going down for another tray of junk food ..and this is DURING the game.

Don't try to sell it to me. I know the rules of the game and it's as made up for a local audience as farting contests are. Take a tennis match and a full packed house. The vast majority there know the rules and object of the game. Likewise with football...you think a single person (apart from the odd bored girlfriend or tourist or 4 year-old with his father) doesn't understand the game?

I was in Giants Stadium at a game with my American ex. She was (plastic beaker in hand not even looking at what was going on on the field and neither did too many around her). I watched some caper and then there was a pause in the activity on the field and I tapped her as she was yapping to other (shirt wearing) "fans" behind her and I asked her if she could tell me what had happened in the game. I was told some crap about "second and down or fcuking first and ten" or some gibberish. She still couldn't explain and I sat out the rest of this spectacle.

Let's face it. The game is crap. the rules of the game are probably not rocket science at all, there's just some obscure crap in there to make it seem a bit more sophisticated than it really is, like some fancy terms and a few strange and rare "plays" that can be done during a certain scenario...like that kicking the ball and having it bounce a few times before it goes out.....how retarded and rip off of rugby is that farce.

Anyway the game is crap and most people who defend it can only do so not because it's skillful but because "you couldn't play that game, you pussy!"

Yeah, ok.

Anti-Super bowl

Comments