Football players are the best athletes on earth--you're an idiot if you think otherwise.

ThuMbs_uP wrote:

Utter nonsense. Champion professional fighters would whoop his ass. But even then, sport fighting is not the most effective form of real-world fighting. Those trained in real combat would take Ray Lewis out.

Football happens to be a sport in which many are massive, strong and short-term speedy because it emphasizes physics... running, tackling, hitting, etc.

Does this make them the best "athlete"? It all depends on how you define athletics.

Champion professional fighters are not who I was comparing Ray Lewis to. The whole idea of some primal death game is stupid. But still, is it really that hard to believe that the likes of Adrian Peterson or Robert Griffin III would fair quite well in such a contest?

body master wrote:

Retard, i said in the REAL WORLD without the engineered concept of "sports." You do realize that a sport is man made? If we were to take the best human beings in a natural setting doing actual natural things like climbing, running etc then track athletes would undoubtedly reign supreme.

In the grand money making concept of "sport" NFL athletes rank right up there as the best athletes because they have a larger skillset then track athletes. But strip away those extraneous skillsets that aren't useful in the natural world and track athletes are the best PURE athlete.

Nobody needs to be able to catch a hail mary with one hand while mantaining possession on the fall down. Or shoot a ball into a small hoop 50 yards away.

I don't fully understand how you're having so much trouble accepting real sports as viable displays of athleticism. Athleticism that would undoubtedly be seen as great, even in "real world" scenarios.

Josh Hamilton's Addiction wrote:

I don't fully understand how you're having so much trouble accepting real sports as viable displays of athleticism. Athleticism that would undoubtedly be seen as great, even in "real world" scenarios.

I buy your premise of using sports as a proxy for athleticism. But don't think football players in general are the top athletes.

I've previously posited NBA players as the top athletes. They are quick, ultra coordinated, more fit than football players, and play a physically demanding, though not brutal, sport.

But in your island survival scenario, wouldn't NHL players be more suited to winning? Fitter than the average NFL players, the only team sport athletes accustomed to routinely fighting, noted for pain tolerances that are off the charts, all with the speed, balance, and coordination demanded by any NFL or NBA player.

Shawn Thornton, who led the NHL in fighting majors, is 6'2 220. And punches people in the face, on skates, for a living. I think he'd give Ray Lewis a tough time.

........... wrote:

I buy your premise of using sports as a proxy for athleticism. But don't think football players in general are the top athletes.

I've previously posited NBA players as the top athletes. They are quick, ultra coordinated, more fit than football players, and play a physically demanding, though not brutal, sport.

But in your island survival scenario, wouldn't NHL players be more suited to winning? Fitter than the average NFL players, the only team sport athletes accustomed to routinely fighting, noted for pain tolerances that are off the charts, all with the speed, balance, and coordination demanded by any NFL or NBA player.

Shawn Thornton, who led the NHL in fighting majors, is 6'2 220. And punches people in the face, on skates, for a living. I think he'd give Ray Lewis a tough time.

This is a well thought out and calculated response, thanks for that. This is what we need more of here--intelligent rebuttals. I too originally believed that basketball players are the best athletes on earth, particularly Lebron James who sets the standard. Basketball has the added factor of endurance, which does help its case.

However, if you watch an NFL wide receiver go across the middle, jumping to catch a pass, while simultaneously being mauled by one or more defenders, you'll see what I consider to be the most athletic (and scary) display on earth--nothing compares, in my opinion. There's no doubt that football players, particularly receivers, running backs, defensive backs, and linebackers all combine your desired traits of speed, balance, and coordination wonderfully. They are machines, and they're the most athletic people on earth, quite frankly.

But football plays host the the world's greatest athletes because it has such a great range of athletes. Receivers and defensive backs are probably what most people would consider to be the purest athletes on the field, but think about the defensive ends who are in the upper 200 range but still have godly speed.

The Giants drafted Jason Pierre Paul after seeing a video of him doing something like 12 consecutive back-handsprings. He's 6-5, 278, and runs a 4.71 40 yard dash. He's also not even close to the best defensive end in football, so rest assured the guy who just sacked 20 QBs is a damn good athlete as well.

Offensive linemen: big, strong, fast, and incredibly intelligent--of course the laymen don't realize just how intelligent one must be to play offensive line in the NFL, particularly the centers.

I could go on, but this post is too long as it is. But feel free to respond, of course.

Wilt Chamberlain on the modern drug protocols would be a fearsome creature indeed.

Chuck Norris once won the Super Bowl by himself.

\End of thread\

This. I have long concluded that NBA players are the greatest athletes of all. Its almost to a fault that it requires such great athleticism. In their own way they have to be just as explosive as NFL players. But they also need great hand eye coordination and body control. Also the endurance to go through an NBA schedule and play at a consistently high level is something I don't think NFL players have.

........... wrote:

In general NBA players are the most athletic people in the world.

Of course individual exceptions are found in every sport, and you could throw in ice hockey for the additional speed component not present anywhere else, but when you look at the physical tools a pro basketball player has to possess, the answer is clear.

you're right, great body control. yes.

I think I'll leave this one to Socrates when he said wisdom begins with admitting one's own ignorance. Saying that anyone who believes differently from you is an idiot is the inverse. Admit that you have no idea what you are talking about and then you might have something worthwhile to say.

Boxers are the best athletes in the world, in my opinion

still stand by rugby players as the best athletes but lets clear some things up:

for those claiming that boxers or wrestlers are the best athletes in the world, you are forgetting about MMA fighters that need to use a much wider fighting skill set (that includes that of boxing and wrestling). these guys are great athletes

the island scenario is dumb because that puts emphasis on a certain skill set. the bigger guy is most likely gonna beat the smaller guy in a fight.

the comment about basketball players being more less athletic because there are more players in their 30s is stupid because basketball is more low impact compared to football. they wear pads but these pads make the hits the players take more brutal: you never see rugby players tackling by leading with their heads.

in conclusion, its between rugby and basketball for the sports that require the skill sets that would make for the best overall athletes in any sport

every NFL defensive back is a physical specimen. Rugby players are great all around athletes and you can not lack stamina to compete in it but in this country (this is an American web site) the best rugby players are not our greatest athletes. There are old NBA players, fat NBA players, and slow NBA players.Yes there are martial artists who got themselves in great condition and have the specific skills necessary to destroy another person. But if you took the average MMA, average basketball player, average soccer, hockey player average decathlete and average defensive back and taught them a new sport or tested them on athletic skills who do you think would do the best?

Josh Hamilton's Addiction wrote:

Ashton Eaton would be destroyed on the gridiron, as would any other Olympian.

So in other words, football has the best athletes in the world, as long as your standards for measuring athleticism is football.

Oh, and they call come from a sport only played by ONE COUNTRY in the world. In other words, all the best athletes in the world the US's 5% of the world population. Typical American ignorance.

I award you 0/10, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Are you guys retarded? What the hell is fighting going to accomplish on an island? Have you seen LOST? Or any other survival show before?

MMA, boxers, wrestlers what the hell are they going to do? Wrestle a bear for some honey? Knockout deer? Fighting is useless in this stage.

Especially if we put these guys on the island one at a time. THEN we'll see the truth.

Have you not heard of the concept of persistence hunting? Football players are already dumb as bricks, i would hardly count on them to be able to start a fire or distinguish between poisonous or not. Not only that, but with all that mass they would never catch anything. Even with 4.1 speed humans are woefully slow compared to animals.

What is Chris Johnson going to do? Catch rabbits with his short bursts of speed?

You all fail to realize that the skillset for most SPORTS is not functional in the real world. It's not useful. And that's what makes track athletes superior because they TRAIN for the most functional skillset a homo-sapien requires. As well as excellent body to weight ratios for climbing and pulling.

Blistering reaction time, excellent hand eye coordination, not neccessary in the wild. Incredible strength seen in football or rugby is useless when the inhabitants of the island (ANIMALS) are still 3x stronger.

Stop looking at this concept from an average person vs athlete perspective and start looking at it from a medieval.

Josh,

If you want to legitimately start an argument sucking football players dicks then please start a new thread retitled, "Football players are the best athletes IN SPORT."

They are no way, shape, or form the best athletes on earth.

crazy raisin wrote:

Josh Hamilton's Addiction wrote:

Ashton Eaton would be destroyed on the gridiron, as would any other Olympian.

So in other words, football has the best athletes in the world, as long as your standards for measuring athleticism is football.

Oh, and they call come from a sport only played by ONE COUNTRY in the world. In other words, all the best athletes in the world the US's 5% of the world population. Typical American ignorance.

I award you 0/10, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Just to piggy back on this, saying that NFL players are the best athletes in the WORLD only proves your ignorance. The number of people in the world who play football is so low that it is impossible for NFL players to be the best athletes. The best soccer players in the world, those who excel at the world's most popular sport are, as a whole, the world's best athletes. I know its tough to admit that Lionel Messi who is 5-7 145, is the best athlete in the world but it is true.

Secondly, the NFL probably doesn't even have the best athletes in America. One of the arguments that many posters make is that the NFL attracts better athletes than Track and Field because there is more money to be made. I agree with the idea that money plays a huge role in attracting the best athletes. Based on that logic then the NBA would have the best athletes, followed by MLB, NHL and then NFL:

This article ranks the top leagues in the world:

1. NBA

2. MLB

3. Indian Premier League (Cricket)

4. English Premier League (Soccer)

5. ???

6. NFL

This article shows the top earning teams worldwide and proves that soccer players are the best paid and therefore most likely to be the best athletes:

coach wrote:

But if you took the average MMA, average basketball player, average soccer, hockey player average decathlete and average defensive back and taught them a new sport or tested them on athletic skills who do you think would do the best?

the decathlete easily. The basketball player's ankles are too weak to play soccer, too tall to play hockey, and too weak to play football.

The MMA guy would be second.

Here's the thing. In the "real world," there's no need to persistence hunt. Nobody here is stranded on an island. Everyone participating in this conversation most likely lives in what we'd consider industrialized countries. Your perception of the "real world" is completely skewed.