so why is American Football so called when the hands are mostly used?
Its very annoying for the rest of the world to whom football means ‘soccer’(I hate to call the most beautiful game in the world soccer it feels soooo wrong!)
It becomes very difficult to express how much football means to the Europeans and south Americans and how sickening it is that Americans change the name. It would appear that just because America is not a power on the football field they decide to pretend that it doesnt exist.
There are some who would say that it requires too much attention and is not as high scoring for Americans to apprieciate. I heard an interesting comment that the American sports networks are scared that the public would catch on to football and that they would loose lots of money.
So any chance that you could change the name to something else to avoid this confussion?
Whats with all the body armour that they all wear you dont get that with rugby
The Brits feel the same way about some of the stuff we call “beer”. Cultural differences, go figure.
Happen to see the Olympics in 1996?
Any chance you will?
I’ve got to agree with you on that. When I played rugby, we used to give the lacrosse team a lot of flak for wearing armor, but at least they carry weapons.
Sorry I really don’t have anything substantive to say, but this seems more like a cultural flame than a real GQ, so I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to be a sarcastic American.
Are you posting similar questions in Canadian and Australian boards? I believe their version of football also differs from what you call football.
We have no problem differentiating U.S. rules football from what you call football. We simply call it soccer, and it is played at nearly every school in the United States. If it’s not as popular here as other sports, it’s certainly not for lack of exposure.
As far as the actual “question” you posted, U.S. rules football was a variation on rugby and when it was developed, the kicking portion of the game was far more important than it is now.
Makes sure some swivel-hipped pansy doesn’t dominate the field.
Its interesting when you look at Football in its earlier days when the only padding was a leather helmet. The guys who owned the running game couldn’t survive a millisecond on today’s field.
That armor makes people hit each other full tilt without much concern for consequences. Whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing is up to debate
They wear “armor” as you put it for the simple reason that these are huge athletes, hitting each other as hard as they possibly can. Take off those pad, and you would have some serious injuries. Go back to leather pads, and you’d have deaths.
If they didn’t have pads, why would they still hit so hard? Or are they just not bright enough to know that slamming into someone with no padding whatsoever, hurts like the dickens. Not only breaking the other guys bones, but your own. Come on, they can’t be that oafish (unless the helmets aren’t as secure as we thought). Besides, many of them have plenty of natural padding, especially aorund the ribcage.
The question has been asked and answered within the last month, so I’ll close this and direct any remaining unanswered questions to the earlier thread, why is football called football?
natural padding, especially aorund the ribcage.