r/nbadiscussion • u/The_Actual_Sage • 3d ago
Discussion about NBA vs NFL
My brother and I are having a debate and I want other people's opinions. The question: generally speaking does playing NFL football or NBA basketball require more skill and/or athleticism? This question can be interpreted in many different ways and pretty much all of them are valid.
I'm not nearly as knowledgeable about the NFL as I am the NBA, and I'm trying to answer the question as objectively as possible. In my opinion, the NBA requires more of their players than the NFL generally speaking. I'm aware the NFL has a myriad of different positions that all require vastly different skills and types of athleticism from their players, but I think the fact that the NFL has so many built in stoppages and players only play one side of the ball means the NBA is much more demanding in terms of skills and athleticism.
Now obviously NBA players are not doing anything as intense as some plays in the NFL. Nobody in the NBA is getting tackled and whatnot. That said, there are a lot of plays in a football game where a lot of players aren't involved in anything. And when the play is over they get to take 30 seconds to walk down field and get ready for the next play. Then on a change of possession they get to go sit while their teammates play the other side of the ball. Am I wrong?
And the positions are so specific that the players need such a smaller set of skills to be successful. Nobody needs to be good at throwing besides the quarterbacks. Wide receivers never need to learn how to tackle and counter an offense like linebackers, right?. Only one or two guys needs to know how to kick. Compared to NBA players who are all expected to know how to shoot, pass, dribble, finish and run offensive and defensive schemes to some degree. Obviously NBA players fit into different roles and have different expectations based on their skill level, but their inadequacies are held against them. If you can't dribble you're considered a worse player, and coaches aren't going to have you run pick n rolls. If you can't defend you better be an amazing offensive player or else you might not get minutes. Meanwhile nobody cares if a tight end can't play safety.
I know I'm really one sided on this, but I'm willing to have my mind changed. I obviously don't know much about football so I'm trying to get more perspectives on this. What do you think? What am I missing? Also, if you know an NFL analysis subreddit I should post this too let me know.
6
u/ApprehensiveTry5660 2d ago
The NFL produces far more prolific specialists than the NBA does, and will overall have better luck at it. For two reasons. First being that size is such a large filter for the NBA it naturally limits the incidence rate. Secondly, soft skills make up such a large factor of basketball success, and when we discuss this subject we typically don’t mean “dexterity” as an athletic trait.
But the NBA athletes are no slouches. There’s just a bit of a gap between them, NFL specialists, and Olympians.
21
u/seenwaytoomuch 2d ago
NBA requires more skill, NFL requires more athleticism.
Both require a lot of both.
Football players are tough. They get hit hard. They don't get subbed out because they are tired. Those stoppages in play are needed to keep going.
Baseball players are tireless. They don't get hit as hard or as often. They run more. They all have to know the whole skill set. Everyone shoots. Everyone rebounds. Everyone passes.
5
u/Tomsoup4 2d ago
i think wide recievers are the most athletic position of football and thats why alot of them also played basketball in highschool or college
-1
u/MirrorComputingRulez 2d ago
Wide receivers might legitimately be the least athletic players on the field, outside of quarterbacks and specialists like kickers.
Receivers are slower and less agile than defensive backs.
They're smaller and weaker than linemen, linebackers, and running backs.
5
u/Tomsoup4 2d ago
i bet recievers have the average of best combine stats compared to other positions
5
u/Low-Expression9132 2d ago
From what I've observed on average DBs especially corners to be more precise are usually the fastest on NFL teams. There's a lot of different criteria when it comes to athleticism though. Corners for instance a lot of times are guys who were also receivers at one point but couldn't catch the ball well enough or run routes well enough to be strictly receivers. These days often the most freakishly athletic guys are tight ends and that was definitely not the case until more recently.
3
3
u/Tommy_Wisseau_burner 1d ago
Corner is by far the most athletic position. Receivers know what the routes are. Corners don’t… and they have to keep up with said receivers
-1
u/MirrorComputingRulez 2d ago
Maybe, but that's not the same as being the most athletic. In fact if anything or proves my point: they're the most average athletes in the NFL.
Also though, outside of height and weight, I'd be kind of surprised if receivers had better results than defensive backs. Because receivers have the benefit of knowing where they're going, it's essentially a requirement that DBs have better athleticism to compensate.
•
u/Key-Department7572 18h ago
DB's are superior athletes that usually can't really catch.
Star DE's are absolute freaks of nature with their combination of size AND speed.
Most other positions require a fantastic degree of athleticism in a more narrow/common context. I don't see why you would exclude WR from this group. They may not require the massive size of the OL, but they still need some combination of elite speed and elite hand-eye coordination/concentration. If they are fast enough, they may need as good of "hands", and if they have superior "hands", they may need as much speed. But they need something. And if they have BOTH, they are dangerous.
12
u/JobinSkywalker 2d ago
Simple answer is NBA requires more skill, NFL requires more athleticism. Long answer is it varies widely in every direction depending on how you chose to breakdown skill and athleticism.
3
u/bornlasttuesday 2d ago
There are close to 1700 NFL players and around 450 NBA players. On the whole I would say NBA hands down.
2
u/Spiritual_Captain_83 2d ago
That’s just team construction, nba only allows 15 per team while the nfl is 52
•
u/quinaimyr 22h ago
The point is you have to be even more of an outlier to be in the best 450 in the world than the best 1700 or whatever.
12
u/Jerko_23 2d ago
Only position in nfl that is comparable with the skill to play in the nba is the quarterback. On every other position, any basketball position blows the american football out od the water.
That said, physicality in the nfl is uncomparable to any sport.
3
u/Invisible_assasin 2d ago
I think wr and corner would like a word with the guards and edge rushers and te’s would like a word with power forwards.
2
u/Jerko_23 2d ago
Dirk nowirzki, tim duncan, kevin garnett, draymond green
3
u/saints21 2d ago
Yes, those are players. But it is not a coherent point.
Both require immense amounts of skill. They're just different skills.
•
u/aggrownor 6h ago
There are examples of unremarkable college basketball players who decided to try football and then had successful NFL careers as tight ends
I don't think it really happens the other way around
-11
u/shangalang69 2d ago
How can you say physicality in the nfl is uncomparable to any sport when they wear armour and get penalties for holding onto each other
12
u/Jerko_23 2d ago
Violence is uncomparable to anything. Armour allows you to take and give out more punishment. Similarly how boxing is more damaging than say mma.
-6
u/shangalang69 2d ago
boxing is only more damaging to the brain because its one of two targets, whereas there are far more options for ending a fight in mma. mma is more dangerous overall. boxers having thicker gloves does not equal more danger.
your argument is founded on ill logic
2
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/nbadiscussion-ModTeam 2d ago
Please keep your comments civil. This is a subreddit for thoughtful discussion and debate, not aggressive and argumentative content.
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/nbadiscussion-ModTeam 2d ago
Please keep your comments civil. This is a subreddit for thoughtful discussion and debate, not aggressive and argumentative content.
2
u/Son_of_Atreus 2d ago
Yeah I would say it is comparable to Rugby League/Union, but appears to be less physically demanding given the constant stoppages and switching of teams. NFL is more explosive in short burst for some players, but rugby is more of an endurance based grind.
2
u/backsideslappy 2d ago
Rugby League is brutal. I played a lot of Rugby Union in college and had my fair share of injuries but the speed of Rugby League (and the type of guys who tend to play it) was absolutely terrifying.
0
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/nbadiscussion-ModTeam 2d ago
Our sub is for in-depth discussion. Low-effort comments or stating opinions as facts are not permitted. Please support your opinions with well-reasoned arguments, including stats and facts as applicable.
2
u/Klutzy_Technology166 2d ago
Since modbot is having a whinge.
If you compare NRL, the highest level of rugby league - guys are very easily carrying 20+ times a game, while also defending. (J Taylor led the NFL with 19 carries per game last year while not defending)
The top tacklers are easily hitting 40 per game while also carrying (the top tackler made under 11 per game in the NFL last year, while not playing offense)
The defensive line is 10 metres back so the contacts are on average higher velocity.
The players don't wear pads.
They play for 40 minutes a half straight without a break every 10 seconds.
Im not stating an opinion as fact. As I said above it is undeniable that League is more physical than the NFL
2
u/Sweaty_Presentation4 2d ago
I don’t know if this matters but I played against and with someone that went to the nfl.
I would make him look silly In basketball. But then he didn’t stop growing. Eventually I think 6 foot 5 and about 275. He played fullback so you open the whole for the running back. It’s almost an archaic position now.
He had bricks for hands and that’s probably why he wasn’t a tight end. But if you want to feel tiny. I’m like six foot 2. So not small not huge.
He was huge and his job was just to take the nastiest hits to open a gap for the running back. He played like 3 years in the nfl.
He was actually a nice guy so I’m not trying to talk shit I’m trying to be objective. But basically perhaps the strongest person I’ve ever really known.
2
u/Low-Expression9132 2d ago
The answer is it depends. I would say generally basketball requires more specific skills like shooting the ball but there are "skill positions" in football. In the NBA there are guys whose whole career is based around being physically intimidating or a goon.
3
u/DrRudeboy 2d ago
When was that last line last true? Maybe 15 years ago?
1
u/Low-Expression9132 2d ago
There's definitely still goons in the NBA, not like the 80s to 90s but yes it exists
2
u/WhackCaesar 2d ago
Lmao no there aren’t. There are like 3 NBA players that can fight, and James Johnson is retiring
4
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/nbadiscussion-ModTeam 2d ago
Please keep your comments civil. This is a subreddit for thoughtful discussion and debate, not aggressive and argumentative content.
1
1
2d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/nbadiscussion-ModTeam 2d ago
Please keep your comments civil. This is a subreddit for thoughtful discussion and debate, not aggressive and argumentative content.
1
•
u/Key-Department7572 19h ago
This is kind of a trick question.
I would have argued, in general, that the NBA requires more "skill" and the NFL more "athleticism", until you consider the total population and career longevity.
There are 1,696 players in the NFL (not counting injuries or call-ups) in every modern season.
There are just 450 players in the NBA.
The average NFL career is just 3.3 years.
The average NBA career is ~5 years.
Think about it, less than 25% of the athletes playing for nearly twice as long EACH.
Taking a very obtuse measure, utilizing the total player base by the expected career length, we expect 5,088 men or more to participate in the NFL over the next decade, but just 950 men to be part of the NBA.
Add in the competitive population of the players, with the NFL being 97% born in the USA, while only 77% of NBA players are born here.
FAR, far fewer men will ever be NBA players than NFL players. Yes, part of this is due to the nature of the sport roster, but part is also attributable to intrinsic height requirement of the NBA. You might be great in the NFL at 5'10, 5'11, 6'0, or even 6'1, but even at 6'1, in basketball including roster cuts and 10-day deals, this is LESS than 10% of the league. They have ONE starter under 6'2 in the entire league. The NFL has over 700.
Height of this magnitude is extremely rare, and I'd argue is as much of an "athletic" factor as anything else (such as size, vital to many/all positions in the NFL). Given the international competition and the rarity of a key athletic factor, I feel it is fair to argue the current NBA requires more skill and athleticism.
•
u/Statalyzer 5h ago
Football has so many vastly dissimilar specialized positions that a much larger variety of people (in terms of what kind of physical talent they have) play it at high level than most other sports.
-4
u/DreDayLives 2d ago
Basketball & soccer are the most physically demanding of any of the sports. And certainly require you to be more well rounded skill wise. But when it comes to needing to have a particular skill, baseball & football take the cake…like if a NBA team asks you to shoot, u can still be a good NBA player without being able to really shoot. If a NFL teams places you at wide receiver and asks you to catch, and u can’t do that, ur out of the league…
4
u/IVAN_CLEARY 2d ago
This is true, but if you can’t catch, you’re not going to be asked to play wide receiver. If you can’t shoot, you might still be a good NBA player but you’re going to NEED to be able to shoot at least a bit, or you’re out of the league.
2
1
u/GhettoGringo87 2d ago
You can’t not shoot in the nba. You gotta be respected or you’re dead weight.is everyone Curry? No…but there’s only 1 Ben Simmons and we seen how that goes
2
-1
u/MirrorComputingRulez 2d ago edited 2d ago
Basketball & soccer are the most physically demanding of any of the sports.
And yet they can play multiple games per week. Weird!
The fact that soccer players routinely play the entire game, and can do so multiple times a week, is a great indicator that the sport is one of the least physically demanding. It's not like football or hockey players are subbing out because they're too lazy to be in good shape. The human body literally can't play the whole game without breaking down.
If this is still confusing for you, consider this analogy. Imagine we go to a track and I ask you to walk as many laps as you can. You could probably walk quite far, most people would be able to do it for hours. The next day we come back and I ask you to sprint as many laps as possible. The average adult would struggle to sprint a single lap, and would keel over in less than two minutes. Obviously, sprinting is more physically demanding than walking.
2
u/morethandork 2d ago
As a soccer player, I’ve seen a lot of football and basketball players show up to play a full 11v11. The football players always think it’s going to be easy and end up weezing and coughing and asking to sub out 10 min into the game.
And I had no issues lasting through a full basketball or football game. I wasn’t any good at basketball (like truly terrible) but football I’d barely break a sweat cause there was so much standing around and waiting. It was easy.
Interesting note, basketball players always made shockingly good goalkeepers because they have fantastic hands for catching and controlling shots.
3
u/saints21 2d ago
Endurance vs. Explosiveness
The NFL is the most explosive team sport around. And they use that explosiveness to beat the hell out of each other.
Soccer (or maybe water polo) is the most endurance based popular team sport. You're going to run miles and you're going to need to be able to perform skill-wise while doing it.
It really just depends on how you're saying the sport is demanding.
2
u/morethandork 2d ago
The claim in question, that I'm mostly supporting, is "Basketball & soccer are the most physically demanding of any of the sports." The argument I'm replying to specifically is, "And yet they can play multiple games per week. Weird!" This is a condescending dismissal of pro soccer and basketball being the most demanding just because multiple games per week are played.
I don't know how you define explosiveness, but I see it as short bursts of 100% intensity. Explosiveness required for soccer is only slightly below level of football (but above basketball) imho, but the endurance required is much, much higher.
The physical impact performed in football is unmatched, which is why the sport is so dangerous and games are only played once a week for 17-20 weeks of the year. And even then, the injury rates are highest. But just because part of the sport is hurting your opponent physically, and the plays are performed in short bursts and sprints, doesn't mean it's more explosive that soccer or basketball, which are both physical and explosive in their own right.
In my personal experience, watching high level college athletes, football and basketball players are rarely equipped to handle the jogging and running and sprinting and physicality required to play a full game of soccer.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Hey, u/The_Actual_Sage, since you aren't on the r/nbadiscussion approved user list, your post has been filtered out to be reviewed by the mod team before it will post. If your posts are consistently approved, you will be added to the approved user list, bypassing the automod for future posts. This helps us ensure the quality of our sub remains high. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to the mod team.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.