Ronaldo vrs Michael vick, whos a better athlete?

I'd give the award to Ronaldo (in his prime.)

 

You talkin' about tubby, here?



A lot of people think Jim Thorpe is/was the best athlete of all time, but at the end of the day, we'd just be comparing apples to oranges...or in the current case of Ronaldo...pears.

Once again, find where I said soccer players weren't great athletes and I will proclaim you king of all the internet!

I just happen to have a healthy respect for all athletes, no matter what their sport. Furthermore, I'm able to separate my love (or loathing) of a sport from the rational discussion of that sport.

 

I thought that was AlGore?

 

First off who is the white boy you are referring too? And trying to compare soccer awards to football is a joke. There is no international NFL World Bowl or whatever it would be called. In any given year a soccer team can win up to 3 or more awards as compared to the singel SuperBowl. I like soccer probably 10 times more then football, but if I had to pick either Ronaldo and Vick to compete in say 10 different physical sports, I would pick Vick. And I would even bet Vick would win in 7 or more.

 

Ronaldo? RONALDO? No contest, it's Vick.

If you'd mentioned someone like Ronaldinho or Robben or Cannavaro, the soccer player would actually have a pretty good chance of winning the debate. Even in Ronaldo's prime, Edgar Davids was infinitely more of an athlete.

 

...and either of them would kick Tiger Woods arse...

 

I don't think you're giving Ronaldo enough credit. You can't accomplish the things he did without speed, strength, coordination, etc. In his prime do I really think he could run 40 yards in a straight line as fast as Mike Vick? No, I don't. But it'd probably be pretty close. Also I'd give ronald the heads up in anything like tennis, skiing, or washers.

 

Vick is the better athlete. Ronaldo is the better soccer player. Athletically the two couldn't be any more different at this point in time. Vick is much faster and stronger than Ronaldo.

 

But in his prime, Ronaldo was absolutely breath-taking. I don't know who Michael Vick is, and therefore obviously can't compare them, but it's hard to imagine a better athlete than Ronaldo in his prime:
look at that

 

well then, have a look at this.
Vick is one of the fastest athletes I have ever seen. He also possesses an incredible amount of upper body strength. The guy in green and yellow (Kabeer Gbaja-Biamila) is 6' 4" tall, 250# and runs a 4.58 second 40 yard dash. He shrugged him off like a winter coat.

Okay...crown prince.

 

It means he is a fabulous athlete. Extremely graceful and intuitive, and yes, even magical...but it's not the definitive proof of being the "best" athlete you think it is.
If you want to know who the best athlete in the world is, right now, Google "decathlete world champion 2006". That event, more than anything else, is the determining factor of overall athletic prowess, period.

 

I am not sure who the better athlete is although Vick is one of the best I have seen.

Lets compare who is better at their sport hands down Ronaldo. Vick is an average NFL quarterback on his best day.

 

No argument there. It's what he does outside the classic scope of his position that makes him unique. I've never seen a player able to tip the field the way he does (except when he faces my Buccaneer defense. ) with his speed.
You can take a receiver like Moss out of the game with coverage. Of course, that opens up other areas, but you can do it. Vick just puts that X Factor into the game.

 

The formula to stop Vick is out. (thanks to your bucs) Running quarterbacks do not last very long in the NFL especially ones that cant throw accuratley. Unfortunatly i believe the best days of Michael Vick are behind him.

 

Just to let everyone know, I am very new to soccer. Thanks for the clip of Ronaldo, that's really impresive, fun to watch and if more American kids grew up seeing that kind of athleticism and skill on the soccer field then we could really generate some excitment towards soccer and grow some talent here.

Now to your post, obviously Ronaldo is freak soccer stud, no denying that...and has some serious athletic ability. M. Vick, also has serious athletic ability and is a physical freak of nature. Like one of the above post's suggested, put them both (in their Prime) in a serious of 10 athletic competitions (excluding soccer and american football skills) and Vick wins hands down. Bigger, Stronger, Faster, with similiar vision and perception on the playing field. Vick is just the better athlete.

Now, I will also concur with another of the post's above, Ronaldo=better professional soccer athlete than Vick is as a pro quaterback in the NFL. Vick was a freak at VTech and, sometimes, the only reason that college team even won games. He put them on the map, but professionally (and maybe it's the personel on the Falcons) he just doesn't seem to have the same impact. Still dangerous, but probably not as dangerous as Ronaldo (in his Prime) was in professional soccer matches.

Since we like youtube here, check this out. Superiour athletic ability: strength, speed, skill, perception, field of vision, heart and desire from a "typical" american college football player that wasn't even "athletic enough" to earn a position with a pro american football team. Remember, this running back was taking to guys that go on to play in the NFL. Check it out...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0AFxF10XtE
long version

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHr2DbCBHws&mode=related&search=
short version...hope it works...let me know if it doesn't

Know everyone knows that I'm a Mountaineer!

 

I remember that run. Is he going to play in NFL Europe or Arena? So much strength and speed.

 

Well...if we're going to compare definitions...then have a look at this.
You also seem to have this misconception that all football players are huge. They aren't. You have five offensive linemen and one or two monsters in the middle of the defensive line. Everyone else on the field is as athletic as they come. Wide receivers and corners are usually running sub 4.5 40s. Linebackers and tight ends are usually in the 4.5-4.8 range. Running backs are usually anywhere in those ranges as well, depending on their role.
Lumping all football players into the category of "fat" is as silly as lumping all soccer players into the category of "Landon Donovan".

 

Not to make any claims about NFL athleticism (obviously they are very athletic in some ways), but how legit are those 40s? In another thread on BigSoccer, someone actually pointed out that if the 40s were timed perfectly accurately, then NFL players would be fast enough on grass to take all of the Olympic sprint medals over runners who train solely to sprint, running on high-tech track surfaces designed for speed. As it turns out, football tends to time 40s by a variety of ways that ensures as much exaggeration of speed as possible: running starts, hand timing, and other things.

Frankie Hejduk, timed using the same (error-filled) method, ran a 4.2 - and was flat-out outrun by Arjen Robben in a match (referring to a few situations where both were sprinting for a loose ball).

 

I'm not sure, I think that he made an NFL practice squad so he may be going to play in Europe...I'm pretty sure that he is/was on the payroll of some team somewhere. I still think that he is a better back than some currently starting in the NFL. You have to remeber, he only started one year of college football for WVU due to the depth that they have at that position. That run is truely amazing.


Not to make any claims about NFL athleticism (obviously they are very athletic in some ways), but how legit are those 40s? In another thread on BigSoccer, someone actually pointed out that if the 40s were timed perfectly accurately, then NFL players would be fast enough on grass to take all of the Olympic sprint medals over runners who train solely to sprint, running on high-tech track surfaces designed for speed. As it turns out, football tends to time 40s by a variety of ways that ensures as much exaggeration of speed as possible: running starts, hand timing, and other things.[/

Someone called me on this and I answered this in a previous thread/topic...The NFL (during there combines to judge the skill and talent of the players coming out of college) uses the most technical, state of art, expensive devices known to measure time...specifically the 40. During the time measurment, the player gets into position and places his thumb on a response pad. As soon as the thumb breaks contact with the pad timing starts. Timing ends when the player crosses the laser line at the end of the 40. I beleive that I also read somewhere that a world class olympic athlete tends to start a little slower (by sprinter standards) and excelerates as the distance increase whereas the football player tends to max out at around the 40 mark.

The NFL is a huge financial market, lots of money, so the owners and coaches want to be sure that they are getting the fastest, most athletic guys that they can get...thus the accurate timing. So, the 40 times are very legit, that's what they are paying for...and a guy like Randy Moss had a redicules 40 time, he also broke all of the state sprinting records when he was in high school, and if he had chosen to be a world class sprinter then he would probably have been very successfull at it.

I honestly do not think football players are that big of a deal, they're just big.... if we gone talk about big, we can talk about Shaq Oneil, if we gone talk about strong, we can talk Mike Tyson...

Not we're not talking who has a bigger upper body, or whos fastest, we are talking of who is a better athletes, isnt Michael Johnson the fastest guy on American? He is not even a football player.

Watch that clip again and tell me that football players are not a big deal. I can promise you that, had Shaq or Mike Tyson been in that runners way, they would have been knocked into next week. But, athletically, neither Shaq nor M. Tyson would have been fast/quick enough to have even been in the position to get knocked on their arse by Quincy (the runner in the clip).
When we talk about athleticism, to a certain extent, we have to talk about bigger, stronger, faster. It's like the boxing trueism, "A good little boxer can never beat a good bigger boxer". For the little boxer to succeed over the larger opponent, he has to have superior skills...if the skills are equal and one of the two boxers is clearly bigger, stronger and faster, the littler boxer has no chance.

 

Vick is quite an amasing athelete BUT I dunno how u can compare a guy who runs with a ball in his hands to a guy who runs with the ball at his feet.....