Exactly. Main problem is comparing an athlete in an individual sport with athletes in team sports. Especially American Football which is far too specialized and the quarterback position is the most specialized of them all. Also, there are only sixteen games played in the NFL regular season. It would take Federer about one slam to put in the same amount of "raw" time as Manning does in an entire season. On top of it you chose the quarterback of an offense that is notorious for having minimal time of possession as other teams deliberately try and keep him on the bench.
@BobFL: thanks for the constructive feedback. How about some actual thoughts on why you think it's a poor comparison?
@seffina: more constructive. The fact that NFL players only play 16 games is sort of the point: it would seem that they just don't play as much. The purpose of the posting is, as it says, more out of admiration than comparison. But, to your comment about my choice of quarterback -- that's fair. I don't watch much American football at all, so I'd welcome a suggestion for someone you think would be a better comparison. And, to reiterate, I don't claim to be making a true one-to-one comparison -- it's just to get the conversation started.
Also, yes, football is a specialized sport, but all players on the field are exerting themselves at the same time when the ball is in play. The difference is in how they exert themselves (is a football player working "harder" than, say, a lineman? Not sure; he's probably exerting less physical energy but more mental energy). The differences here seem unquantifiable.
@Moose Malloy: thanks for that stat -- that's interesting (and those clips are good). Curious about your chuckle -- basketball is obviously not an actual contact sport in the way that American football is, but compared to tennis, they beat up on each other quite a bit. Soccer would be a similar comparison here -- not an actual contact sport, but you can't deny that those guys beat each other up on the field.
