A question for the "historians" amongst us (1 Viewer)

its a good thing we're not playing like a finesse team this year. we have a swarming, hard hitting D and an in your face run game. It would be nice if Mike Bell were playing so we could really ram it down their throat. Maybe L. Hamilton can play 'the hammer' this week.
 
Making it "of the last 14 years" so I don't have to deal with the Cowboys...

It would be the 1999 Rams against the 2000 Ravens. It would have happened (in 2000) but the Rams defense was terrible in 2000 and oh yeah, someone knocked them out of the playoffs first :hihi:


Who would win? No clue. 1999 Rams actually had a pretty good defense and run game though. I think the "finesse vs smashmouth" labels are silly anyways. Do the Montana and Young 49er teams count as "finesse" just because they could execute crisply in the passing game? And was the Carl Smith Saints offense correspondingly "smashmouth" just because it sucked there and had mediocre offensive skill position players?

I don't think it matters what people label you as long as you play good football.
 
I think the "finesse vs smashmouth" labels are silly anyways. Do the Montana and Young 49er teams count as "finesse" just because they could execute crisply in the passing game? And was the Carl Smith Saints offense correspondingly "smashmouth" just because it sucked there and had mediocre offensive skill position players?

This was precisely the quandry I came up with after thinking on it a while. "What exactly is a finesse team?"

I think my definition would be a team that's pass first and always hits the corners on runs. No blasting through the line, no TE short catches over the middle, no QB holding in the pocket for a while then running through the line like a runaway locomotive.

And after a lot of consideration, it's true that even a team that may possess these traits on offense must still have a rather smothering defense at some point in the game.

I guess it boils down to this..

You have to possess both elements to win in a league that features so many different type of teams. Those that are pretty much all finesse (Arizona comes to mind), or all brutes (Philly here), and those that mix it up across both sides of the ball.
 
You have to possess both elements to win in a league that features so many different type of teams. Those that are pretty much all finesse (Arizona comes to mind), or all brutes (Philly here), and those that mix it up across both sides of the ball.

See but even that falls short. Philly had a blitzing, athletic defense and a pass first, second, and line up in the shotgun for third down offense during their NFC Championship runs.

Does that qualify as finesse or smashmouth? I mean you could argue even their defense was "finesse" in that it focused on exploiting and overloading gaps and quick athletes, not on out muscling the offense. They've certainly never had the sort of defensive line the 85/86 Bears or 2000 Ravens had.

It's an overrated terminology.
 
I don't know.

I think the '85 Bears or the '00 Ravens could have dominated ANYONE in the Super Bowl those respective years. :scared:

:gosaints:


generally there's usually a bad matchup game for most superbowl contenders and they will typically lose to some team of their respected year of glory (i.e. saints sweep bucs 02')


i really wanted a saints-ravens matchup in 00' because we had the best offensive and defensive lines in football and i thought that we really had a chance to move the ball on their defensive line in spite of tony siragusa, sam adams, mcrary, and webster.


jermaine lewis was a good returman but that was about the only advantage they really had because dilfer was only marginally better than tony banks. the giants defense played pretty well for the most part but their offense got shut out.

rickey and our offensive line demolished a jags defense in 99' that was on pace for the same numbers that the ravens achieved in 00' and hadn't surrenderd any rushing tds the whole year until rickey easily scored his first nfl td.

i really would've longed to have seen that match-up but joe horn missed the vikings game and we lost our ability to match scores with the vikings.


that would have been an interesting SB right next to having seen the 98' vikings vs. the 98' broncos.


horn was also held out of the championship game two years ago against the bears. only that time he said that he was healthy enough to play.
 
"Finesse" seems to only refer to offense whereas "smashmouth" can be offense or defense. I don't think I would call a Ronnie Lott-led defense "finesse", at least not to his face. I guess you could call the 2006 Colts D "finesse", if by finesse you mean a defense that is built to play with the lead. Undersized and fast, able to rush the passer and get interceptions. Maybe they aren't the best against the run, but eventually, you will have to throw the ball against them and they are so good at that aspect, you're toast.

'06 Colts against '00 Ravens

I'm not going to pick a winner, because both teams had such glaring deficiencies. I think the winner would be the '99 Rams. They were a top 5 ranked defensive unit as well as the finesse offensive team we remember.

Also, a question of clarification. If a team is inept at throwing the football, do they automatically become a "finesse" team?
 
I don't know.

I think the '85 Bears or the '00 Ravens could have dominated ANYONE in the Super Bowl those respective years. :scared:

:gosaints:

The Bears only loss in 85 was to the very finessee Dolphins. The 2000 Ravens defense never had a chance to face the Colts,Rams or Vikings of 2000 that season. That is a matchup I would like to have seen.
 
Also, a question of clarification. If a team is inept at throwing the football, do they automatically become a "finesse" team?

If the team is considered a "good team", meaning they're winning games, then I would think they're blasting through on the ground. And if you're stuck on the ground, you'd kinda have to be playing some form of "smash mouth" type ball.

My thoughts on a typical finesse offense (did I post this already? forget...) is a pass often, run the corners and screen a lot.
 
They won that one by one yard. A Rams linebacker stopped a Titans receiver on the 1 yard line on the final play of the game to seal the victory. It was a very evenly matched, hard fought game as I recall.

Consider this: The Titans passed on Moss because of character issues surrounding him and instead drafted Kevin Dyson. Dyson is the receiver who was tackled about 1 foot short of the goal line. He's 6', Randy is 6'4". The arguement that I've made every day since then is that Tennessee cost itself a Superbowl victory by passing on Randy Moss!
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom