Philosophical Question about the Run Defense. | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Philosophical Question about the Run Defense.

JTech194

Starter
Joined
Jun 14, 2004
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
174
Location
Miami Florida
I heard on the radio the other day from either Herm Edwards or a former Player I'm not sure. But they were saying that teams with Finesses type offenses will never be good defensively against physical power run based offenses. And the logic was that because they don't get to practice daily against an offense that runs a physical power scheme, they don't get to practice the necessary run fits and physicality needed to be good at stopping it. I didn't think much of this until watching the game yesterday and we seemed to do pretty good against Philly's running game. Could this be because we run a similar finesse type offense and our defense practices against it every day?


This got me thinking. Is there a team in the NFL that runs a finesse type offense and has a defense that's good against power running teams? Denver came to mind because they're defense is pretty good (not the last 2 weeks though) But is their offense a finesse offense like ours?

If this is the case, what's the solution? If you don't have the players on offense to give the defense that type of look, how can they get better at it? There aren't many teams that can switch back and forth... the Patriots come to mind as a team that can go from a power running attack to a finesse attack from play to play. What do you guys think?
 
Side Note: I kinda liked watching that Hewitt kid. From what I remember reading, he has great physical gifts but played for a small school and needs work on technique and stuff.

Still, he could be a guy we see sooner than later get significant minutes. Jelani Jenkins is now our best linebacker and Hewitt could be that guy next year.
 
Denver is not finesse, Kubiak's goal is to smash you with the run and pass off of it.

I do agree with the idea that if you don't pound the ball on offense your run defense will suffer. We seem to have gotten weaker since Lazor brought in his finesse game on offense.
 
How do you explain the Patriots? A team that seems to be whatever it needs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
How do you explain the Patriots? A team that seems to be whatever it needs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the Million dollar ?. They are like f-ing chameleons. You almost have to sign and draft players that fit both schemes. For example, they have Blount for the ground and pound game, and Lewis for the finesse spread game. I have no answers for how they get practice squad olineman to perfom at an adequate level and we can't get 3rd round picks to perform.

Even if have your practice squad's giving the defense a physical look, those players aren't as good as the players the defense will face on gameday so that's insufficient. Seems like you have to have starters that can do both. But that's extremely difficult.
 
The 49ers under Montana/Young would disagree.Sure the offense were ZBS and according to some a finesse offense. Ronnie Lott and his boys would knock you unconscious. 4 rings is enough validation

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
 
^^^^ That's a great example with the 49ers - that offense pretty much coined the term "finesse" (or i'm not old enough to know better)
 
How do you explain the Patriots? A team that seems to be whatever it needs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They happen to have a HC that is a defensive Genius. I am very sure he has made sure his defense was ready even more then his team offense each week.
 
The Patriots do it by taping your practices. Seriously, does anyone think the Patriots stopped doing what they got in trouble for? I don't.
 
How do you explain the Patriots? A team that seems to be whatever it needs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree it is more than Tom Brady. It is just top to bottom, front office, staff, players and execution all done well. As much as I hate them both Brady and Billicheat are just that much smarter than everyone else.

Until they are unpaired New England is going to win by doing whatever they need to do. Power running, short passing, two te sets, stretch the field. It's just the perfect storm.
 
The 49ers under Montana/Young would disagree.Sure the offense were ZBS and according to some a finesse offense. Ronnie Lott and his boys would knock you unconscious. 4 rings is enough validation

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

I don't think you can make that comparison. Those teams could morph into whatever was needed against different opponents. They had 21 rushing TD's in 1984 and 18 in 1988 when they won 2 of the Super Bowls. Roger Craig could pound it at the goal line. Big difference that what we have.
 
That's a good point, and I think it hold validity. I think NE is probably the best example, but most games because of Brady they put enough points on the board the power run teams don't get to utilize it the entire game as you have to match TD's. There are obviously exception games, and lately NE's defense hasn't been anything other than middle of the pack.

The example of San Fran I am not sure fits here as that was a different time, and different rules. BD's could mug receivers and receivers going across the middle were fair game. As great as Ronnie Lott was, not sure his game then would translate as well to today's games and rules.
 
The 49ers under Montana/Young would disagree.Sure the offense were ZBS and according to some a finesse offense. Ronnie Lott and his boys would knock you unconscious. 4 rings is enough validation

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Great example you only had to go back 25+ years
 
Great example you only had to go back 25+ years


I'm old, suh me

---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:46 PM ----------

When was the last time a team with a finesse type offense won the Super Bowl?

Green Bay? I would not call the Aaron Roger led Packers a ground and pound offense
 
Back
Top Bottom