
Originally Posted by
Preacher
I think it would help if the two of you defined your terms.
What is "smashmouth" and what is "finesse." Because in reality, there's no reason why both concept can't be employed in the same game, or even in the same drive. Matter of fact, with the speed and power of defenses, they both must be employed or a team won't go very far.
Smashmouth, to me, is the same as facing Randy Johnson in his prime during the playoffs in a rare closing role (he did it a couple times). Everyone in the building, everyone watching TV, heck, everyone in Antarctica knew that that he was going to chuck 99 MPH fastballs with a few sliders thrown in. There was no guessing. It was just "See if you can hit it" chucking the ball. Smashmouth is the same way to me. Line up with 2 or three TE's, broadcast to the world that your running up the middle, or off a tackle, and then go do it, imposing your will on the other team. The second you start throwing in things to obscure what your doing, you start moving to "finesse." Three wide to draw people out of the box, and then run to the week side? Your depending on finesse of being able to sell it as a run play before the play begins (which means that you've necessarily ran three wide in previous plays). Play action? Are routes timed? Yep, finesse to a greater or lesser degree.
On the other side of that, throwing the football isn't necessarily finesse. There wasn't anything finesse about throwing a screen to Ward and watching him run over people. Everyone knew those screens were coming - and it was simply Ward imposing his will. Heck, many of the short slants are a combination - finesse in timing, then depending on the receivers-or more often, a TE or FB to impose their will on DB's and run over them for a first down.
This purity "smashmouth" vs. "finesse" is really an argument that belongs back in the 80's. Neither game in it's purity will get a team to the playoffs anymore, let alone win a SB.