Our team has NEVER had a PHYSICAL D. I'm not saying that we did not have VG D's, just not one that was physical. We seem to be moving in that direction. Questions: Is that the right way to go? Why did we not do it before? Did the heat have anything to do with it? Were we built for the location we are in, and was it the right choice?
That's a good question. IMO, it has more to do with the basic philosophy of the coaches than the weather. Personally, I like having the type of team that even though you might outscore us, we're going to beat you up physically. I loved the fact that twice we played the Jets, and big-mouthed Rex talked about how physical they were, and both times we not only won the games, but were more physical than they were, and you could see that that KILLED Ryan deep down inside. I loved it. I want to see us get even bigger and more physical. I want to see the Dolphins beating down every team they face... especially the Jets.
I would love to see physical LB's, and we have none. Just one, making a tackle or two that you can hear, would make my day.
I prefer to be a physical team personally. Finesse is great and all, but there's something to be said about being able to beat up on the opposing team. But we weren't a very physical team this year outside of a few games. Physical teams do not give up record 4th quarter points. The point of a Physical team as I've always understood it is to physically exhaust the opposing team's offense and defense so that you don't have to worry about massive 4th quarter comebacks. Maybe my understanding is wrong, but thats the kind of defense I want. The one that when you get to the final 15 minutes of regulation play has the other guy spent, and looking for miracles, rather than consistent drives.
I would have to say physical and fast our defense has to be the slowest in the NFL It seems were always chasing down a play rather than attacking a play We need a team of Troy Polamalu's or just a team with players that have his attitude and desire going sideline to sideline making plays with no quit
I agree with you both. We need a defense that is like a gladiator or a warrior...they don't quit and they don't stop fighting until its over. I want to see a defense that shows no mercy and that scares offenses. Those are always fun to watch in my opinion
When Zach and JT were in their prime we put a hurting on guys. Teams would play the Dolphins and win or lose against the next week they always seemed to lose. They were just beaten up. Our defense used to be so good that if we scored 20 points we were guaranteed to win. Hopefully Nolan plus some solid draft picks will make us better than ever defensively.
your 100% right This team does not have a player like Zach Thomas in his prime...BOY,DO I MISS ZACH AS A PLAYER
We've been a physical D the last two years, we just haven't been all that good. But during the win streaks it was common to hear us described as a defense that would hit you hard.
What we need is 11 Chuck Norrises on Defense. I heard somewhere that he fathered the entire 1972 roster.
Finesse is such a meaningless word when it comes to football, as if there are teams that get by without hard tackling or rough play. When I hear people describe football teams as "finesse" teams, I wonder if their ability to evaluate the game is stuck in 1977.
I would agree on the DL, and somewhat on the DB's but, not at LB. The only one I considered physical was Roth.
I have to respectfully disagree - but then again, I have been watching this team for 45 years. We have had some very physical teams, and the 71-75 teams were only starters. The defenses in the late 90s through about 2002 were pretty good at making people hurt on Monday AM as well. Myself, I prefer the 4-3 to begin with. and I like for the front four and MLB to be large, strong, aggressive, and downright hostile about anyone crossing the lie of scrimmage. (Envision the DTs being Tim Bowens cloned and twinned.) The OLBs and DB should be the fastest people available who can be built up to be as strong as possible without losing speed. But, then again, what do I know.
It usually boils down to speed versus bulk. Instead of trying for a knockout blow to intimidate the opponent, the focus was on proper technique for sure and certain tackling - something that is surely missed today. That is why I cannot stand the play of a Harrison or Dawkins. They are not playing the game of football, they are enjoying legalized thuggery.
I go back a ways as well to Butkus, Nitchke, Lambert, Tatum, and Lott to name a few PHYSICAL guys. Who would you name as the most physical players in Phins history?
A few current examples are Davis vs Smith at CB, and Wake vs JT rushing the QB. I do not understand why today's players miss sooo many tackles. They train almost year round, and have coaches for almost every few players. Yet, most are missing basic knowledge and execution. I hate to see coaches say that we went back to fundamentals this week in practice. Why should you have to do that 10-12 games into the season? Maybe too many players are looking to get on ESPN.
I vote for a physical attacking defense. Let's not forget what essentially the Dolphins "taught" the league. We taught the league how to beat the Patriots when they were at their best. How did we do it? We put Brady on the turf as much as possible. Get any QB flustered and you win games....period. So much of this game comes down to timing on offense. If you disrupt the timing of the offense then you gain a significant advantage. I hate to say it but look at what the Jets do. They blitz and throw off the timing of the offense and thus keep themselves in every game because they don't give up very many points. They usually stack a blitz from one side and force the QB to move out of the pocket and essentially take away half of the field. Apply pressure and don't let the QB go through his progressions and now you put yourself in a position to succeed and create turnovers due to poor decisions by offense.
Just as there was very little to no finesse football in 1977, there is little to no finesse football today. The amount of guys not willing to take a hit can be counted on one hand, and the amount of guys not willing to land a hit number even less. Meanwhile, the word's alternative meaning, a sort of denigration of the rise of importance of passing, is just silly. Passing is more important than running in the modern NFL because of rule changes. Change the rules back to the way they were in 1977 and the style of play that dominated in 1977 will return. Until then, this is a passing league, and describing that as "finesse" misses the point entirely.
I would love to see a nasty SOB at LB (Spikes). I would love to see a safety or LB nailing receivers coming over the middle so they had second thoughts on doing it again. I would love to see Wake lining up with a TE, and giving them a shot or two coming off the line. He is athletic enough to do it, and they would not be running free in the secondary. JMO
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1977/probowl.htm Here's a list of the 1977 Pro Bowlers. I found it interesting that the WR's, Cliff Branch, Mel Gray, Harold Jackson, Nat Moore, and Ken Burroughs, were anything but big, physical WR's
Imagine, if you will, Ginn vs Neon. One wants to be tackled, the other does not want to tackle. That standoff is a clock killer. JK/LOL.
Not sure how the results of Pro Bowl voting can be taken as proof of a prevalence of "finesse" football, especially since the concept didn't really rise until the late 80s, as a reaction to the way the 49ers were winning Super Bowls left and right. Ginn is one of the guys you can count on one hand.
A.J. Duhe, Manny Fernandez, Tim Bowens, Bob Brudzinski, John Offerdahl, Larry Little, Roy Foster, Dwight Stephenson, Bryan Cox, Jim Jensen, Bob Kuchenberg, Jim Langer, Bob Matheson, Kieth Sims, Zack Thomas, Louis Oliver, Jarvis Williams all come to mind as being more physical than finesse, and sometimes more physical than smart. Also, they may not have been as good as they could have but... they were physical. I did not include the obvious ones like Csonka and Kiick, but they are there as well.
Honestly I think if we could somehow land McLain in the first round and then Spikes in the 2nd round our LB will get younger, faster and more physical overnight. I would be ecstatic if we pick up 2 good LB's in the first 4 rounds. Our LB's are as bad off as our CB's were last year. Honestly at the least we need to replace Porter and Ayodele. We've gotten as much as we can out of Porter, now he's ******ing the growth of our younger LB's and Ayodele was never more than a stop gap on a team starved of talent. Now is the time we can replace them and I hope we should.
If by physical you mean missing tackles going for the big hit that's not what I want. If you mean hard, proper tackling and well measured excellent hits then yes that's I want.
