2001 team. More weapons(Holt wasn't a rookie), more experience and a better defensive team.
I haven't looked it up in awhile but IIRC the '01 defense had a ridiculous amount of takeaways...giving our ridiculously good offense a ridiculous amount of chances to score.I think defensively they were about equal, both were very good. I don't have a single thing to back that up other than from memory both defenses had a similar thing that held through the 2 seasons, the O got a lead and the D got aggressive.
I haven't looked it up in awhile but IIRC the '01 defense had a ridiculous amount of takeaways...giving our ridiculously good offense a ridiculous amount of chances to score.
I think talent wise the 2001 team was better. I think not having Vermeil cost the Rams at least one more Super Bowl. Thoughts?
Not having Vermeil... yeahhhhh I could see that a bit but what really cost us is our practices getting video taped and them knowing what we are doing throughout the game.I think talent wise the 2001 team was better. I think not having Vermeil cost the Rams at least one more Super Bowl. Thoughts?
All we had to do was run the ball. They had so many DBs on the field we could have shredded them with Faulk. He was our best player. He barely touched the ball. We should have beat those guys even though they cheated. We almost did.Not having Vermeil... yeahhhhh I could see that a bit but what really cost us is our practices getting video taped and them knowing what we are doing throughout the game.