Who was better, the 1999 Rams or 2001 Rams?

[FRO]

I think talent wise the 2001 team was better. I think not having Vermeil cost the Rams at least one more Super Bowl. Thoughts?

 

[thirteen28]

Pretty close to even if you ask me.

Think the 2001 defense was better ... the 1999 Offense was better. But of that glorious 3 year stretch, I think the 2000 offense was the best (too bad the 2000 defense was atrocious).

 

[Rambitious1]

I think the 2001 team was the best Rams team in the modern era.
Maybe best ever.

 

[LesBaker]

If they played each other I'd put my money on the 2001 Rams. My thought process is that in 99 the played several average to below average teams, in 2001 they played a lot of top defenses and had their way with them.

As a side note the Rams offense in 2001 scored 57 TD's and in 1999 scored 55.

 

[Mojo Ram]

2001 team. More weapons(Holt wasn't a rookie), more experience and a better defensive team.

 

[LesBaker]

2001 team. More weapons(Holt wasn't a rookie), more experience and a better defensive team.

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.

 

[FRO]

The 2001 team didn't have Tony Horne, that guy was a weapon. The 2001 Rams lacked him and Vermiel, other than that I feel as the 2001 team was better.

 

[Mojo Ram]

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.

 

[LesBaker]

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.

Why that sounds............preposterous!

It's true though, they did get a lot of takeaways, but the 99 D scored more IIRC. Same with ST's, 99 was a little more effective there.

I'd pay a ridiculous sum of money to see the two teams play each other I will say that.

 

[NukeRam]

2001 team was awesome. Cheatriots stole our legacy.

 

[Thordaddy]

2001 was better and if the time between the conference championship had been two weeks instead of one they would have proven it. We played a far more physical game in the NFC championship than the Pats did in the AFC championship, we had no healthy right tackle Jones and Tucker were both hurt enough to be out ,but both were active.
The INT Ty Law made for a pick six was a direct result of our RT failing to get the DE on the ground.
I think the ensuing success of each team we played in those two SB's should tell anyone which of our opponents was the better.

 

[Angry Ram]

2001. Everyone was in their prime and more sound on their fundamentals.

Granted, that's what I hope, as I only was 12 at the time and didn't know jack about football. Except that the Rams were my team.

 

[AnarchyRam]

Hmm, I think the 99' defense and special teams were better than the 2001 team. But the offenses were almost the same.

99 won a superbowl....

 

[Pancake]

Wouldn't it be cool to watch those two teams play each other?

That 99 team had the element of surprise going for them. Nobody knew how in the heck to defend against that O. The 2001 team had 3 years of tape out there and they still went to the SB. They couldn't be stopped without cheating.

I really can't choose between the two. They were both to good to count them out and say they couldn't win any game they played.

 

[ZigZagRam]

2001.

Complete domination. 1999 had the better story, but 2001 was the better team.

 

[ED_29]

I think talent wise the 2001 team was better. I think not having Vermeil cost the Rams at least one more Super Bowl. Thoughts?

2001 Rams were more talented no question IMO

 

[Lesson]

I think the 2001 team was better. However, and this is just my opinion, but I think the 1999 team was the team of destiny, while the 2001 team faced an opponent who cheated.

 

[CGI_Ram]

No spy gate. And... If the refs called all the holding on Faulk... Rams win SB36 easily.

 

[The Rammer]

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.

 

[FRO]

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.

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.