Maury Ballstein Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 The no huddle with Fitz would be worst idea ever. This was a practice game, listen to the post game interviews and you can tell this is not the game plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) I think its a bad idea- we don't create enough matchup problems with our offensive personnel. Our main talent is on defense.We should be looking to eat up clock as much as possible. Edited August 10, 2012 by Adam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I think no huddle is fine. A better question would be: "Are 4 & 5 wideout shotgun sets a good option?" The answer is NO. That stuff didn't work last year and won't work this year. And I think Chan was on crack when he put Brad Smith out there in the spread. That page in the playbook needs to be replaced with 2-TE sets like the Pats* use. I wasn't watching really close. But, did Fitz take a single snap under center? I saw none. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heitz Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 ...you can tell this is not the game plan. Really, the Bills aren't going all no-huddle with no running plays all season? Shocker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sllib olaffub Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Good responses - sure, I didn't think they'd go all no-huddle, but the fact that they'd go out so much last year and just pass in those 4 and 5 wide sets, seemingly abandoning the run, coupled with my imagining Gailey getting it in his head to reinvent the no-huddle as a way to camouflage our weaknesses, all led to that post - I just think we should run more, slow it down, keep the D off the field. But, good points in that the no-huddle doesn't have to be quick, K-Gun style. Also, I didn't get a chance to read a lot of the articles on the game as they hadn't yet been posted. It does make sense, though, in response to the 3-4, that they stuck with their game plan. I really do like that Gailey is using the preseason as he does, without giving away much. I'm not too worried about the starting offense. Don't get me wrong, I think we're lacking a proven stud WR, and another QB on the roster good enough to win. Here's a quote from Gailey that was a real head-scratcher for me: "That’s the one thing you’re trying to find. Who can create that consistency for you at the backup quarterback? That guy doesn’t get a lot of reps during the week so he has to be able to be consistent without getting a lot of reps." If that is the Bills belief, then what have they been doing these past 2 years? Are you kidding me? I happen to believe Tanney, the youtube QB kid, would look more consistent, more traditional, than the two we have. Unless Young starts to really improve - and he very well might - I think the Bills have to pick someone else up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I think it's good to have as an option for us. But I'm not convinced that we should use it all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I think it's good to have as an option for us. But I'm not convinced that we should use it all the time. IMHO, we will be using it a lot. And it will depend on the opponent and their defense. The goal is to help avoid defensive substitution and look for mismatches. We have versatile players which will allow us to have mismatches against some but not all D's. This time makes a lot more sense than the ill-advised and ill-fated attempt with Edwards and his supporting cast. That was a stupid decision and it showed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffalopdc Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I have a different take... I really think this formation was Chan's way of testing the O-line and receivers. There are questions with who starts where and now he has plenty of film on who performed well when you are put out on an island as an O-lineman. The receivers in that formation are also one on one. When you have the RB and TE chipping in the O-line can cheat a bit. He did not let that happen tonight. I also think it was smart not running the ball. For one, Fred does not need the practice as he will be a monster come the season, and two, they seem to run block better than pass block. This was a glorified practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maury Ballstein Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Really, the Bills aren't going all no-huddle with no running plays all season? Shocker... Appreciate your sarcasm.....just pointing the same thing out to the "chicken littles" who think that is the gameplan.....you have to be pretty to the point on here for some posters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 I have a different take... I really think this formation was Chan's way of testing the O-line and receivers. There are questions with who starts where and now he has plenty of film on who performed well when you are put out on an island as an O-lineman. The receivers in that formation are also one on one. When you have the RB and TE chipping in the O-line can cheat a bit. He did not let that happen tonight. I also think it was smart not running the ball. For one, Fred does not need the practice as he will be a monster come the season, and two, they seem to run block better than pass block. This was a glorified practice. This^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heitz Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Appreciate your sarcasm.....just pointing the same thing out to the "chicken littles" who think that is the gameplan.....you have to be pretty to the point on here for some posters. Foooooor sure! I'm sure there is some odd, small fraction out there that thinks Mario sucks because he didn't have a sack last night... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted August 10, 2012 Share Posted August 10, 2012 Foooooor sure! I'm sure there is some odd, small fraction out there that thinks Mario sucks because he didn't have a sack last night... I think we could trade mario for a 3rd if were lucky after last night! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts