What Is The Right Mix of Hurry Up Offense?

[PolishDave]

I am a big fan of the hurry up no huddle offense when it works well. I think there is a time and a place for it though.

 

In my opinion the biggest advantage of the hurry up is that when you are executing well, the defense ends up backpedaling on their heels and gives up scores because they don’t have enough time to prepare for the next play.

 

With that in mind, I think the best time to go into a hurry up mode is immediately after a big play. Like any play that goes for more than 20 yards for example. As soon as that happens on offense, I wish the Bills would immediately go into the no huddle. I think that would maximize the overall use of that system while also minimizing the downside of using that format.

 

I don’t like the idea of starting every new possession with a hurry up tempo. I think it is the wrong time for it because you can end up screwing yourself and your defense.

Someday a coach is going to get it right and it will change the way new offensive schemes are designed.

 

Agree or disagree?

[PlayoffsPlease]

The hurry up only makes sense when you are clearly better than the other team. Its a way to dominate people. But if the other team has a more favorable match up of offense vs. defense, it makes no sense to follow a strategy of having more series.

 

For example it makes zero sense to work hard to make sure Tom Brady gets back on the field more often.

[Lord_MacDonald]

interesting question- though hard to really answer well.

 

I suppose an argument could be made that the Bills are a perfect team to to run the hurry up. Inexperience offense gets more opportunities to score while they count on their defense to control the opposing O despite many attempts from them.

 

or are they negating the impact of their quality D by tiring them out?

 

I do agree though that there are def times it is unwise to go peddle to the metal on O.

[B-Man]

I am a big fan of the hurry up no huddle offense when it works well. I think there is a time and a place for it though.

 

In my opinion the biggest advantage of the hurry up is that when you are executing well, the defense ends up backpedaling on their heels and gives up scores because they don’t have enough time to prepare for the next play.

 

With that in mind, I think the best time to go into a hurry up mode is immediately after a big play. Like any play that goes for more than 20 yards for example. As soon as that happens on offense, I wish the Bills would immediately go into the no huddle. I think that would maximize the overall use of that system while also minimizing the downside of using that format.

 

I don’t like the idea of starting every new possession with a hurry up tempo. I think it is the wrong time for it because you can end up screwing yourself and your defense.

Someday a coach is going to get it right and it will change the way new offensive schemes are designed.

 

Agree or disagree?

 

I agree that you need to be selective as to when a no-huddle is run. I like the idea of following up quickly after a big gain.

 

The other advantage that I see is using it against a defensive coordinator who likes to run multiple players in and out.

 

.

[Gugny]

If it's working, i.e. - resulting in sustained drives, then keep doing it.

 

If it's not, i.e. - very short drives, thus over-working the defense, then stop it.

 

If the Bills are ahead by more than 8 points, then stop it.

[The Wiz]

If it's working, i.e. - resulting in sustained drives, then keep doing it.

 

If it's not, i.e. - very short drives, thus over-working the defense, then stop it.

 

If the Bills are ahead by more than 8 points, then stop it.

Kind of my thoughts as well. Hurry if you're behind slow down when you're ahead.

[Mango]

Game situation determines the mix. Take a look at Manning. This dude revolutionized the way QB is played, manages a team, and runs an offense.

 

I know post season...

 

But the way this guy understand how to pace offense during the game is unbelievable.

[Gugny]

Game situation determines the mix. Take a look at Manning. This dude revolutionized the way QB is played, manages a team, and runs an offense.

 

I know post season...

 

But the way this guy understand how to pace offense during the game is unbelievable.

I believe there was a certain #12 who did this before Manning was in high school.

[Kelly the Dog]

People complain like crazy about the New England game last year. One of the worst things you can do is stop what was working and go into a shell with 5:51 to go like what happened in that game. Slowing it down would have made no difference against Brady and the Patriots with that much time left, and it's stupid.

 

3-4 minutes, sure. You run the clock if you can. That is why there is an actual term in the NFL called the "four minute offense." 6 minutes? No. You try for first downs.

 

That is a poor example if you are going to use it as a miscarriage of justice against Hackett.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Kelly the Dog

[Tyrod's Tailor]

That is a poor example if you are going to use it as a miscarriage of justice against Hackett.

Indeed. I seem to recall a certain receiver being open for the first down, but.....

[Mango]

 

I believe there was a certain #12 who did this before Manning was in high school.

 

Ok cool, and Boomer Esaison did it a year before Kelly. Manning makes Kelly look like a Peewee backup in the way he commands the offense. Obviously hyperbole, but Kelly took Boomer and made it effective, Manning took Kelly and perfected it.

 

I am on my phone and don't want to deal with looking up vintage stats, but Kelly and Co were traditionally the worst in the league at ToP. Anybody know where Indy used to fall, or more recently Denver. Their pace is so up and down, I can't really even make a guesstimate.

[Gugny]

Ok cool, and Boomer Esaison did it a year before Kelly. Manning makes Kelly look like a Peewee backup in the way he commands the offense. Obviously hyperbole, but Kelly took Boomer and made it effective, Manning took Kelly and perfected it.

 

I am on my phone and don't want to deal with looking up vintage stats, but Kelly and Co were traditionally the worst in the league at ToP. Anybody know where Indy used to fall, or more recently Denver. Their pace is so up and down, I can't really even make a guesstimate.

A no-huddle offense isn't typically a ToP-enhancer.

 

I respectfully disagree with your assessment that places P. Manning that far ahead of Kelly. I also disagree re: Esiason. He didn't do anything near what Kelly did.

[st pete gogolak]

Zero. None. Nada. You've got a putrid offense and a defense that looks like it's going to be anywhere from ok to really, really good. I would think that any coach with half a brain would scrap the no huddle entirely other than 2 minute drill. They should look at film from the Jets from the early 90's when Boomer Esiason was their QB. The team wasn't very good but they were hugely aggravating to play. They would milk the clock from the first possession of the game. They always seemed to be in 3rd and 2 or 3rd and 3 (very few negative plays). If they picked up two first downs, six minutes would be off the clock. That's exactly what we should be doing.

[Kelly the Dog]

 

A no-huddle offense isn't typically a ToP-enhancer.

 

I respectfully disagree with your assessment that places P. Manning that far ahead of Kelly. I also disagree re: Esiason. He didn't do anything near what Kelly did.

Exactly. Boomer's no huddle was just that. The same offense but they just didn't huddle. It didn't do very much of anything to confuse a defense or alter its defense of the offense. There was very little hurry up at all to boomer's. A totally different concept to the Bills' hurry up and Hackett's hurry up. Manning's is different than both. He's smart enough that if the team tries to adapt on the fly he will just have the ball snapped. He dissects the defense and calls the play. Boomer did little of that, too.

 

Manning's and Kelly's made sense and was a real problem for defenses. Boomer's did little to benefit them.

Edited August 28, 2014 by Kelly the Dog

[Buffaloed in Pa]

Why the hello are we running a hurry up offense with a inexperienced QB. That is why we are the Bills. Speed it up and give the ball back. Power run game should be the plan, until EJ improves.This is what the Steelers did with Big Ben ,his 1st few years. That and a stout D. Which we have. Ugh what do I know.

[Thunderstealer]

They should drop it. EJ will be exposed. It'll be ugly for everyone.

 

I'd like to see a long huddle and a prominent running game. limit EJ to under ten passing plays and only do five of them.

[Mango]

Exactly. Boomer's no huddle was just that. The same offense but they just didn't huddle. It didn't do very much of anything to confuse a defense or alter its defense of the offense. There was very little hurry up at all to boomer's. A totally different concept to the Bills' hurry up and Hackett's hurry up. Manning's is different than both. He's smart enough that if the team tries to adapt on the fly he will just have the ball snapped. He dissects the defense and calls the play. Boomer did little of that, too.

 

Manning's and Kelly's made sense and was a real problem for defenses. Boomer's did little to benefit them.

A no-huddle offense isn't typically a ToP-enhancer.

 

I respectfully disagree with your assessment that places P. Manning that far ahead of Kelly. I also disagree re: Esiason. He didn't do anything near what Kelly did.

 

I know no huddle isn't a ToS enhancer, that is why I was curious about Peyton. The comment on Kelly wasn't ment to be a knock on him, but rather to reference if Mannings ability to manage the no huddle helps diminish that weakness at all. I totally agree on Boomer, but as I recall, they were the first to run it, and even beat the Bills in the AFC Championship game with it. More of a timeline than a commentary on the list. The overall point is that each guy has done it better than the next is all.