SKOOBY Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 A tired defense that cannot change will not be able to handle our offensive weapons. Can you imagine a defense having to cover Owens / Evans tired after not having time to change?? Goodluck to them on the first few go arounds, it won't go well over the course of the game. I'd plan on the Bills scoring early & often. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hossage Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The no huddle offense tends to be pass happy, and while it can wear a team down, especially in the short term, it is not often associated with grinding down defenses. Running the ball is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QB Bills Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 And this needed a new thread because? Can you go away for a while? Or at least stop starting so many stupid threads? For those of us who aren't on here that often, you're bumping some interesting topics off the main page. Nothing personal, but your posts are the equivalent of junk mail most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilbuffalobob Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 And this needed a new thread because? Can you go away for a while? Or at least stop starting so many stupid threads? For those of us who aren't on here that often, you're bumping some interesting topics off the main page. Nothing personal, but your posts are the equivalent of junk mail most of the time. And you're contributing WHAT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKOOBY Posted June 2, 2009 Author Share Posted June 2, 2009 And you're contributing WHAT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach55 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The no huddle offense tends to be pass happy, and while it can wear a team down, especially in the short term, it is not often associated with grinding down defenses. Running the ball is. This is a complete misnomer. The Bills during the early 90's led the league in rushing twice and were 7 and 8 the other two years they ran the no huddle. The no huddle spreads the defense which opens up rushing lanes. The no huddle can effectively wear down a defense as good or better than a smash mouth offense. The whole key is moving the chains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wagon Circler Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 This is a complete misnomer. The Bills during the early 90's led the league in rushing twice and were 7 and 8 the other two years they ran the no huddle. The no huddle spreads the defense which opens up rushing lanes. The no huddle can effectively wear down a defense as good or better than a smash mouth offense. The whole key is moving the chains. Totally agree. Sometimes spreading the defense is the key to running successfully. The reason the Bills have trouble running, aside from the fact they go up the middle too often, is because they have no credible passing game. DB's come flying up on first down as soon as the ball is hiked. We MUST throw on first down so teams don't gang up on the running game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazedandConfused Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Totally agree. Sometimes spreading the defense is the key to running successfully. The reason the Bills have trouble running, aside from the fact they go up the middle too often, is because they have no credible passing game. DB's come flying up on first down as soon as the ball is hiked. We MUST throw on first down so teams don't gang up on the running game. Exactly. I think that running a spread offense would really help our running game alot. The no huddle would be one way of doing this (though it does demand a particular skillset and abilities from a QB which Jiimbo who clearly was pretty much a moron in other facets of life had big time so that he read opposing Ds and ra-n the no huddle in an amazingly successful manner) I think Edwards has shown good ability to make reads, some surprising mobility and can throw the tight pass. However, his durability remains a question mark and whether he has the combination of skills to run the no huddle is something he will have to learn and show. I like us moving into the no huddle in graded amounts as quickly as it works, but I think a simpler straight-forward way for us to spread the D so Lynch (or whoever is in) can shred the spread D is for us to go with more 3 WRs as our base O. You are right that both Evans and TO credibly demand to be doubled. If one throws Parrish in as a slot WR the opponent is basically forced to use the nickle and probably the dime on each play. Lynch has demonstrated the ability to not be brought down by the first hit during his brief career. In the spread if the first hit cannot be followed up by gang tackling because the opposing dime D is already on its heels doing an over and under doubles on the wideouts and trying to defend against Parrish running a slant Lynch can go all day. The Bills should no huddle and 3 WRs because it would create great running opportunities for Lynch, et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 If I remember correctly didn't OUR defense often times suffer from our no-huddle offense? With little time between plays even an 11 play drive didn't take very long. So our defense had very little turn aound time between series. This often showed with our defense often looking haggard torward the end of games especially torward the end of the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Nope, the key to our offense this season is the offensive line. This thread can be closed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 If I remember correctly didn't OUR defense often times suffer from our no-huddle offense? With little time between plays even an 11 play drive didn't take very long. So our defense had very little turn aound time between series. This often showed with our defense often looking haggard torward the end of games especially torward the end of the season. Not really. Our O put up so many points so quickly that other teams were quickly taken out of their game plan, had to be one dimensional in playing catch-up, and our D could dictate. They weren't on the field very long either, in most cases. It was common for us to have the ball less time but run twice as many plays as the other team. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bufcomments Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The main reason the No huddle worked so well was an experienced O line led by Kent Hall and the fact that Thurman was running the rock. Trent is a better QB when they spread the offense out IMO. I hope they go 3WR base offense this year. They have the talent to do so. It all depends on the Oline jelling fast. That's the big if of the season if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 This is a complete misnomer. The Bills during the early 90's led the league in rushing twice and were 7 and 8 the other two years they ran the no huddle. The no huddle spreads the defense which opens up rushing lanes. The no huddle can effectively wear down a defense as good or better than a smash mouth offense. The whole key is moving the chains. "Wearing out the defense" is pretty overrated anyway. It is one of those things that seems to make sense but, imho, it isn't often a factor. These guys are athletes who train hard and are in great shape given their body size. Unlike most sports, football has a ton of play stoppages, especially for commercials. Penalties, instant reviews and just getting 11 guys off and another 11 on for special teams and so forth provide additional stoppages. The players get a lot of rest in the course of a game not to mention a whole half time to get their wind back. The point someone was trying to make about it being harder to cover the WR's, I think, is not necessarily true. The defensive backs are some of the best conditioned athletes in all of football and they are the ones doing the covering. All defenses play a good deal of zone coverage which reduces tremendously the amount of flat out sprinting the DB's have to do. Add in all the running play that go for a yard or two where the safeties are never involved. Fatigue on a play by play basis is more of a factor than "wearing out the defense" over the course of a game. The no-huddle can help with that but only if you are actually getting first downs. The defense can get tuckered out, especially the lineman, on a long drive if the offense can get decent stretch of time with no play stoppages. A long gainer, if not followed by an official stoppage, can be a problem if the lineman have to trot down field to get to the line before the snap. If the no huddle offense always caused defenses to break down, to wear out and fold, everyone would be using it but that just isn't the case. It is like any other scheme, it has advantages and disadvantages. I think the real question is whether or not our personnel is suited to the no huddle on both sides of the ball. The no huddle periodically puts a lot of pressure on the defense with those super quick three and outs. Soon, it could be our defense, not theirs that has fatigue problems. Back in the '90's, we had superior athletes and so simplifying things so that it was man vs. man action was to our benefit, we were going to win those matchups. By depriving the defense of situational substitutions, they couldn't load up to stop an expected run or pass. It made it more of a player's game, not a coach's game decided by strategy and game planning. We didn't have to outthink them, just outplay them, and we did. There were games where I swear we didn't have more than 5 or 6 plays we were choosing from at the line. We ran them all to perfection, how could we not? It wasn't as if there was too much to memorize. I don't know that this team is suited to a no huddle offense. It isn't as if our 2 minute offense was gangbusters last year. It was the success of the hurry up at the end of games that lead Kelly and company to ask Levy to go no huddle from the get go and for Levy to agree to give it a shot. Only time will tell I guess but I just don't see that we have top athletes across the roster on offense that are going to beat people one on one all the time. Apart from the line which is an obvious concern, I am worried that Trent just isn't a no huddle kind of QB. He has never forced the defense to play the whole field, quick as he is to go to the check down. Remember, we had Lofton and Reed, two all time greats at WR. Owens, as good as he is, isn't as good as Lofton was and Evans is no Andre Reed, not yet, not by a longshot. But Trent is smart, and disciplined, and accurate. Owens can be a beast when he is focused and Lynch hasn't even begun to play his best football yet. We may see a whole new Evans now that defenses will be focused on Owens. Young lineman might benefit from a faster pace with less thinking and more doing. It could work. Lets face it, Jauron isn't going to out game plan anyone so the more we take the game out of his hands and in to the players', the better off we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrFishfinder Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 If I remember correctly didn't OUR defense often times suffer from our no-huddle offense? With little time between plays even an 11 play drive didn't take very long. So our defense had very little turn aound time between series. This often showed with our defense often looking haggard torward the end of games especially torward the end of the season. The downside to the no-huddle is that there are times it leads to very quick 3-and-out series. When that happens, the defense can get gassed, especially against a ball control offense. I think it would be better to intelligently pick and choose when to run the no-huddle if they are serious about trying it this season. If a team is going to do something to death, they damn sure better have the guns to do it with. I'm not convinced the Bills have the players or the coaching to run the no-huddle on a consistent basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloaggie Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 If I remember correctly didn't OUR defense often times suffer from our no-huddle offense? With little time between plays even an 11 play drive didn't take very long. So our defense had very little turn aound time between series. This often showed with our defense often looking haggard torward the end of games especially torward the end of the season. I'd say that if we had tremendous depth on our Defensive Line, we'd have no worries, but instead we have 40,000 DB's and apparently can't draft enough DB's to satisfy Jauron. Remember that our gassed defense couldn't tackle Mark Ingram to stop him from getting a first down in SB XXV? Yes, you are absolutely correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrFishfinder Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 Lets face it, Jauron isn't going to out game plan anyone so the more we take the game out of his hands and in to the players', the better off we are. That's actually something worth consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloaggie Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 You know, if we take the play calling out of Schonert's hands, we may be better off. As people point out, Trent's a smart guy, so as long as his brain doesn't get scrambled from lack of O-line protection, we'll be OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 I'd say that if we had tremendous depth on our Defensive Line, we'd have no worries, but instead we have 40,000 DB's and apparently can't draft enough DB's to satisfy Jauron. Remember that our gassed defense couldn't tackle Mark Ingram to stop him from getting a first down in SB XXV? Yes, you are absolutely correct. Please tell me your not suggesting that our defense was gassed in the SB against the Giants because our offense ran a hurry-up no huddle. Please. Our defense was gassed because they plain sucked and couldn't stop the run worth a damn that day. The Giants had the ball over 40 minutes. That's all we need to know. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The main reason the No huddle worked so well was an experienced O line led by Kent Hall and the fact that Thurman was running the rock. Trent is a better QB when they spread the offense out IMO. I hope they go 3WR base offense this year. They have the talent to do so. It all depends on the Oline jelling fast. That's the big if of the season if you ask me. The main reason the no-huddle worked so well for Buffalo was Jim Kelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pkwwjd Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The main reason the no-huddle worked so well for Buffalo was Jim Kelly. I love Jim, but the reason the no huddle worked was Kent Hull Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts