Tipster19 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I'm wondeing if the no huddle helped play a part in the Bills' decision to trade Jason Peters this offseason. Can the no huddle help overcome some of the inexperience of our OL? Any input on the pros and cons on running this type of offense with our young OL would be appreciated. http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3...ab-c16f5d7c8fed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I already posted this over on Sal Maiorana's blog, but I'll repeat it here: Just finished reading “Playing Write Field,” the 1997 collection of some of Scott Pitoniak’s D&C columns and features. A piece on Joe Ferguson from 1991 was included, and here’s what Fergy had to say about the K-Gun: “I wish we would have used it back in the early ’80s. The key is having the right personnel. You have to have talent and experience. A young club can’t run that. You have to play together for a while, get to know one another pretty good.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I'm wondeing if the no huddle helped play a part in the Bills' decision to trade Jason Peters this offseason. Can the no huddle help overcome some of the inexperience of our OL? Any input on the pros and cons on running this type of offense with our young OL would be appreciated. http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3...ab-c16f5d7c8fed If the Bills offense can get prove themselves capable of actually scoring TDs when they get near the redzone, they could use the scheme early in games to take leads and play ball control thereafter, especially to eat up the clock when nearing the final gun. This team has got to start putting points on the board - and I mean the 6 point variety rather than the "almost got there" 3 pointers. I think with the additions of Owens, Nelson, Rhodes, and the (hopeful)emergence of youngsters like, Derek Fine and Steve Johnson (I'm not counting on Hardy for anything), we might now have the weapons to create redzone mismatches - the real catalyst of any sort of no-huddle attack. With a relatively young group, the fastbreak approach might work well, assuming they're conditioned properly and all are on the same page. They might be able to wear out the older vets with their youthful energy. Experience is the big question and how much that will hinder the approach is up in the air. For all I know, the no-huddle might be a reasonable way to mask inexperience on the line, at least on a temporary basis. Never played the position, so I don't know if it helps or hurts. The good news is that every one of the presumed starting 5 are highly intelligent and should be able to adjust well to quick line calls. The cons are that our defense would be on the field for more minutes. Don't have too much of a problem with that, as long as the offense is scoring. If the offense is just zipping down the field, or doing quick snaps, less time of possession, but without any points to show for it, the defense it gonna have some real problems. Wear the defense down, and suddenly we're going to see another rash of injuries on their side of the ball. It only gets worse from there. As exciting to watch as the no-huddle can be, I only like the idea of using the no-huddle as a change up occasionally to gain an advantage. I don't think it's all that sound fundamentally for regular use. Other more seasoned teams have experimented with it with mixed success, but I don't recall any using it to the degree Kelly & Co did. Manning, Elway, and a couple of others come to mind as having given it a shot. Remember, when Kelly was running the K-gun, he had 7 or 8 years of pro experience behind him, some experienced savvy linemen, and a HOF running back who in addition to his ability to quickly find holes in the run game, also had the head of a QB* and the hands of a WR. *Could anyone pick up blitzes better? If, as most seem to think, Woods and Levitre are going to be starters, and in turn, an integral part of the offensive and team's success, getting these 2 signed has to be a priority for the front office. These two cogs in the offensive wheel can't afford to miss a minute of training camp or preseason. Get 'er done - the clock is ticking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 It might help a bit, but the folks who think it will solve all our problems are off the deep end. If it solved all the problems, lots and lots of teams would use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I'm wondeing if the no huddle helped play a part in the Bills' decision to trade Jason Peters this offseason. Can the no huddle help overcome some of the inexperience of our OL? Any input on the pros and cons on running this type of offense with our young OL would be appreciated. http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3...ab-c16f5d7c8fed I'm wondering if Bill Belichick isn't chuckling so hard he pees himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I already posted this over on Sal Maiorana's blog, but I'll repeat it here: I would just hasten to add that there's a world of difference between running the K-Gun and running a no-huddle. Fergy was absolutely correct. Other than the receivers, I don't see ANY resemblance in the talent level past vs. present at any other position, particularly the "K" part. None of our present TEs offers the combo of blocking, receiving, and speed that McKeller did at this point. Regardless, it's still up to the Oline. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I would just hasten to add that there's a world of difference between running the K-Gun and running a no-huddle. Fergy was absolutely correct. Other than the receivers, I don't see ANY resemblance in the talent level past vs. present at any other position, particularly the "K" part. None of our present TEs offers the combo of blocking, receiving, and speed that McKeller did at this point. Regardless, it's still up to the Oline. GO BILLS!!! McKeller: 45 games started, over 7 years; 124 total receptions; 1464 career yards; 11.8 yd/reception; 11 career TDs. Not exactly the stuff of legends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 McKeller: 45 games started, over 7 years; 124 total receptions; 1464 career yards; 11.8 yd/reception; 11 career TDs. Not exactly the stuff of legends. And yet, he's the one the offense was named after because he could line up tight then split out wide and create mismatch nightmares for defenses. Because he could both block and stretch a middle seam with equal ability. Because those mismatches opened things up for everybody else. But continue to focus on stats that do nothing but show your ignorance of the facts. McKeller may not be the stuff of legends, but yours continues to grow with every post you make. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 McKeller: 45 games started, over 7 years; 124 total receptions; 1464 career yards; 11.8 yd/reception; 11 career TDs. Not exactly the stuff of legends. It wasn't all about stats. He was a threat down field and helped open the field a bit more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 McKeller: 45 games started, over 7 years; 124 total receptions; 1464 career yards; 11.8 yd/reception; 11 career TDs. Not exactly the stuff of legends. As I do agree with your comments, McKellers stats and experience in one season prolly double the stats/experience of all our TE's combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 And yet, he's the one the offense was named after because he could line up tight then split out wide and create mismatch nightmares for defenses. Because he could both block and stretch a middle seam with equal ability. Because those mismatches opened things up for everybody else. But continue to focus on stats that do nothing but show your ignorance of the facts. McKeller may not be the stuff of legends, but yours continues to grow with every post you make. GO BILLS!!! Marchibroda could not have possibly run the K-gun without Keith, I suppose. It was all about McKeller. Please... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Marchibroda could not have possibly run the K-gun without Keith, I suppose. It was all about McKeller. Please... Do you ever agree with anyone besides yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 The no huddle allows our offense to dictate the tempo of the game and puts our young and inexperienced O-line at an advantage, especially with all the weapons at TE's disposal. Defense's will have no alternative, but to back off and play conservatively or get burned. So in my opinion the no huddle does offset our young O-lines inexperience and should go a long ways in helping make our offense as a whole one of the best in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I'm wondeing if the no huddle helped play a part in the Bills' decision to trade Jason Peters this offseason. Can the no huddle help overcome some of the inexperience of our OL? Any input on the pros and cons on running this type of offense with our young OL would be appreciated. http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3...ab-c16f5d7c8fed It keeps the defense from running complex schemes, which I suppose in theory simplifies the game and could possibly be an advantage, or more precisely just less of a disadvantage, to our inexperienced o-line. In practicality, if not executed well, it could potentially magnify our offensive line woes. I think the real question is going to be whether or not we can sustain the running game, and the fatigue factor should to work to our advantage there. If we can play action effectively I can see our offense being very potent, and so I think that at least on some level the no huddle should be advantageous for us. But nonetheless the line is going to have to play a lot better than they look on paper in order for us to stand a chance, no matter what offensive scheme we run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 The no huddle allows our offense to dictate the tempo of the game and puts our young and inexperienced O-line at an advantage, especially with all the weapons at TE's disposal. Defense's will have no alternative, but to back off and play conservatively or get burned. So in my opinion the no huddle does offset our young O-lines inexperience and should go a long ways in helping make our offense as a whole one of the best in the league. The other side is that they can blitz the hell out of it and expose the inexperience of our line. Just because it is the no-huddle does not guarantee success. Anyone remember the Championship Game against Denver? Like Marv said, it's not the schemes it's the execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 The no huddle allows our offense to dictate the tempo of the game and puts our young and inexperienced O-line at an advantage, especially with all the weapons at TE's disposal. Defense's will have no alternative, but to back off and play conservatively or get burned. So in my opinion the no huddle does offset our young O-lines inexperience and should go a long ways in helping make our offense as a whole one of the best in the league. I completely agree with this dog. However if the O'line is REALLY bad (which i dont expect). I think they should be fine mixing it in now and again. The linemen we have are intelligent maulers, this should play to their strenghts if they can work together as a unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Do you ever agree with anyone besides yourself? The TE position was extremely important to the success of the K-gun. When everything was moving fast and with all guns blazing, Jim Machine Gun Kelly sought out his biggest targets and then he pulled the trigger, the rest is history... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 The no huddle allows our offense to dictate the tempo of the game and puts our young and inexperienced O-line at an advantage, especially with all the weapons at TE's disposal. Defense's will have no alternative, but to back off and play conservatively or get burned. So in my opinion the no huddle does offset our young O-lines inexperience and should go a long ways in helping make our offense as a whole one of the best in the league. It certainly does not put them at an advantage. Perhaps it mitigates some of their disadvantage, but I do not expect under any circumstances for our o-line to have the advantage against division rivals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I'm wondeing if the no huddle helped play a part in the Bills' decision to trade Jason Peters this offseason. Can the no huddle help overcome some of the inexperience of our OL? Any input on the pros and cons on running this type of offense with our young OL would be appreciated. http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3...ab-c16f5d7c8fed I wouldn't care to burden a line with a couple of rookies with anything but an occasional no-huddle. It's useful if you think you can catch a defense in transition. Every team does it from time to time, rookies or not. If you want to run it with a degree of regularity, you better be pumping up those big bodies with banned substances if you try to cheat the play clock. And if you fail, you end up having your D spending more time on the field and wearing down. Seems to me that this is just another pre-season hype by the marketing arm of a front office. Reminds me of the "keep the offense under wraps in the preseason" stuff that we hear from time to time. Football is like a four act play that's been running for over a hundred years. Everybody has seen everything ever, over and over again for decades and decades etc. Job#1...move the sticks. I'm all for quick snaps when the line puts knuckles on turf, trap run plays to ring the bells of interior rushers, then a quick FB plunge up the heart after these DTs are suffering from ear bleeds. I'm not letting pass-rushing or run DEs dictate to me. When I run wide, I pull guards, have the C tie up or flatten 1 defender, and will try to bring the beef to toss any DE up into the cheap seats. My rb better follow the blocks or he is gone. He can go and get his highlight films with some other club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 The TE position was extremely important to the success of the K-gun. When everything was moving fast and with all guns blazing, Jim Machine Gun Kelly sought out his biggest targets and then he pulled the trigger, the rest is history... This was not directed towards you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts