Jaws blasts the "no huddle"

[Malazan]

I think the big problem is that everyone including the Bills are confused about "No Huddle" and "Hurry Up" offense. If they're just "huddling" at the line then I think there are distinct advantages. If they're zinging it out and not using the clock effectively to control the ball then it's pointless because they won't put up the points of a high powered offense.

[K-9]

Yet, when Kelly talked Marv back into using the K-Gun, the offense started looking better. I'm sorry that you can't appreciate the example, but since so few teams have run a no-huddle offense exclusively we are obviously limited.

 

Chuckle. You're right that the no-huddle is a tactic. You are wrong that the Bills did not define their doctrine based on it. Hence, you are wrong that it can be removed with no effect to their operations. Of course, a strategic thinker such as yourself sees that operations have nothing to do with excellent execution.

 

Thank-you. Of course a strategic thinker like yourself would think that football is so damn complicated that asking a football team to huddle up would completely ruin any potential for excellent execution. It isn't and it wouldn't. A talented team (and I'm not saying we're even close) could do either and execute properly. You think the Colts would fall to pieces if they huddled up? They would suddenly lose their ability to execute? You are overthinking the situation.

 

I appreciate the example of Kelly and Levy re the K-Gun. But as I mentioned, Bresnahan presided over two SB offenses after Marchibroda left. I'm sorry you can't appreciate that the loss of talented players along the Oline and elsewhere along with aging players and the fact that defenses caught up to us was much more a contributing factor than whether or not the K-Gun huddled up or not.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[dave mcbride]

Thank-you. Of course a strategic thinker like yourself would think that football is so damn complicated that asking a football team to huddle up would completely ruin any potential for excellent execution. It isn't and it wouldn't. A talented team (and I'm not saying we're even close) could do either and execute properly. You think the Colts would fall to pieces if they huddled up? They would suddenly lose their ability to execute? You are overthinking the situation.

 

I appreciate the example of Kelly and Levy re the K-Gun. But as I mentioned, Bresnahan presided over two SB offenses after Marchibroda left. I'm sorry you can't appreciate that the loss of talented players along the Oline and elsewhere along with aging players and the fact that defenses caught up to us was much more a contributing factor than whether or not the K-Gun huddled up or not.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Thank you too! Re the period after Marchibroda, I think history shows that it was a talent issue, not a coaching issue. They were pretty much unstoppable until Kelly ruptured his bursar sac in week 12 (or so) of 1992, and they still finished second overall that year in offense. Marchibroda left in 1991 -- the year before. I made this point the other day: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...p;#entry1540443

[Wilson from Gamehendge]

I saw him on the ESPN Football Insiders preview show the other day...

 

 

Mort and the other guys (John Clayton, Michael Smith, Adam Schefter and Trey Wingo) were all talking about the AFC West and who they thought was going to struggle most; Denver, Kansas City or Oakland? After everyone else answered with one of those teams, Mort frickin' chirped in with this: (along these lines)

 

Well, I'd, I'd, uhhh...I think the Buffalo Bills are headed in the wrong direction. They dump their Offensive Coordinator who turns around and bashes the Head Coach. Then they put a 7th Rd. draft pick at LT to replace the guy who was put in place to fill the void of their best player, Pro-Bowler Jason Peters. (Fails to mention that Peters was undrafted). They are putting the pressure on 2 Rookies to protect Edwards. I'm not sold on Trent Edwards. And, I think T.O. is going to tear him apart when he doesn't get the ball to Owens....blah blah blah...

 

 

He really laid into this team pretty harshly (if that's a word).

 

Michael Smith and Adam Schefter disagreed with him...Trey Wingo said something stupid like "Yeah, it's gonna be a hard year for the Bills in that division." Which, I don't disagree with him, he just said it like a prick. And, John Clayton just sat there looking like he had to take a dump or something.

[Malazan]

And, John Clayton just sat there looking like he had to take a dump or something.

 

To be fair, he always looks like that and I would to if I had to do a show with those guys.

[K-9]

Thank you too! Re the period after Marchibroda, I think history shows that it was a talent issue, not a coaching issue. They were pretty much unstoppable until Kelly ruptured his bursar sac in week 12 (or so) of 1992, and they still finished second overall that year in offense. Marchibroda left in 1991 -- the year before. I made this point the other day: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/index.php?...p;#entry1540443

 

I missed your post in that thread otherwise I would have supported your thinking. How anyone could think it's NOT a question of talent is beyond me. It's ALWAYS a question of talent.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Wilson from Gamehendge]

I saw him on the ESPN Football Insiders preview show the other day...

 

 

Mort and the other guys (John Clayton, Michael Smith, Adam Schefter and Trey Wingo) were all talking about the AFC West and who they thought was going to struggle most; Denver, Kansas City or Oakland? After everyone else answered with one of those teams, Mort frickin' chirped in with this: (along these lines)

 

Well, I'd, I'd, uhhh...I think the Buffalo Bills are headed in the wrong direction. They dump their Offensive Coordinator who turns around and bashes the Head Coach. Then they put a 7th Rd. draft pick at LT to replace the guy who was put in place to fill the void of their best player, Pro-Bowler Jason Peters. (Fails to mention that Peters was undrafted). They are putting the pressure on 2 Rookies to protect Edwards. I'm not sold on Trent Edwards. And, I think T.O. is going to tear him apart when he doesn't get the ball to Owens....blah blah blah...

 

 

He really laid into this team pretty harshly (if that's a word).

 

Michael Smith and Adam Schefter disagreed with him...Trey Wingo said something stupid like "Yeah, it's gonna be a hard year for the Bills in that division." Which, I don't disagree with him, he just said it like a prick. And, John Clayton just sat there looking like he had to take a dump or something.

 

 

Sorry...I just realized the thread is about Jaworski and not Mortenson. My bad.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Thank-you. Of course a strategic thinker like yourself would think that football is so damn complicated that asking a football team to huddle up would completely ruin any potential for excellent execution.

Completely ruin? No. Are they executing well what they've been practicing? No. So, why would anyone think that changing the approach at the last minute to something they haven't been working on would improve the situation? That's got nothing to do with "football being complicated", it has to do with lack of preparation. Of course, they could change the plan and get prepared by backing off the 100% no-huddle idea. But, if you believe them, they aren't doing that.

[Guest dog14787]

Completely ruin? No. Are they executing well what they've been practicing? No. So, why would anyone think that changing the approach at the last minute to something they haven't been working on would improve the situation? That's got nothing to do with "football being complicated", it has to do with lack of preparation. Of course, they could change the plan and get prepared by backing off the 100% no-huddle idea. But, if you believe them, they aren't doing that.

 

 

Huddling up allows you to communicate, words are spoken, nerves calmed. Nothing changes from the no huddle to huddling up. The no huddle is a tactic, nothing more nothing less and when your offense is manned with half rookies and almost all younger players and has not even learned to execute properly to begin with it could become a deterrent. I'm not saying they can't work past it, but huddling up should not effect their execution and if the Bills fail to execute properly while huddling or not huddling it will have zero to do with the huddle and everything to do with just not executing the play properly in my opinion.

[eball]

Nobody watches more film than Jaws, and Trent Edwards is no Jim Kelly. I could substitute my dead grandmother in the time it takes the Bills to get to the line of scrimmage. If we continue to run the no-huddle with this speed and efficiency, it's going to be a long season.

I agree; thankfully, there are signs of improvement in that regard. Fred Jackson was quoted earlier this week as saying the offense under AVP is now getting plays off "7 or 8 seconds faster" than they were when Schonert was calling the plays.

[Guest dog14787]

I agree; thankfully, there are signs of improvement in that regard. Fred Jackson was quoted earlier this week as saying the offense under AVP is now getting plays off "7 or 8 seconds faster" than they were when Schonert was calling the plays.

 

As long as its taking to get the ball spotted its ruining any chance of catching defenses off guard.

[Bill from NYC]

My view is that looking at last year's tapes, the only times that Edwards was effectively running the offense was out of a hurry up set. That's my guess on why Jauron insists on running the offense full time. The big difference is that Bills ran that O against prevent Ds, and there's a question of whether it will be effective for a full game.

 

But the bottom line is that (duh) Bills have to score more often than they did, otherwise the entire effect of the hurry up (now that's it's not just the no huddle offense) will hurt the Bills more than it will the opposition.

 

So, it's certainly valid for Jaws to be skeptical at this point.

 

The other bottom line will be the ability to run the football Gerry. They simply must be able to run in the elements. This is something that will never change.

[K-9]

The other bottom line will be the ability to run the football Gerry. They simply must be able to run in the elements. This is something that will never change.

 

Truer words were never spoken. And not just run in the elements. Teams need to run the ball period. I don't have to tell you what that does in setting up everything else. Let's just say I remember how a play fake to TT would freeze LBs and Ss in their tracks and then commit and by that time Andre was already hauling in a crossing route and adding some serious YAC.

 

My apologies if that made you wispy in a moment of nostalgia.

 

As to never changing? I have to disagree if for no other reason than it has to eventually, right? You know that running the ball is about attitude, the OL asserting it's dominance. In Hangartner, Wood, Levitre, and Butler (although he's more limited physically) we have mean guys up front. Compare that to Dockery (who didn't want to be here), Fowler (who simply chickened out rather than get embarrassed by the NTs in our division) and Preston (simply a p*ssy) and Walker (who played too soft too often).

 

Better days are ahead, Bill. This will be evident when Wilfork tries to welcome one of the rookies to the league and Wood gets in his grill over it. I'm holding to my prediction that Wood will get at least one unsportmanlike penalty as a result of the NE* DL's cheapness. Perhaps a game misconduct. And while that would suck to lose him, I'll be happy about it.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Dark Fan]

Honestly, this is shaping up to be one of the worst seasons the franchise has ever seen (and that's saying something).

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/i...e-a-big-mistake

 

"I think they're making a big mistake running the no-huddle."

 

With yet another change on the line with yet another raw player Bell I wouldnt be surprised to see them scrap the no huddle for the regular season except for 2 min drills and change of pace and such. These young guys need to communicate their assignments, no way around it. Might even give them a slight advantage in terms of whats on pre-season film.

[Albany,n.y.]

OK & DON'T YOU BLAME COACHING (Or the O-line, or ANYTHING ELSE) if Trent FAILS this year.

If Trent fails it's all on him. Teams can lose games with poor coaching, but individual player failures are virtually never coaching related. When 31 teams other than the team that cuts a former 1st rounder want nothing to do with the guy, there's a pretty good chance that their scouts know it wasn't coaching that caused the guy to fail. Guys can't cut it in the NFL every day, anyone who blames coaching for a guy's failure, especially in JP's case where he had a top QB mentor in Sam Wyche, is just not seeing the truth. I think Trent will have a fine career, but if he doesn't nobody should blame the coaches. 31 other teams let Trent fall to the bottom of the 3rd round where the Bills drafted him, so it's not like he was a flawless guy coming out of Stanford.

In your line of reasoning, Cincinnati's poor coaching ruined Akili Smith, the 3rd pick in the draft. Never mind the guy was illiterate when it came to reading defenses & couldn't cut it in Green Bay or even the CFL. QBs who are football mentally deficient (like Akili & JP) can't be helped or ruined by coaching, they just can't react well on the field and no coach can change that. Look at what we tried with Bledsoe with the stop watches-the guy just didn't have the internal clock & nothing could help him. That's why Bledsoe never was anything better than good-even Belichick couldn't make him great & dumped him as soon as he realized Brady had the inate smarts, that no coach can teach, to play the position at a much higher level than Bledsoe.

In 1986 Felser wrote a great article on QBs who make something out of very little. It was about what Jim Kelly would face in Buffalo. Here's a key sentence from the article, which appeared in the 8/11/86 Sporting News:

"If he plans to translate those claims into reality in the record book, he will have to make something out of very little for the Bills, because that is what most of the great quarterbacks have done." Nowhere did Felser express any fear that the Bills, who were very poorly coached by Hank Bullough & company, would ruin Jim Kelly.

[Sisyphean Bills]

Huddling up allows you to communicate, words are spoken, nerves calmed. Nothing changes from the no huddle to huddling up. The no huddle is a tactic, nothing more nothing less and when your offense is manned with half rookies and almost all younger players and has not even learned to execute properly to begin with it could become a deterrent. I'm not saying they can't work past it, but huddling up should not effect their execution and if the Bills fail to execute properly while huddling or not huddling it will have zero to do with the huddle and everything to do with just not executing the play properly in my opinion.

All things being equal, I agree. In this case, not huddling has ceased to be a "mere" tactic because it is the only thing the Bills have done (and plan to do). That makes it a tactic that defines their doctrine on offense. Now, if the situation was different and the Bills were going to huddle up some of the time, like the Colts do, then it is just a tactical option. That is the distinction. The point is that the team has prepared 100% to use X, so removing X at the last minute would be disruptive. That isn't unique to the game of football.

 

Dog and K9, let me throw you guys a bone here:

 

Lost in telling me I don't know anything about football was the simple irony that I was defending Dick Jauron on this point. (Bad idea, but I was hoping maybe it would result in some X and O conversation other rather than "you moron".) I should have said "he won't change it now" rather than "it's too late" in my original post to be totally precise. There are coaching reasons why I was arguing that Dick Jauron is not going to go away from the no-huddle offense 1 week before the start of the season. I was arguing that Jauron was correct in that assessment and shouldn't waffle, backtrack, and change things given the unique elements of this situation. I guess taking Jauron's POV these days makes one an idiot. So, let me change my position in the argument. Yes, I agree. The Bills should just start huddling up at this point. It won't change a thing with respect to their plan and thus their execution in the near term. (The execution is already awful. So, so what? As for the plan, that remains to be seen.) And, in the longer term, using both the huddle and no-huddle at certain strategic points in the game, like 31 other teams, might actually help their execution improve through better communication. (That last bit is something I have said before in another thread. I point it out here just because I never really thought putting the huddle back in was something completely impossible. But, I think this short-handed staff won't do it. Yet, anyway. Maybe by the bye-week, the situation will be more clear?)

[Guest dog14787]

All things being equal, I agree. In this case, not huddling has ceased to be a "mere" tactic because it is the only thing the Bills have done (and plan to do). That makes it a tactic that defines their doctrine on offense. Now, if the situation was different and the Bills were going to huddle up some of the time, like the Colts do, then it is just a tactical option. That is the distinction. The point is that the team has prepared 100% to use X, so removing X at the last minute would be disruptive. That isn't unique to the game of football.

 

Dog and K9, let me throw you guys a bone here:

 

Lost in telling me I don't know anything about football was the simple irony that I was defending Dick Jauron on this point. (Bad idea, but I was hoping maybe it would result in some X and O conversation other rather than "you moron".) I should have said "he won't change it now" rather than "it's too late" in my original post to be totally precise. There are coaching reasons why I was arguing that Dick Jauron is not going to go away from the no-huddle offense 1 week before the start of the season. I was arguing that Jauron was correct in that assessment and shouldn't waffle, backtrack, and change things given the unique elements of this situation. I guess taking Jauron's POV these days makes one an idiot. So, let me change my position in the argument. Yes, I agree. The Bills should just start huddling up at this point. It won't change a thing with respect to their plan and thus their execution in the near term. (The execution is already awful. So, so what? As for the plan, that remains to be seen.) And, in the longer term, using both the huddle and no-huddle at certain strategic points in the game, like 31 other teams, might actually help their execution improve through better communication. (That last bit is something I have said before in another thread. I point it out here just because I never really thought putting the huddle back in was something completely impossible. But, I think this short-handed staff won't do it. Yet, anyway. Maybe by the bye-week, the situation will be more clear?)

 

I know, give dog and k9 a bone and we wag our tail and go away happy, I see whats going on here.

[K-9]

All things being equal, I agree. In this case, not huddling has ceased to be a "mere" tactic because it is the only thing the Bills have done (and plan to do). That makes it a tactic that defines their doctrine on offense. Now, if the situation was different and the Bills were going to huddle up some of the time, like the Colts do, then it is just a tactical option. That is the distinction. The point is that the team has prepared 100% to use X, so removing X at the last minute would be disruptive. That isn't unique to the game of football.

 

Dog and K9, let me throw you guys a bone here:

 

Lost in telling me I don't know anything about football was the simple irony that I was defending Dick Jauron on this point. (Bad idea, but I was hoping maybe it would result in some X and O conversation other rather than "you moron".) I should have said "he won't change it now" rather than "it's too late" in my original post to be totally precise. There are coaching reasons why I was arguing that Dick Jauron is not going to go away from the no-huddle offense 1 week before the start of the season. I was arguing that Jauron was correct in that assessment and shouldn't waffle, backtrack, and change things given the unique elements of this situation. I guess taking Jauron's POV these days makes one an idiot. So, let me change my position in the argument. Yes, I agree. The Bills should just start huddling up at this point. It won't change a thing with respect to their plan and thus their execution in the near term. (The execution is already awful. So, so what? As for the plan, that remains to be seen.) And, in the longer term, using both the huddle and no-huddle at certain strategic points in the game, like 31 other teams, might actually help their execution improve through better communication. (That last bit is something I have said before in another thread. I point it out here just because I never really thought putting the huddle back in was something completely impossible. But, I think this short-handed staff won't do it. Yet, anyway. Maybe by the bye-week, the situation will be more clear?)

 

Sisyphean, you are anything but a moron. Certainly didn't mean to imply otherwise. I didn't engage in an Xs and Os discussion because IMO the decision to huddle or not has little to do with Xs and Os. All I was arguing is that IF the Bills decided to scrap the no-huddle it would have little impact on their ability to implement the schemes they've installed. That's all. I'm not suggesting they 'should' scrap it. Nor do I think they will per DJ's remarks about the matter. Again, just saying it's not a big deal to huddle up whenever they want to or not.

 

Peace.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[rstencel]

Jaws understands it takes good execution for the no huddle to work properly and until we execute properly the no huddle will struggle. Common sense tells you communicating back and forth will help improve our execution. Maybe we can work our way through it, time will tell I suppose.

 

Going up against the Pats it would be beneficial if the Bills could control the ball and win the time of possession because you really need to keep Tom Brady off the field as much as possible. In that respect the no huddle does not work to our advantage.

 

I agree, the no huddle is used if you feel your team can win the one on one issues, and out execute/score the other team. Not sure anyone want to get into a scoring match with the patriots, with the possible exception of the Colts.

[rstencel]

I think the big problem is that everyone including the Bills are confused about "No Huddle" and "Hurry Up" offense. If they're just "huddling" at the line then I think there are distinct advantages. If they're zinging it out and not using the clock effectively to control the ball then it's pointless because they won't put up the points of a high powered offense.

 

Yes you can stand over the ball for a long time rather than hike it quick, but there is no real advantage to running the no huddle unless you spend at least part of the time hiking it quick. Also while your standing over the ball the defensive players can adjust and share note, while the offense is stuck in their stance, and cant compare notes, or tell the QB, that my guys winded, or biting on the stop and go, until they go off the field and give the defensive coordinator a chance to correct the issue. Rookie lineman can verify responsibilities for situations with call if need to. Rookie TE cant verify with lineman next to him who is going to pick up the blitzing LB if he comes for a play. Etc...

 

As you can tell, I am not a fan of this team running the no huddle. At Least they have a fairly athletic line now, so that will help some what, but till they can master the execution and can get on the same page well enough to know what everyone around the will do for adjustments in different situations, they are going to struggle somewhat more in no huddle than would in huddle.

 

I do agree its a little late to change the offense at this point, but huddling doesn't change the calls or responsibilities, it just gives them ability to run larger set of plays, since have a bit more time to correct things.

 

Now mixing in No-Huddle with huddle for situations for for portion of the game, I do like. Having put this much time into practicing it, would allow them to use it fairly well as a change of pace.