Bills and no huddle

[Fingon]

I realize that not every no-huddle play is a hurry-up. But I'm not quite clear why one would want to sacrifice those seconds in a huddle, trying to be sure that everybody is on the same page, for setting the OL into position quickly as the clock winds down.

 

As long as the ball is dead (not snapped), the defense can substitute. And if you set early, doesn't that in some degree, tip off the D? I really don't see a lot of sense to a no-huddle not resulting in a quick snap to catch a D unaware, fatigue the DL (and also your OL players), or if you are battling the clock.

I believe the rule on the no huddle is that you must only let the defense substitute if you make a substitution.

[Billistic]

11/30/08, 3-10 v. 49ers

12/7/08, 3-16 v. Dolphins

12/28/08, 0-13 v. Pats

 

What exactly is there to lose by change? I'd even encourage the occasional quick kick on 3rd down instead of the usual short yardage running play stuffed at the line, or the 4 yard pass on 3rd and 8.

[scribo]

Why did I ever let PPP come between us? :worthy:

Ha ha. That was while back. See you back over there in about three years.

[Billistic]

The no huddle in hurry up mode puts strain on the offensive players, not just those on opponent's defense.

 

I wonder about the strength and conditioning coach John Allaire. The Bills have had ludicrous numbers of injuries over the recent past, especially 2007.

 

I think going to the no huddle helps prevent the opponent's from anticipating the snap, which should reduce sacks (especially blitzes). Teams that chronically break the huddle late give that up. I hope the Bills really mix up the snap timing.

[stuckincincy]

I believe the rule on the no huddle is that you must only let the defense substitute if you make a substitution.

 

Do you mean to say that if the offense does not huddle, the defense cannot change players on the field?

 

My understanding that as long as the ball is dead, the D can do as they please, as long as they have 11 or less players on the field when the snap initiates the play. There might be some details about a player coming off, on, then off again, I suppose. Dunno.

 

There are rules about how many people can be in an offensive huddle, and some other details connected with that.

[scribo]

Do you mean to say that if the offense does not huddle, the defense cannot change players on the field?

 

My understanding that as long as the ball is dead, the D can do as they please, as long as they have 11 or less players on the field when the snap initiates the play. There might be some details about a player coming off, on, then off again, I suppose. Dunno.

 

There are rules about how many people can be in an offensive huddle, and some other details connected with that.

There are no rules limiting defensive substitutions. I believe the rule Fingon was talking about is the one that mandates the offense allow the defensive the opportunity to make substitutions when it makes substitutions. For example, if the Bills swap a RB out for a WR, they must allow the defense reasonable time to switch one player such as a LB for CB. But the D is free to attempt substitutions even when the offense isn't changing any personnel.

 

With Edwards standing over center, studying the D, he should have a very good idea of what defensive players are on the field and predict when the D will try to make subs.

[naj377]

That and the fact that not advertising it means the surprise will last a grand total of one play.

 

 

just remember that the no huddle was originated and perfected by our boy JK

[stuckincincy]

With Edwards standing over center, studying the D, he should have a very good idea of what defensive players are on the field and predict when the D will try to make subs.

 

Yes - if he's astute enough. He's young, and I don't think he has much historical knowledge about the opposing defensive players. If he pulled it on me once, next time I would have a cb make a blatant (and false) move towards the sideline, and see it I can sucker him into a quick snap. Which will probably be a wasted play, or at worse a busted play as he catches his other offensive players unawares. If he's under center, an experienced DL and LB corps will pour in and try to hurt him and try to make him fumble.

 

So..he'd better pull out and spike the ball pronto. Trying to get a penalty against a defense carries some risk.

 

A 15 yard personal foul penalty is a cheap price to pay for getting a starting QB off the field.

[SuperKillerRobots]

I think the no-huddle will work great for this team, as long as they run out of it. The most successful part of this offense is when you can line up and run the ball two or three times without letting the defense substitute or really rest. Make them stay in their stances while Trent surveys the field. Also they really have to be careful to not rush the snaps ona regular basis. Anytime you can catch the d off guard, that works to do a quick snap, but if the defense is ready for the play, it's more productive for the offense to sit at the line and wait until the clock runs down. Furthermore, I think that going with a limited playbook for the no-huddle, which is probably what they'll start out with, will benefit the offensive personnel, since there are a lot of new faces and younger guys.

 

As far as the coaching staff talking about the use of the no-huddle and allowing defensive coordinators time to plan against it, I think it is necessary. First of all, even if they weren't going to use it at all, it would be a competitive advantage to say they were going to, to provide the preverbial red-harring for the opposing defensive coordinators to worry about. Kind of like what we are doing witht he wildcat this year. Maybe we see that in a game (with Roscoe as QB) a handful of times this year, but defensive coordinators will have to be ready for it in case we decide to use it. This wastes their prep time during the week. The no-huddle does the same thing. They probably figured that they want to use it and use the threat of it.

 

All of the talking about the no-huddle this early makes me think that they are not going to use it against New England as their primary plan. Maybe if they are doing terrible and need a spark, they switch to it, but they probably would rather see them have to prepare for it more and prepare less for other, less obvious changes from last year. The thing is that even if we kept the same offense from last year, it's going to be new to everyone, since we have two real outside WRs. That might be enough in and of itself to give defensive coordinators fits.

[The Senator]

just remember that the no huddle was originated and perfected by our boy JK

Well, not quite - Marv/Ted/Kelly 'adopted' it after it was 'introduced' to them by Sam Wyche & the Bengals...

 

"The first team to employ the no-huddle approach as the normal offensive play strategy was the 1988-89 Cincinnati Bengals under Sam Wyche with Boomer Esiason as the quarterback. The no-huddle approach was used by many teams before but in specific situations for a limited time. This strategy proved to be very effective in limiting substitutions, creating fatigue in the opposing defense, creating play-calling issues for the defense, and various other advantages. The Bengals' regular employment of the no-huddle was sufficiently controversial that the league experimented with mid-season rules changes to discourage its use. The employment of the no-huddle propelled the Bengals to their second appearance in the Super Bowl.

 

 

The Buffalo Bills, defeated in the AFC Championship game by the no-huddle Bengals, soon adopted their approach. With Jim Kelly quarterbacking a no-huddle "K-Gun" offense, the Bills became the only team in NFL history to appear in four consecutive Super Bowls, from 1991-1994."

 

link

 

Suffice to says the Bills certainly 'perfected' the No-Huddle, and used it more successfully than ever seen - before or since.

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

[Captain Caveman]

Regarding catching a def. substitution - doesn't that means a quicker snap?

 

Not necessarily. It means the threat of a quicker snap. This ties in to the previous post about having a few quick snap plays that can effectively be used to make sure the defense doesn't even try to substitute.

[scribo]

just remember that the no huddle was originated and perfected by our boy JK

I certainly would not say it was originated by the Bills. But Jim Kelly, Ted Marchibroda and company did perfect it. Sam Wyche, Boomer Esiason ran a different version, actually beating Jim Kelly and the Bills with it before the Bills started their own version.

[Captain Caveman]

To add to this, it's very rare for a defense to try and substitute when an offense is in no-huddle mode, because most def. coordinators don't want to take the risk.

[Flbillsfan#1]

The no huddle in hurry up mode puts strain on the offensive players, not just those on opponent's defense.

 

I wonder about the strength and conditioning coach John Allaire. The Bills have had ludicrous numbers of injuries over the recent past, especially 2007.

 

I think going to the no huddle helps prevent the opponent's from anticipating the snap, which should reduce sacks (especially blitzes). Teams that chronically break the huddle late give that up. I hope the Bills really mix up the snap timing.

I agree with you about Allaire. Gregg Williams fired the strength & conditioning coach that had been with the team a number of years when he was named the Bills HC.

 

I think the main advantage to the no huddle is it prevents the defense from substituting players, so if the offense has a favorable matchup they are able to take advantage of it.

[oregonbbfan]

Anyone heard if Jim Kelly has had any input or been consulted on his thoughts on it? As stated, he was the best at running it.

 

Or has the complexity of the defenses pasted him by? Or too much pride to ask Jim for his take?

 

I think a little first hand talking with Trent couldn't hurt. Your thoughts

[Flbillsfan#1]

There are no rules limiting defensive substitutions. I believe the rule Fingon was talking about is the one that mandates the offense allow the defensive the opportunity to make substitutions when it makes substitutions. For example, if the Bills swap a RB out for a WR, they must allow the defense reasonable time to switch one player such as a LB for CB. But the D is free to attempt substitutions even when the offense isn't changing any personnel.

 

With Edwards standing over center, studying the D, he should have a very good idea of what defensive players are on the field and predict when the D will try to make subs.

Good post, but I might add if the offense does not substitute & is at the line of scrimmage, they can snap the ball & run the play at any time. If the defense TRYS to substitute they may not be able to make the substitution in time, and either be flagged for too many players on the field, or they may have to play a player short or out of position.

[Fingon]

There are no rules limiting defensive substitutions. I believe the rule Fingon was talking about is the one that mandates the offense allow the defensive the opportunity to make substitutions when it makes substitutions. For example, if the Bills swap a RB out for a WR, they must allow the defense reasonable time to switch one player such as a LB for CB. But the D is free to attempt substitutions even when the offense isn't changing any personnel.

 

With Edwards standing over center, studying the D, he should have a very good idea of what defensive players are on the field and predict when the D will try to make subs.

That's exactly what i was trying to say. I'd like to add that having players like Fred Jackson means that we don't have to substitute another WR in on passing downs. This can create big mismatches, as they might not have time to get a CB out to defend him, and they will have to rely on a LB guarding Jackson.

[scribo]

That's exactly what i was trying to say. I'd like to add that having players like Fred Jackson means that we don't have to substitute another WR in on passing downs. This can create big mismatches, as they might not have time to get a CB out to defend him, and they will have to rely on a LB guarding Jackson.

Bingo. Having Thurman back in the day helped immensely, as he could catch as well as any true RB in the history of the game. And as has been discussed on this board forever, the real key was having a tight end that could be a decent run blocker and be a good enough receiver to split the seem. That is going to be key now. Everyone needs to be smart and versatile, but no one needs to be great.

[Billistic]

The way Peyton Manning runs the no-huddle, it's all (mostly) about subterfuge, psychology, phony re-alignments and keeping the defense thinking and over-thinking and sitting back on their heels. Peyton can do anything, and often has.

 

I am really not too sure anyone is going to fear Edward's field generalship. Unless he burns some good defenses pretty quick, it's going to be all smoke, mirrors and so-whats.

[scribo]

Anyone heard if Jim Kelly has had any input or been consulted on his thoughts on it? As stated, he was the best at running it.

 

Or has the complexity of the defenses pasted him by? Or too much pride to ask Jim for his take?

 

I think a little first hand talking with Trent couldn't hurt. Your thoughts

Yes, Chris Brown reported a little while back that Jim Kelly has been consulted about the no-huddle and provided insight to the coaching staff and directly to Trent.