PDaDdy Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 IMO Jaws is usually pretty accurate with his assessment. There can be no doubt the Bills are taking a risk but time will tell how it pans out. I actually do like Jaws but he also said that both JP and Trent were starting to get it at times in there career and were going to be real NFL QBs. We saw how the one turned out and the other is in the process of regressing and crashing and burning! I certainly get the points he's trying to make but let's hope he is wrong about the no huddle. Perhaps they can make a positive by running it at more of a hurry up pace keeping the defense off guard and hopefully a little vanilla.
Cynical Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 I remember going to the home opener the following year and I can't remember who we were playing off-hand but once Buffalo received the ball for the very 1st time in the game the no huddle was immediately utilized. The one thing I remember vividly @ the game is when they did that the whole stadium erupted into cheers. It was obvious from the Owner, to the coaches, to the players, and to right up to the fans in the stands is that was the way to go. They never looked back. The team was the Colts, and it was Jeff George's first start as a QB in the NFL.
TheChimp Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Maybe he meant when he got the proper coaching so he could develop? It's hard to find good coaches for retarded people, I know.
Cynical Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 I seriously think we need to trust the coaching staff here. If Jauron didn't think these young guys on the line could handle the no huddle, he wouldn't have gone with it, and most certainly wouldn't still be sticking with it. It might struggle a big early, but when you think about how young this offense is, it might be best for the long run. Or maybe Jauron is desperate to save his azz and his career, he has finally realized staying with the "status quo" wasn't going to work. Everyone's saying we must win this year. Well, I don't find that to be necessarily true. It would be nice to win, but you can't put all your eggs in one basket. This is finally developing a young Oline from scratch, instead of compiling a makeshift offensive line. When the team struggles for the first half of the season, don't throw in the towel. I half a feeling the second half of the season is going to be much better, and heading into next year we'll have a lot of momentum. (Yes, cue the argument "that's how it is every year." True, but I'm not sure this is their year with the difficult schedule and a new offensive line. As much as nobody wants to admit it, this team has all the makings of a two-year plan. Jauron doesn't have two years. He has to win NOW.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Marv always commented on the no-huddle that it was all about execution. If the execution is off, the play won't work, you won't gain yards, you won't move the chains, and you won't score. Both the Bills and Bengals teams that used it full-time in the early 90s were veteran teams. They wanted to get their 11 starters out on the field and force the defensive coordinator to go with his 11 and then exploit the weaknesses of whatever 11 he put out there. Of the current Bills starting 11, over half of the starters are playing for the first time or in new positions or with new teammates. The Bills coaches may feel like their outside receivers are a big mismatch against other teams defenses, but they haven't shown any ability to execute anything with any consistency in this offense all pre-season. The execution was ragged the last half of last year with many of the same skills players operating behind a veteran line. Why should we trust the coaches? Have they been successful? Why go with the no huddle? Turk Schonert wanted to put in his offense and put his own stamp on things. Jauron let him do it. Why stick with it? Because it is too late. They've put 6 months into installing this offense. They don't have an experienced OC and they are working with too many rookies to just turn back the clock and install something else. Is it the best thing in the long run? The early results are that this offense has big communications problems, as expected. If that continues and DCs around the NFL attack this offense early and often, then you have put the team behind the 8-ball in both the short and long term by reducing the players' confidence in themselves, the system, and your coaching. If it works and the offense starts scoring points, you look like a genius.
trock12 Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 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." Maybe if his protege, JP, was running it he would like it
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 The team was the Colts, and it was Jeff George's first start as a QB in the NFL. Yes, but they only used the no-huddle for the opening drive in that game. They did not commit to it full time until the Eagles game much later in the season, where they scored 24 points in the first quarter.
spartacus Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Ted Marchibroda was the OC from 89 -91 and the offense was effective before and after the the no huddle was introduced. that is mostly incorrect before the no huddle, the offense at least moved the ball at times and scored, but they were inconsistent. However, that is light years ahead of where this offense is. the Kelly offense was much more effective using the no huddle because the OL was able to exploit superior conditioning to dominate DLs. without it, they struggled when going man-to-man because they were physically superior to the DLs they faced.
Flbillsfan#1 Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 JP could have been coached by the ghost of Vince F'n Lombardi & he still wouldn't have been any good. When are you going to get it that a million $ arm & a 10 cent brain =an uncoachable player & a bust at QB? He had Sam Wyche, a man who proved to be a very good coach of QBs as his QB coach his 1st 2 seasons and he couldn't learn anything from him. Proper coaching? He had "proper coaching". Just because you fell in love with a bum, don't blame the coaching he got. OK & DON'T YOU BLAME COACHING (Or the O-line, or ANYTHING ELSE) if Trent FAILS this year.
Guest dog14787 Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 that is mostly incorrect before the no huddle, the offense at least moved the ball at times and scored, but they were inconsistent. However, that is light years ahead of where this offense is. the Kelly offense was much more effective using the no huddle because the OL was able to exploit superior conditioning to dominate DLs. without it, they struggled when going man-to-man because they were physically superior to the DLs they faced. 89 Kelly had 25 TD's (89-91 Ted Marchibroda was OC) 90 Kelly had 24 TD's 91 Kelly had 33 TD's 92 Kelly had 23 TD's 93 Kelly had 18 TD's 94 Kelly had 22 TD's At least from the QB's perspective I don't see much difference so I'm not sure how I'm mostly incorrect. Ted Marchibroda is the main reason Buffalo's offense was so explosive and you can note the decline after his departure. Note: Dan Marino has thrown for 48 TD's in a season ,Peyton manning 49 TD's, and of course the record holder, Tom Brady with 50 TD's in a season
K-9 Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Marv always commented on the no-huddle that it was all about execution. If the execution is off, the play won't work, you won't gain yards, you won't move the chains, and you won't score. Both the Bills and Bengals teams that used it full-time in the early 90s were veteran teams. They wanted to get their 11 starters out on the field and force the defensive coordinator to go with his 11 and then exploit the weaknesses of whatever 11 he put out there. Of the current Bills starting 11, over half of the starters are playing for the first time or in new positions or with new teammates. The Bills coaches may feel like their outside receivers are a big mismatch against other teams defenses, but they haven't shown any ability to execute anything with any consistency in this offense all pre-season. The execution was ragged the last half of last year with many of the same skills players operating behind a veteran line. Why should we trust the coaches? Have they been successful? Why go with the no huddle? Turk Schonert wanted to put in his offense and put his own stamp on things. Jauron let him do it. Why stick with it? Because it is too late. They've put 6 months into installing this offense. They don't have an experienced OC and they are working with too many rookies to just turn back the clock and install something else. Is it the best thing in the long run? The early results are that this offense has big communications problems, as expected. If that continues and DCs around the NFL attack this offense early and often, then you have put the team behind the 8-ball in both the short and long term by reducing the players' confidence in themselves, the system, and your coaching. If it works and the offense starts scoring points, you look like a genius. Are you actually suggesting it's too late to scrap the no-huddle? C'mon man. The offense installed and the personnel groups decided upon, yeah, too late in the game to go back to the drawing board. But a team can scrap the no-huddle at any time. All they gotta do, now follow me here, is...... huddle up. Don't confuse tactics (no-huddle) with schemes. GO BILLS!!!
RuffMuff Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 I love Jaws and he loves us, but I think he's been poised by too much time with Hodge in the early mornings.
EndZoneCrew Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Honestly, this is shaping up to be one of the worst seasons the franchise has ever seen
cantankerous Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 89 Kelly had 25 TD's (89-91 Ted Marchibroda was OC) 90 Kelly had 24 TD's 91 Kelly had 33 TD's 92 Kelly had 23 TD's 93 Kelly had 18 TD's 94 Kelly had 22 TD's At least from the QB's perspective I don't see much difference so I'm not sure how I'm mostly incorrect. Ted Marchibroda is the main reason Buffalo's offense was so explosive and you can note the decline after his departure. Note: Dan Marino has thrown for 48 TD's in a season ,Peyton manning 49 TD's, and of course the record holder, Tom Brady with 50 TD's in a season Note the decline? What decline...seems pretty even from then on out.
first_and_ten Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 IMO Jaws is usually pretty accurate with his assessment. There can be no doubt the Bills are taking a risk but time will tell how it pans out. Didn't Jaws like Losman better than Rivers before the 2004 draft?
Guest dog14787 Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Note the decline? What decline...seems pretty even from then on out. I don't mean to conclude that there is much difference and that was the original point I was trying to make when someone asked if the Buffalo Bills were already successful before they started using the no huddle. I believe a loss to Cinci in a playoff game (or AFC championship) is what started the ball rolling. The Bengals beat us with a no huddle attack and Ted Marchibroda being the smart fella that he was said, "O.K., we will beat them at their own game next time". It is evident that the no huddle has been able to break through tough defenses, I believe its partly to do with forcing your opponent to use 2nd and even 3rd string in an effort to keep up with the fast paced offense resulting in mismatches.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Are you actually suggesting it's too late to scrap the no-huddle? C'mon man. The offense installed and the personnel groups decided upon, yeah, too late in the game to go back to the drawing board. But a team can scrap the no-huddle at any time. All they gotta do, now follow me here, is...... huddle up. Don't confuse tactics (no-huddle) with schemes. GO BILLS!!! Yeah. They spent 6 months working on calling the plays at the line of scrimmage, reading the defense, setting the tempo of the offense, setting the protections at the line, etc. But, since it is merely a tactic, they can just flip a switch and do something they haven't practiced at all and it won't throw them off one iota. Actually, that helps explain why Jim Kelly and the guys always looked so comfortable when Shofner and Bresnahan kept changing the tempo of the offense and trying to get them to huddle up every September.
Guest dog14787 Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Yeah. They spent 6 months working on calling the plays at the line of scrimmage, reading the defense, setting the tempo of the offense, setting the protections at the line, etc. But, since it is merely a tactic, they can just flip a switch and do something they haven't practiced at all and it won't throw them off one iota. Actually, that helps explain why Jim Kelly and the guys always looked so comfortable when Shofner and Bresnahan kept changing the tempo of the offense and trying to get them to huddle up every September. We are talking about a no huddle offense in the K-Gun that worked well before the no huddle vs. one that has never worked well.
K-9 Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Yeah. They spent 6 months working on calling the plays at the line of scrimmage, reading the defense, setting the tempo of the offense, setting the protections at the line, etc. But, since it is merely a tactic, they can just flip a switch and do something they haven't practiced at all and it won't throw them off one iota. Actually, that helps explain why Jim Kelly and the guys always looked so comfortable when Shofner and Bresnahan kept changing the tempo of the offense and trying to get them to huddle up every September. Shofner and Bresnahan? You are really stretching to make a point. Care to discuss a few of the personnel changes, not to mention declining skill levels and the fact that defenses had pretty much caught up to our offense? Just a few slight changes from the K-Gun's heyday. But let's get back to today's team: 1.) Any play that can be called at the LOS can be called in a huddle and audibled out of at the LOS. 2.) Reading the defense is NOT relative to running the no huddle. 3.) Setting line protections is NOT relative to running the no huddle. 4.) Practicing to huddle? How long have these guys been playing football? Yeah, that could really throw them off. As for the tempo that's the ONLY thing that would be affected by huddling up. Speeding up/slowing down the tempo is a TACTIC. You really make football more complicated than it is. You need to slow down your own tempo. GO BILLS!!! PS - It's worth noting that Bresnahan presided over two SB offenses after Marchibroda's departure. But it was Kelly's offense anyway. It took a couple more seasons for the full effect of the aging and departing players to really impact the Bills' O. Especially along the Oline.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Shofner and Bresnahan? You are really stretching to make a point. Care to discuss a few of the personnel changes, not to mention declining skill levels and the fact that defenses had pretty much caught up to our offense? Just a few slight changes from the K-Gun's heyday. 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. But let's get back to today's team: 1.) Any play that can be called at the LOS can be called in a huddle. 2.) Reading the defense is NOT relative to running the no huddle. 3.) Setting line protections is NOT relative to running the no huddle. 4.) Practicing to huddle? How long have these guys been playing football? Yeah, that could really throw them off. As for the tempo that's the ONLY thing that would be affected by huddling up. Speeding up/slowing down the tempo is a TACTIC. You really make football more complicated than it is. You need to slow down your own tempo. GO BILLS!!! 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.
Recommended Posts