The No-Huddle Offense and how new weapons could change the Bills
by pasaluki on May 16, 2009 9:09 PM EDT
62 comments
Ed. Note, by Brian Galliford: Bumped from the FanPost section - this is a quality read. Thanks, pasaluki! End Note
In addition to upgrades at receiver and tight end, the Buffalo Bills feature solid running back depth in Fred Jackson (who recently re-signed with the club) and new addition Dominic Rhodes. Although Marshawn Lynch is appealing his 3-game suspension, the reality is that, at best, it will be reduced to one game. But don't think the Bills' running game will be ineffective in his absence. Last year against New England in the final regular season game, Jackson rushed for 136 yards in miserable weather conditions, and as the Patriots found out, is not much easier to bring down than Lynch is.
Thus, with few of the skill positions lacking in talent, and with dynamic new players and proven veterans in place, one question remains:
Where does the Bill's offense go from here?
Many experts, including AFC East blogger Tim Graham of ESPN, speculate that it is going back to the heart of the Bills' success in the 1990s. Yes, I'm talking about the no-huddle offense.
The No-Huddle Offense (also called the hurry-up offense) was first introduced in the NFL in 1988 by Sam Wyche, the coach of the Cincinnati Bengals. Before him, the concept of the hurry-up offense was not foreign, with many teams employing it with two or so minutes left until halftime, or two minutes until the end of the game.
Wyche's contribution was applying the hurry-up philosophy to the whole game. Because it was something never done before in the NFL, teams initially didn't know how to react to it. The no-huddle interfered with the opposing defense's ability to communicate with coaches and substitute off the field, because there was an ever-present threat of the offense snapping the ball. As a result, teams that were caught off guard had tired players, and sometimes not even the right personnel to stop the offense on the field. Because defenses were used to communicating with coaches, sometimes they weren't even able to get the right play and confused themselves.
With the defense in a muddled mess, the offense was able to stretch the field - usually with a pass - and catch players out of position. Audibles were called to change the play at the line. Sometimes fake audible were called to give the impression that the offense was going to run a play out of a certain formation, but then quickly switch back into the original formation. So just as the 'Wildcat' employed by the Miami Dolphins last year was so lethal to New England, Wyche's no-huddle offense was lethal in this same way - it was so innovative, and one of the biggest victims of it was, surprisingly enough, the Buffalo Bills. The Bills were defeated by the Bengals in the AFC Championship game. They saw first-hand the havoc that the no-huddle offense could cause, and as the saying goes "the NFL is a copy cat league." The following season, the Bills came out of the gate having learned the lessons from their loss and carrying with them their own version of the no-huddle.
A form of the no-huddle so perfectly executed, so dynamic, and so exciting, that word spread around the league about it. Many defenses throughout the history of the NFL were feared, but few offenses were. The K-Gun offense, with Jim Kelly as its head, was feared, and in its wake came four Super Bowl appearances.
Interestingly, the 'K' of the K-Gun wasn't for Kelly, but rather Keith McKeller, the Bills' tight end. McKeller's nickname was 'Killer', so perhaps the true name was the Killer-Gun Offense.
McKeller was one of the most important pieces to the offense because he was both a strong blocker and a good pass catcher. He was the instrumental player in the K-Gun, and that was why it was named after him. This is why Buffalo may still go with a no-huddle offense, but not specifically a revival of the K-Gun itself. The Bills possess tight ends who are good blockers, but are unproven vertical threats. They drafted a tight end who is a pass catcher in fourth-round pick Shawn Nelson, but he needs more experience blocking.
Although NFL defenses have adjusted to the formation over time, there are still a few teams that actively employ the no-huddle offense today. The most notable of these teams is the Indianapolis Colts, who the Bills might try to emulate as the Colts run a similar defense to the Bills as well and have had great long-term success in the AFC South.
Nothing is certain, but if the the Bills do go back to the no-huddle, Trent Edwards is going to have very big shoes to fill as parallels to him and Kelly will no doubt be drawn. Kelly is known as one of the toughest quarterbacks of all time, and some have serious doubts as to the durability of Edwards.
Amidst much speculation and uncertainty, one thing is clear: the Bills have the pieces in place right now to run a variant on the no-huddle. But don't take it from me:
As Sam Wyche himself said, "Buffalo's sitting pretty with all those guys, believe me."
This FanPost was written by a registered user of Buffalo Rumblings. Its views do not necessarily reflect the views of Rumblings' editorial staff, but are just as valued as our own.
0 recs |
62 comments
Email
Print
Comments
One thing I'm curious about
Cinci has a history with no-huddle and does anyone know if Ryan Fitzpatrick knows the system and could that have factored into signing him?
by pasaluki on May 16, 2009 9:10 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I doubt it. Fitzpatrick is a well below average QB, so I doubt the team would be comfortable going no huddle with him….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on May 17, 2009 2:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
bengals fan here
Fitz didnt run the no huddle last season when Palmer went down. He did change some calls at the line and thats similar to the No Huddle so i assume he could do it. He did go to Harvard
by firstPick on May 17, 2009 2:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couple of thoughts:
- I would have been interested to see a further explanation of the “how new weapons could change the Bills” part of your headline. Did you just mean a possible switch to the no-huddle there?
Kelly is known as one of the toughest quarterbacks of all time, and some have serious doubts as to the durability of Edwards.
There’s a difference between “toughness” and “durability”. Jim Kelly only played a full 16 games in four of his eleven seasons. He was a tough SOB, obviously, but I wouldn’t have necessarily called him durable – we saw a lot of Frank Reich in those days, and we were lucky to have such a quality backup. Edwards has clearly had durability issues, but he’s taken a pretty solid pounding early in his career and still willingly sacrifices his body on a routine basis. I’d call Trent a pretty tough cookie, too – though Kelly’s mentality took his own toughness to an entirely different level. Trent would do well to channel a bit of that.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on May 16, 2009 10:09 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How many of the seasons where he didn’t play a full 16 games were due to sitting out meaningless weeks at the end of the season? Not quibbling with the point- I just remember starters resting back then.
Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet. -jesse. @ BSD
by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on May 17, 2009 12:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well I initially wanted to just add what the new weapons were, and then talk about possible offensive schemes that would be implemented, but I wanted to specifically address the no-huddle because that’s seems to be the talk of the town. I didn’t want to make one article that dragged on too long, so I’m going to address the new players specifically in another article. Why I think I titled it that way is because if the bills do run the no-huddle it’s because of these new weapons they added on offense.
I think the point I’m trying to make about Kelly/Edwards is although we saw alot of Frank Reich, it was Frank Reich, a man who more than held his own. That’s why I’m more concerned about Edwards. He has proven less than Kelly has, and he has questionable depth behind him. Now I’m optimistic about Edwards I think he is intelligent enough to run the system and I even believe he physically can as well, but an injury to him in all probability dooms the Bills in a way that even Kelly, a HOF QB, going down doesn’t. I think Edwards knows that it’s him or the breaks, and other teams know that he is the head of the snake.
by pasaluki on May 17, 2009 10:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least to me, Fitzpatrick seems like a Frank Reich kind of player. We have yet to see what he can accomplish in limited action on our team, but he seems like the kind of guy who will help Edwards and work towards the team goals instead of his own. Is it just me, or does anyone else think that Reich knew who buttered his bread? Does it get any better than the situation he was in, sit on the bench, prepare, help Kelly prepare, cash paychecks, and then 1 – 2 times a year, go in there and do your thing? That sounds great to me, anyway. Let’s you finish your career with your head and body intact for the next phases of your life, and also make a fine living while you are playing.
by syrbillsfan on May 18, 2009 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was always prepared.
THat’s why he was so good. He prepared like the starter.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on May 18, 2009 11:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Close but nope
“We’re going to use the tight end more”
“The fullback is going to be an integral part of our offense”
“We’re going to blitz more”
“We’re going to be more aggressive”
“We’re going to throw the ball down the field more”
“The playcalling won’t be as predictable”
Should I list any more statements from the Bills that never happened??
by telka on May 17, 2009 12:07 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I say we pick up Michael Vick and run the Wildcat! No I’m just joking…kind of…well unless you think it’s a good idea…Noooo! You think? Maybe? Hah! I’m just kiding…a little.
by telka on May 17, 2009 12:12 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I said it somewhere else and I’ll repeat it here. Vick would not be a good option for the wildcat. First, he’s not smart enough. Say what you will about the Wildcat, and even if it’s ran because of a lack of tallent at certain positions on offence, it is a complexe offencive scheme when run properly and you need a good and SMART QB to run it. Vick has shown that he is not able to handle running complex offences. Plus the advantage of the WIlcat is it’s unpredictability. And how unpredictable is a QB that runs 80% of the time? ANd I’ll go flat out and say it, I don’t like Vick’s caracter. Not because of what he did, although really do hate him for doing that, but because he has shown no remorse afterwords. Theres a reason why PETA and other animal rights orginisations refuse to run him in their adds, and it’s because he’s shown absolutly no remorse in his interviews with them.
I’ll pass on Vick.
by CanadianBillsFan on May 18, 2009 3:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Want the "No Huddle" or the "Hurry Up"?
Because if you meant the hurry up (K-gun), then I don’t and neither does the rest of the league. Are we so arrogant that we really believe the Bills are that stacked with talent from the players to the coaches to pull off something no one has been able to do since the Kelly and Levi? You mentioned the Colts , but even they don’t run the hurry up for a whole game. With radio transmitters in helmets, is huddling up or not really a big deal? Defenses are able to adapt to it, much like stopping the Wildcat. Also, defenders are much more athletic and versatile today than in the 90s. If you are expecting the same results, prepared to be disappointed.
If the Bills do try the No Huddle, they better be able to sustain drives and score TDs. Field goals will not do it. Last but not least, win the time of possession battle.
How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?
by Joe P. on May 17, 2009 12:36 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The K-Gun was technically a no-huddle offense, and I’m arguing Buffalo cannot do that exact same offense because we lack the tight end for it. Although the words are interchangeable, technically a hurry-up offense can be a 2 minute offense or a no-huddle(which is used the whole game). But if you say a team operates under the hurry-up it is thought that you are saying that team uses primarily a no-huddle offense.
Keep in mind that I am not advocating that Buffalo should switch to a no-huddle. I’m not trying to sell a car, I don’t have a personal stake in what Buffalo decides to run, I’m discussing the history of the no-huddle and how Buffalo now features personnel that might be able to run it and what others have said about Buffalo running it. I don’t think quoting Sam Wyche saying that we have talent at the positions is arrogant.
by pasaluki on May 17, 2009 10:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was not trying to single you out when I used the term arrogant, as many seem to think it is a good idea.
If Sam Wyche was so good, he would still be coaching. Hell, he couldn’t even hold down the QB coach position in Buffalo. Not that he can’t spot talent, but I just don’t think that because Wyche says it makes it so. Maybe my feeling can be summed up with this quote,
“Iron man football with this bunch of Daisies?”
IMO, there is a difference between hurry up (2min drill) and no huddle. The hurry up is a much quicker tempo, due to the fact most teams are running out of time and don’t want to waste valuable seconds off the clock. The K-Gun was much closer to this type of offense, but was run for longer stretches. The no huddle can be a slower placed offense than the hurry up, but also allows the offense to use up as much of the clock as possible (see the Colts) before snapping the ball.
How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?
by Joe P. on May 18, 2009 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Last but not least, win the time of possession battle.
We did – from nfl.com stats:
17 Buffalo Bills ToP/G 30:04
Only by a smidge, but we did. I did find it kind of strange that 18/32 teams had possession time of 30 mins or more. I guess if you have a bad defense as well, the other team can score quickly.
by syrbillsfan on May 18, 2009 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
but I was referring to if we would run the no huddle this season. The Bills offense can't afford to go 3 and out.
How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?
by Joe P. on May 18, 2009 11:29 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They can and will go 3 and out sometimes, but as the game wears on it should reduce the number of 3 and outs overall. I am not sure if the Bills had a problem with 3 and outs last year, but I know they didn’t have very many 10+ play drives.
by syrbillsfan on May 19, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Unfortunately, they did have several long, sustained drives that went for 0, or at best 3, points.
by thefourwinds on May 19, 2009 1:47 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sad, but true. That and we had to put J.P. on the field. I wonder how Hamdan might have done in those games.
by syrbillsfan on May 19, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Probably not much better. Hamdan is pretty much around just because he’s Trent’s best friend and actually does a lot to keep Trent grounded during the games. If you look at trent when he comes off the feild he goes to the coachs first, and then straight to Hamdan. I think Trent likes to have both the coach’s and another QB’s point of view. And hey if thats what our third stringer can do for us, then it’s actually pretty good.
by CanadianBillsFan on May 19, 2009 5:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome piece man! Really gets me ready for the season.
Lets go Bills!
by louiethegent on May 17, 2009 1:16 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
There’s no way the Bills, or any team, switches to a no-huddle offense. They’ll use the no-huddle from time to time, but we shouldn’t be expecting a very up tempo new-aged version of the K-Gun….the Stun Gun.
If the O has no success with the no-huddle early on, I doubt we see much of it as the season progresses….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on May 17, 2009 2:08 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
.the Stun Gun.
Whitner should have plenty of input for the offense.
No night spent pantsless is a wasted night.
by sireric on May 17, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Bills have been searching for an identity for 10 years now.
Too bad they already had it in the 90’s and lost it – hurry up offense, playmaking defense, dominant special teams.
They need to get back to that identity asap and at least look to be heading that way. They have the special teams down, drafted defensive playmakers, and have brought in the tools for the hurry up.
New York City Buffalo Bills Backers
www.nycbbb.com
by BillsNYC on May 17, 2009 6:29 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
well at least we still have a dominant special teams game.
by CanadianBillsFan on May 18, 2009 3:39 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
A lot of chatter on insituting the no-huddle
after Malcolm Gladwell’s David v. Goliath piece
Your uncle molests collies.
by 3k on May 17, 2009 6:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget that a QB on that Wyche team was named Turk Schonert.
Schonert has seen it implemented and done effectively. He has seen it take teams to the Super Bowl.
Edwards is smart enough to do it. The Bills have, at minimum, 9 of the 11 pieces they need for it to succeed. It’s not a hurry-up offense – we’re not going to try and out-condition other teams. The Colts routinely go no-huddle but take the entire 40 second clock to get in position and call their play. If a team tries to sub someone or they are on the wrong side of the line they snap it to catch them off-guard. The Bills would be similar to this and not the just run down the field type that the Bills were able to do.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on May 17, 2009 9:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I could see that happening. I just have zero faith in Jauron. He is our weak link.
by BuffaloChip on May 17, 2009 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How can you not have faith in Jauron?
He’s 2-23 against teams with a winning record the last 3 years and had an 0-6 record in the division last year.
That has success written all over it for this season!
New York City Buffalo Bills Backers
www.nycbbb.com
by BillsNYC on May 17, 2009 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But Jauron isn't coaching the offense.
The guy that is knows the system. How is Jauron going to screw that up?
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on May 17, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Look at the last 2 minutes before halftime of the patriots game last december.
by BuffaloChip on May 17, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Again...
How was that Jauron’s fault? If you can tell me why Dick Jauron is the reason we didn’t get a play off at the end of that half I will be glad to listen. What I remember is Duke Preston getting his panties in a bunch. Should they have called a pass? Probably. The wind was pretty unpredictable that day. The only reason we were even close was because Fred Jackson decided to be a man among boys. Why not keep handing off to him?
Seriously, explain what you mean and I will be glad to agree with you. This gameday recap might help.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on May 17, 2009 2:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree about Jauron being our weak link. You might not like the guy but he is a good coach. And even if we’ve went 3 straight seasons at 7-9, and last season was a huge disapointment, the first two season were almost mircular that we even got to 7-9. Jauron did a lot with NOTHING his first season here, then he did a lot to overcome a riddiculous amount of injuries 2 years ago. Jauron is a good coach.
by CanadianBillsFan on May 18, 2009 3:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m with you. The last three years Jauron went 7-9 with teams that had no business doing that well. Think of the major retooling of our offense this off-season. That is something that should have happened at least 4 or 5 years ago. I think without Jauron, say, with Mularkey coaching, we go 5-11 or worse two of those 3 years.
by syrbillsfan on May 18, 2009 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But he helped build those teams!! He’s had a lot of roster input and has been a part of the team that has brought in FA stinkers and draft picks that haven’t work out. He’s won 2 games against teams with winning records in THREE seasons! His teams have the same struggles every year (offense, time management, in-game adjustments, playing against top teams, etc, etc, etc), so why are we claiming he’s such a good coach??? He does a good job with certain areas of the job, such as player interaction and uh I guess that’s it, but overall, he just isn’t head coach material. He IS a weak link, guys, and his track record is a pretty strong indicator of that.
Jauron can do a good job of taking a turd and polishing it up all nicely. Unfortunately, it’s still a piece of &&&&.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on May 18, 2009 12:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
man
i used to hate it when kelly was qb in your no huddle. he used to KILL us. you have to have a smart qb to pull it off. not every qb can manage the contolled chaos of it.
by ncfinfan on May 17, 2009 9:10 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
How about a guy that graduated with honours from Stanford and had a internship with Synopsis before deciding to turn pro?
Trent isn’t your average football player that gets out of college doing the easiest classes possible. Edwards was well on his way to becoming an engineer before deciding to turn pro. I think he’s smart enough
by CanadianBillsFan on May 18, 2009 3:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Problem with the no huddle for this Bill's team
When Kelly ran the no huddle there was confidence you would have very few 3-and-outs.
This team on the other hand had a knack for 3-and-outs last year.
I am not saying we aren’t going to get better this year, but if we don’t get more first downs we are going to wear down OUR defense, not vice-versa. That will have to be carefually monitored, if we are only on the field consisitently on offense for a few minutes, that is going to be wearing on our D.
"It's that time of the year where all teams are involved in making some, to a degree, painful decisions." - Marv Levy
by Jason from OH-IO on May 17, 2009 9:43 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Great point
Our problem with our “bend but don’t break” defense is that they are on the field way too much. If we run the “no huddle,” and can’t string together decent length drives, our defense will be on the field even longer. I am an optimist, so I think the improvement of Edwards will allow the Bills to limit the 3 and outs. That was however, our achilles heal last year.
by hilliarddavid on May 17, 2009 10:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
How many 3 and outs did we have last year?
I am genuinely curious. I have no idea what percentage of our drives ended on three and out vs. other NFL teams.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on May 17, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I’d like some sources there Jason.
by CanadianBillsFan on May 18, 2009 3:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
It might be a slow start with it at first, but the effect of the prolonged no huddle attack is to CAUSE longer drives as the defense tires. As long as the Bills commit to it, the three and outs should happen much less often. Also, there were enough changes that to compare the ’09 Bills offense to the ’08 Bills offense would be like comparing the Bills to the Jets. Two totally different units.
by syrbillsfan on May 18, 2009 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What if our defense tires first?
How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?
by Joe P. on May 18, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then we’re in for trouble. Our defense does benefit in that department a little because they are smaller in the front 7. Not carrying the extra baggage that some of the other teams do. I was just thinking about how the Stellers had a front 7 that were all like 250+ pounds, even the linebackers. I think that is the kind of defensive front that would be most susceptible to the no huddle over time.
by syrbillsfan on May 19, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
WERE IS THE POSITIVE BILLS FANS
MEN OHH MEN IT IS ME OR JUST THAT IM BEEN TO POSITIVE THERE IS TO MANY THAT WE CANT DO OR WE WONT DO. COME ON EVERY ONE I KNOW YOU WANT TO BE REALISTIC BUT BEEN THAT NEGATIVE ABOUT OR TEAM IS NOT GONG TO HELP JACK EITHER , THAT WE CAN DO THE HURRY UP OFENSE THAT WE WONT DO THE K KUN THE SHOOT GUN THE STUNT GUN, The pistol the fire cracker, the bazzuka , the rifle ,the sling shoot, the one arm catapult . I really dont care what the bills come out with. even if is a field goal that we hate to see in the red zone. If it is a win at the end of the game thats what I care about . SO lets start supporting our team BILLS FANS . lets stars with positive thinking with our team and maybe it will rub off. IT start with us pronto, NOW, AHORA, THIS MINUTE , THIS IS OUR TIME COME BILLS FANS I KNOW WE CAN DO IT THIS YEAR, FAITH IS ON OUR SIDE THE WAGON IS GOING TO BRING GOOD THINGS THIS YEAR, JUMP N NOW BEFORE ITS TO LATE
by abayarde on May 17, 2009 2:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
BEEN THAT NEGATIVE ABOUT OR TEAM IS NOT GONG TO HELP JACK EITHER
Could not agree more, friend. :)
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on May 17, 2009 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Being positive ain't going to help either.
Plus, the Bills have been losers for a decade straight, fans have a right to be negative, especially when they retain a coach with 3 straight losing seasons.
New York City Buffalo Bills Backers
www.nycbbb.com
by BillsNYC on May 17, 2009 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
hen they retain a coach with 3 straight losing seasons.
In a few games Jauron’s decisions affected the outcome. For the most part Jauron coached up teams that were for the most part devoid of superstar talent. With almost anyone else, were going 5-11, 3-13 and not 7-9 the last three year. He had a voice in personnel decisions, but was not the guy who made the final call, so that isn’t on him. The stability provided by retaining Jauron provided the Bills with a platform for the personnel shift of this offseason. Do you think they cut Dockery, et al, at the same time they bring in a new coach? Does a new coach look DE at 11? I think if they brought in a new coach and staff, the Bills end up with Josh Freeman in round 1. Ugh.
by syrbillsfan on May 18, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What are you talking about?!?!
That’s a TON of crazy assumptions right there!! How did Freeman get involved?!?!
Jauron has implemented the schemes, therefore he’s trying to bring in players to fit those schemes. He does have a lot of say. Obviously not final say, but enough to have a major impact on the roster.
Why couldn’t some other coach have done any better? It’s not like Jauron’s teams have competed against or beaten many good teams. Why couldn’t we expect another coach to get in done in those games?
You pretty much contradict yourself saying:
In a few games Jauron’s decisions affected the outcome.
Then…
For the most part Jauron coached up teams that were for the most part devoid of superstar talent. With almost anyone else, were going 5-11, 3-13 and not 7-9 the last three year.
I’m confused….if Jauron’s decision making only affected the outcome a few times, how did he coach up a potential 3 win team into a perennial 7-9 club each season?
He’s a mediocre coach, at best. His biggest weaknesses are on game day and that’s the area we can least afford to have problems….
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on May 18, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Try to be realistic
We are a team that has the longest play-off drought, tied with the…. Lions, urghhh.
"It's that time of the year where all teams are involved in making some, to a degree, painful decisions." - Marv Levy
by Jason from OH-IO on May 17, 2009 5:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Being optimistic doesn’t hurt no one either. And it sure is better then running for the “Captain Pessimist” title.
Common man we’re trying to have a little fun here, no reason not to have a good amount of optimism to go with our realism.
by CanadianBillsFan on May 18, 2009 3:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
So what’s worse to think about: Another status quo season of Jauron, where maybe, just maybe they can break thru and put it all together. Or tearing down the team, rebuilding the entire coaching staff and then trying to make it work with a bunch of players that fit the systems that we employ now and maybe not the ones a new staff would.
I may have been in the minority then and now, but I thought that Jauron should be retained and I still think it was the right decision. What does pulling the trigger now do for us?
"Potential just means you haven’t done sh## yet"
by willgarr15 on May 17, 2009 2:57 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
The "no huddle" misconception
My problem with pasaluki’s original post (which Joe P. kind of touched on in a roundabout way) is that it wrongfully insinuates that a “no huddle offense” and a “hurry up offense” are interchangeable terms.
The Bills coaching staff is certifiably insane if they try to run a “hurry up” like the early 90’s Bills. Even if they score a few more points because of it, do you want our 245 pound defensive ends and 225 pound linebackers on the field for 35-37 minutes of the game? That’s not to mention that the key player on the Bills d-line, Stroud, is aging and has shown himself to be somewhat prone to injuries over the last 2 or 3 years.
The Bills play a quarter of their games every season against the Jets and Dolphins- two teams that are going to rely heavily on defense and running the ball. The Bills can’t afford to have major gaps in time of possession against these teams.
If they want to run a “no huddle” similar to how the Colts do it, I’m fine with that if that’s what they think Edwards will function best with. How often, when the Colts are running their no huddle (aside from 2 minute drills of course), do you see Peyton Manning take a snap with more than 5 seconds left on the play clock? Almost never. That’s not a “hurry up” offense, so we’d be wise to really start differentiating between the two.
Again- run a “no huddle” like the Colts, and that’s fine. Run a “hurry up” like the early 90’s Bills, and it’s a recipe for disaster. If they do run the Colts style no huddle, I would hope that people are wise enough to not use the Kelly-era Bills as a measuring stick, because it’s a much different philosophy.
by Make a play Whitner on May 18, 2009 12:38 AM EDT reply actions 3 recs
Once again I’m not saying the Bills should run anything, but if anything I’m arguing AGAINST the hurry up too, except I’m arguing that we can’t run it from a skill standpoint since we lack the T.E.
Basically the article gives a quick recap of the talent we added and then goes into a cliff notes version of the history of the no-huddle/hurry up. The hurry up was still used by teams all the time because the 2 minute offense was a hurry up offense. What Wyche brought to the game was the no huddle approach. If you say the Bills ran a hurry-up offense in the K-gun most of the time you would be right except when they were running to try to kill the clock, but saying the K-Gun is a no-huddle offense is true too.
Why I brought up the K-Gun to begin with is because if Edwards runs any version of the no-huddle, bills fans will draw parallels rightly or wrongly between the two offenses.
And maybe interchangeable is too strong of a word, but not in what I am describing which is the Bengals and the Bills versions of it. Notice the word hurry-up disappears completely when talking about the modern Bills and Colts. But in my opinion saying Jim Kelly’s K-Gun offense is a no-huddle offense is the clearest way to describe it.
Now regardless of whether or not it is a hurry up offense, the no-huddle still seeks to limit defensive substitutions off the field and confuse defenses.
by pasaluki on May 18, 2009 2:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough.
Just wanted to clarify the difference between how the K-Gun was run and how the Colts do it.
And I know that if they run a no-huddle, rightly (if it’s a hurry up) or wrongly (if it’s not), they’ll be compared to Kelly’s teams. And my point is they shouldn’t be compared unless the modern day Bills are going to try to pull off a hurry up.
I do also disagree slightly about how the no-huddle operated with the Bills back in the day. I don’t necessarily think it was used by Buffalo to limit substitutions as much as it was used because Kelly simply operated more comfortably at a breakneck pace. An added benefit, obviously, was that they’d be facing nickel packages on 3rd and 2. But I don’t think that’s why the ran it.
We have to keep in mind that the hurry the Bills ran had a relatively brief period of effectiveness. It certainly didn’t last as long as Kelly’s tenure in Buffalo. The hurry up excelled late in 1990 and early in 1991. Toward the end of ‘91 and in to the following seasons, the hurry up wasn’t the reason for their blowout wins- a clear superiority in talent was. After the league caught up to it, the Bills on a few occasions tried to stray from it- only to find that Kelly performed horribly when they did.
Limiting substitutions and confusing defenses (more the latter) were added benefits- but I think the primary reason Marchibroda concocted that scheme was because of the way his QB functioned in it, and secondly, the ability to have the then RELATIVELY unconditioned opponents gasping for air after 3 or 4 plays in 80 seconds.
by Make a play Whitner on May 20, 2009 12:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well done Make a play Whitner.....didn't see your post when I posted above.
How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?
by Joe P. on May 18, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good reply
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on May 18, 2009 12:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry for the back to back posts-
Something I wanted to add but forgot to- when the Bills hurry up was firing at it’s most effective, their o-line consisted of Wolford-Ritcher-Hull-Davis-Ballard.
Ritcher had been in the league, and a Bill, for a decade.
Hull had been a pro for about 7 or 8 years, and in Buffalo for 4 or 5.
Ballard had at least 3 solid years of experience with the team.
Wolford had about a half-decade worth of experience as a Bill.
Davis had a year in Buffalo under his belt.
Lots of continuity, lots of experience- and a lot of talent there. And those were primarily running teams that achieved their success on the ground through “intelligence” more than brute force. They excelled at running counters, and traps…two plays that aren’t necessarily the bread and butter of NFL offenses these days.
The Bills plan on starting 2 rookies on the offensive line, one newcomer, one guy playing a new position, and another playing on the opposite side. If all goes as planned, not a single lineman on the team will be lined up right next to a guy they played with last year. That matters. And it’s going to take time. Not to mention that we’re assuming Wood and Levitre are upgrades. They may be, but there’s no guarantee of that, especially as rookies.
So…if you’re expecting anything like the early 90’s Bills style hurry up, I think you’re going to be quite disappointed. No huddle is cool. Hurry up is not.
by Make a play Whitner on May 18, 2009 12:54 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
LETS KICK BUTT
SCREW ALL THIS WE , WONT DO THIS OUR THAT, IM COMING THIS SEASON WITH WERE GOIBG TO KICK ASS THIS YEAR AND FORGET THE REST GET IN THE WAGON BECAUSE ONCE IT TAKES OF ITS NOT GOING TO COME BACK FOR ANYBODY LETS GO BUFFALO THE BILLS ARE COMING TO A TOWN NEAR YOU SO BUY YOUR POP CORN THE SWOW IS ABOUT TO START LETS GET READY TO KICK ASS
by abayarde on May 18, 2009 6:43 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
SB Nation's home for daily Buffalo Bills coverage.
Related FanPosts on Buffalo Rumblings
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
