Is the hurryup offense really good for us

[Vol8188]

Like most teams we use multiple tempos. We are not a super fast team that gets in a lot of snaps. We ranked in the 70s in plays per game last season.

Thread is misguided.

https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/plays-per-game

 

[ChattaTNVol]

Our offense actually slowed down a good bit last year from the 2 previous years.....76 plays per game in 2014, 76 plays per game in 2015, 69 plays per game in 2016

I don't think that's an accurate way to measure the "tempo" of our offense. For example, we scored more in 2016 than we did in the prior years. We didn't need as many plays but still there's a lot of variables that affect total plays per game so I think the best way to measure tempo is time of possession/number of plays. jmo.

In 2014 our time of possession was 393.08 min/977 plays = 24.14 seconds/play
In 2015 our time of possession was 397.00 min/988 plays = 24.11 seconds/play
In 2016 our time of possession was 356.13 min/896 plays = 23.85 seconds/play

We didn't slow our tempo. We've increased it in each of the years you referenced.

 

[jctenn1]

I am not knocking our offense or anything..and yes sorry we ran more no huddle than hurryup..but it did seem like we gassed on defense way to much..what happened to controlling the time of possession ? I just think if we controlled the clock more we could have won more..GBO

 

[ChattaTNVol]

I am not knocking our offense or anything..and yes sorry we ran more no huddle than hurryup..but it did seem like we gassed on defense way to much..what happened to controlling the time of possession ? I just think if we controlled the clock more we could have won more..GBO

We only run clock control is situational circumstances; the rest of the time Butch's offense is uptempo. Alabama ran more plays per game than we did last year but at a slower tempo. They also punted less than we did. There are, as previously noted, a lot of variables that affect the number of plays per game but tempo is time and we do have one of the top 4 fastest tempos in the SEC.

 

[jasonvol18]

I am not knocking our offense or anything..and yes sorry we ran more no huddle than hurryup..but it did seem like we gassed on defense way to much..what happened to controlling the time of possession ? I just think if we controlled the clock more we could have won more..GBO

You gotta have an offense that is built that way and designed to control the clock.Too many times in the Butch Jones era we just needed 1 first down to close out the game. More times than not we couldn't get the first down and teams got the ball back with a chance to score and many times they did. We just aren't built that way and that can throw off the passing game on down. And not many teams run that kind of slow paced offense's nor do kids wanna play in that style offense. Hard to put up numbers when you're running 40-50 plays a game.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

I don't think that's an accurate way to measure the "tempo" of our offense. For example, we scored more in 2016 than we did in the prior years. We didn't need as many plays but still there's a lot of variables that affect total plays per game so I think the best way to measure tempo is time of possession/number of plays. jmo.

In 2014 our time of possession was 393.08 min/977 plays = 24.14 seconds/play
In 2015 our time of possession was 397.00 min/988 plays = 24.11 seconds/play
In 2016 our time of possession was 356.13 min/896 plays = 23.85 seconds/play

We didn't slow our tempo. We've increased it in each of the years you referenced.

And none of those clock averages are fast. Taking 60% of the 40-second play clock (okay, 40-50%, because the time of the play is also counted in there) is not hurry-up.

Fact is, we were one of the more relaxed-pace teams in the SEC and in Division I in 2016. Think no-huddle is tricking your brain.

You're making KB's point for him, even as you argue with him.

 

[TucsonVol]

Horrible idea!

 

[StillaWaiting]

Oregon auburn ran true hurry up, ours is just call the play at the line once the defense is set

 

[ChattaTNVol]

And none of those clock averages are fast. Taking 60% of the 40-second play clock (okay, 40-50%, because the time of the play is also counted in there) is not hurry-up.

Fact is, we were one of the more relaxed-pace teams in the SEC and in Division I in 2016. Think no-huddle is tricking your brain.

You're making KB's point for him, even as you argue with him.

That sounds like gibberish to me. Can you rephrase? Otherwise I disagee with your "fact". I'm not arguing we ran less plays. We were ranked #11 in the SEC in time of possession last year.

 

[VFL-82-JP]

That sounds like gibberish to me. Can you rephrase? Otherwise I disagee with your "fact". I'm not arguing we ran less plays. We were ranked #11 in the SEC in time of possession last year.

Here, read this article, it might help: https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2016/11/7/13549506/college-football-tempo-pace-increasing

Basically, it says everyone's speeding up. The whole college game is speeding up. More offensive plays per game for everyone.

So if you see a trendline like the one you provided, it could be entirely the result of the college game in general speeding up. It's such a small change in value (0.3 seconds...over three years) that it's pocket lint.

As for what I was saying specifically, consider the numbers you gave. For ease of discussion, we'll round it off to 24 seconds per play.

Well, that formula includes both the time it took to execute those plays, and the time we intentionally took between plays.

Say the average offensive play takes 8 seconds to execute. That leaves us with 24-8 = 16 seconds of "standing around" between plays. That's about 40% of the 40-second play clock available to us.

No team that's in the hurry-up spends 16 seconds on average before snapping the ball again.

So what I was saying was this: your data helped prove KB's (and mine, and others') points: we were not in a hurry-up offense last year, except on rare occasion.

The no-huddle is tricking your mind.

 

[robow]

Hell I'm just not a fan of Butch's style of offense in general. Never have been and never will. I know full well he's not changing it and I know it can be a potent and explosive, but that doesn't change my opinion. That being said I hope we like hell we average 40 points a game this season.

GBO

Don't care if you change your opinion, but for the benefit of all, please change your underwear and attitude. lol

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

(1) We didn't typically employ hurry-up in 2016. No-huddle, sure. But usually not Hurry-up.

(2) We didn't typically go 3-and-out last year. Our offense was usually pretty potent. 3-and-out was a bigger problem in 2015, and even more of one in 2014 and beyond. 2016 was statistically one of the best offensive years in the history of our program.

(3) The hurry-up offenses in 2016 were running 85+ snaps/game on O. Six teams ran at that pace, led by Houston.

(4) At 72.4 snaps/game, the Volunteers were #71 out of 128 Div I teams in number off offensive plays per game average. So actually we're one of the more relaxed pace teams out there. The game has generally picked up that much, for everyone.

So bottom line is, I don't think we're a hurry-up team at all (though we were more of one in 2015, at 77.6 snaps/game).


SOURCE: https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/stat/plays-per-game

Get these facts out of here. We only like negative opinions with nothing to support them!

 

[VFL-82-JP]

Get these facts out of here. We only like negative opinions with nothing to support them!

Yes sir. Sorry.

 

[ChattaTNVol]

Here, read this article, it might help: https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2016/11/7/13549506/college-football-tempo-pace-increasing

Basically, it says everyone's speeding up. The whole college game is speeding up. More offensive plays per game for everyone.

So if you see a trendline like the one you provided, it could be entirely the result of the college game in general speeding up. It's such a small change in value (0.3 seconds...over three years) that it's pocket lint, especially when the game of football is speeding up in general.

As for what I was saying specifically, consider the numbers you gave. For ease of discussion, we'll round it off to 24 seconds per play, based on time of possession divided by # plays run.

Well, that formula includes both the time it took to execute those plays, and the time we intentionally took between plays.

Say the average offensive play takes 8 seconds to execute. That leaves us with 24-8 = 16 seconds of "standing around" between plays. That's about 40% of the 40-second play clock available to us.

No team that's in the hurry-up spends 16 seconds on average before snapping the ball again.

So what I was saying was this: your data helped prove KB's (and mine, and others') points: we were not in a hurry-up offense last year, except on rare occasion.

The no-huddle is tricking your mind.

You're arguing with a brick-by-brick wall.

As if it wasn’t obvious already, here’s what DeBord had to say about tempo toward the end of spring, courtesy of 247Sports: ““The tempo of the practice has been the biggest thing, just the speed of everything that way. That’s been interesting in a lot of ways. I’m just pushing players to go as fast as we can on and off the field, and also in their play.

“We’re trying to go as fast as we can. It all depends on the play and the tempo and all that stuff, but a lot of times we like to be 20 seconds or more on the clock (at the snap).”

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/tennessee-football/tennessee-to-push-tempo/

My point is the number of plays you run are affected by your 3rd and 4th down conversion rates, the number of times you punt, the number of plays it takes you to score on a possession, the number of possessions you have in a game, things like that. Again, my claim is that the number of plays per game isn't the best measure of "tempo" because tempo is a factor of time. It stands to reason you measure tempo as plays/time not plays per game because as noted so many other factors affect plays per game. jmo.

 

[Doberman]

The only reason to run a no huddle is if you have 11 guys you can leave on the field for an extended period of time which takes away/limits the ability of the defense to substitute.

Our problem last year was we ran a no huddle but I constantly saw us allowing the defense to substitute. We should snap the ball and catch them with too many men on the field and steal five yards every time they do ( assuming we haven't subbed).

If we substitute, I don't see the benefit of no huddle.

This ^^

 

[VFL-82-JP]

If we substitute, I don't see the benefit of no huddle.

You're right, limiting defensive subs is a big benefit of no-huddle.

And you're right, that advantage is abandoned when the O substitutes.

But the second big benefit of no-huddle is probably the main reason we use it:

By saving the time it would take to huddle, break huddle and line up, you put 5-10 seconds in your pocket.

You get to spend those 5-10 seconds, if you want, adjusting to what the defense shows you. Because once you line up ready to play, they line up as well. And start giving away their coverages, any blitz packages, and so on.

That extra 5-10 seconds allows the coaches on the sideline to see the D, interpret it, decide how to adjust to it, and signal in an audible.

...

Like you, I didn't see us benefiting from the substitution limits last year...but I sure saw us benefiting from this other advantage. Practically every play, in some games.

So probably that's why we do it, most of all.

 

[ChattaTNVol]

You're right, limiting defensive subs is a big benefit of no-huddle.

And you're right, that advantage is abandoned when the O substitutes.

But the second big benefit of no-huddle is probably the main reason we use it:

By saving the time it would take to huddle, break huddle and line up, you put 5-10 seconds in your pocket.

You get to spend those 5-10 seconds, if you want, adjusting to what the defense shows you. Because once you line up ready to play, they line up as well. And start giving away their coverages, any blitz packages, and so on.

That extra 5-10 seconds allows the coaches on the sideline to see the D, interpret it, decide how to adjust to it, and signal in an audible.

...

Like you, I didn't see us benefiting from the substitution limits last year...but I sure saw us benefiting from this other advantage. Practically every play, in some games.

So probably that's why we do it, most of all.

Added benefit, according to Chip Kelly, saves mileage on offensive linemen.

Chip Kelly became famous for the fast-paced offense he ran at Oregon, and in all four of his seasons as an NFL head coach his offenses have had the fastest pace in the NFL. But Kelly doesn’t think his offense is really all that fast.

“I don’t think we’re playing fast right now,” Kelly said. “So if someone said, ‘How are you playing offensively?’ I don’t think we’re playing fast offensively. I think we’re just not going back [to huddle]. We’re saving seven yards of run time for our offensive line because they don’t have to run back in the huddle, get a play called and then do it. We’re just calling it at the line of scrimmage. So I think it’s a lot of what Denver used to do when Peyton [Manning] was there. But there’s a lot of times that we’re under 15 seconds when we’re snapping the ball and getting the play off. So we’re not playing fast and we’re not calling tempo-type plays in those situations. We’re just calling plays.”

The numbers, however, say Kelly’s 49ers still have the fastest offense in the NFL.

FootballOutsiders.com tracks the offensive pace of each team, adjusted to account for situations when teams are running a particularly fast pace because they’re trailing late in the game or a particularly slow pace because they’re leading late in the game. And by those stats, the 49ers rank first in the NFL in pace, at 23.95 seconds per play. That is slower, however, than Kelly’s Eagles last year (22.21 seconds per play) or in 2014 (21.95 seconds per play) or in 2013 (23.38 seconds per play.) And Kelly’s NFL teams have always run a slower pace than his Oregon teams.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-fastest-offense-just-not-as-fast-as-before/

 

[KBVol]

I don't think that's an accurate way to measure the "tempo" of our offense. For example, we scored more in 2016 than we did in the prior years. We didn't need as many plays but still there's a lot of variables that affect total plays per game so I think the best way to measure tempo is time of possession/number of plays. jmo.

In 2014 our time of possession was 393.08 min/977 plays = 24.14 seconds/play
In 2015 our time of possession was 397.00 min/988 plays = 24.11 seconds/play
In 2016 our time of possession was 356.13 min/896 plays = 23.85 seconds/play

We didn't slow our tempo. We've increased it in each of the years you referenced.

So less than 1/2 second increase per play run. Alrighty then....we really picked up that pace.

All I know is what I thought I saw....a slower, more deliberate offense rarely ever went hurry-up.....which correlated with nearly 100 fewer offensive plays run for Tennessee over the course of the season.

 

[chargervol]

Seemed like the UT version of Hurryup is Hurry to line of scrimmage then QB stares at sideline for 5 minutes waiting on play call!?!?!

:blink::blink::banghead2::banghead2:


.

The guy above you is complaining that we don't eat enough clock and you're complaining that we take too long. LOL, got to love it.

The reason for the no-huddle is to deny the defenses substitution.

 

[KBVol]

The guy above you is complaining that we don't eat enough clock and you're complaining that we take too long. LOL, got to love it.

The reason for the no-huddle is to deny the defenses substitution.

Yes, if you yourself don't substitute.

I thought you also ran the hurry-up and/or no huddle to dictate tempo and wear out the opposing defenses. And ftr, I'm not complaining either way, just trying to correctly define our offense last year vs the previous couple of years. I never got the sense last year that a goal of our offense was to run hurry up/go fast like Butch said he wanted to when he first got here.

 

[Giveem6]

no its not good, especially like last year when our defense couldn't stop anyone, they were gassed the whole game cause our offense was 3 and out in 1:10.

Did you watch last season?

 

[OrangeByBirth]

Plays per game on offense is a dumb statistic. There is a huge difference in 72 plays with 6 possessions and 72 plays with 20 possessions. Time of possession is only slightly better since the real key is how long the opponent has the ball and how often then score. The bottom line is that in 2016 the defense was on their heels and the offense did little to give them time to recover on the sideline.

 

[MikeVol44]

NO....not as a full-time offensive approach....

 

[MikeVol44]

Plays per game on offense is a dumb statistic. There is a huge difference in 72 plays with 6 possessions and 72 plays with 20 possessions. Time of possession is only slightly better since the real key is how long the opponent has the ball and how often then score. The bottom line is that in 2016 the defense was on their heels and the offense did little to give them time to recover on the sideline.

ASK the BAMA players who had to defend 109 plays in the NC game last year how dumb it is....:salute:

 

[chargervol]

Yes, if you yourself don't substitute.

I thought you also ran the hurry-up and/or no huddle to dictate tempo and wear out the opposing defenses. And ftr, I'm not complaining either way, just trying to correctly define our offense last year vs the previous couple of years. I never got the sense last year that a goal of our offense was to run hurry up/go fast like Butch said he wanted to when he first got here.

Yep, it's for all those reasons.
I also agree on last year. Not sure the reason, new plan or circumstances.

Edit: We also get a look at the defense before making the final play call from the sideline.