All right football gurus...

[thunder5]

I've got a question that's been puzzling me...

I was watching the Steelers last night...I don't know how many of you watched...but I noticed something that I have noticed in the majority of close games that I can recall watching...

The Steelers struggled to move the ball for most of the game....but in their final possession they got in a "hurry up" offense and went right down the field and scored...

Like I said I've noticed this is so many close games...you know...how a team struggles offensively but then goes right down the field in the 2-minute offense...

My question is this...

Why don't more teams run this "hurry up" offense all the time?

And I'm not just talking about the no-huddle here...I'm talking about the "hurried up" no-huddle...

Why don't teams run a fast paced no-huddle like what we see at the end of close games as their norm?

From what I can tell it really throws the opposing defense off...and I know the no huddle does this as well...but most no-huddles still give the defense time to set up...

Why not install an offense that has the defense scrambling to line up on every possession?

 

[Cartervol]

Its effective because you can't substitute players as frequently. Defenses tend to play soft zone coverage against it, keeping everything underneath.

Some teams like the colts go into a hurry up at times, but they don't stay in it all the time. Not saying it wouldn't work, but defenses would just tighten up the coverage and take away the short slant routes and screens. Teams try to stay as balanced in the nfl as they can be. Some lean one way or the other. But you need balance to be successful. It would be very hard to stay balanced running the no huddle all the time.

 

[jakez4ut]

to run that offense you have to have a lot of faith in the QB, center and skill players on the outside as they are essentially coaching themselves.

Ben has been calling a lot more plays on his own this year, and it's something they started doing 6 or 7 games back to off set some of the pressure defenses have been able to generate against him.

plus, one thing most teams still want to do is win TOP. they don't want their defenses on the feild, and the no huddle hurry up works as long as you're getting first downs.......

no one wants a 35 second 3 and out. Keep the D off the field.

 

[BigPapaVol]

That success is often the result of a defense playing soft in an effort to trade time for yardage. The Chavis is a perfect example of its ineffectiveness in today's game.

The reason teams don't stick with it is that it would kill their own defense over the course of a game / season. Some teams try it, but most of those are bent on simply outscoring the opposition, defense be damned (and likely can't stop anyone themselves). Typical defenses would also eventually pin back the ears and start bringing the horses on every play.

Malzahn at Tulsa is a huge proponent of the no huddle system and has some books out about it. He has been reasonably successful employing it, but has never given a rip about what it might do to his defense.

 

[thunder5]

Its effective because you can't substitute players as frequently. Defenses tend to play soft zone coverage against it, keeping everything underneath.

Some teams like the colts go into a hurry up at times, but they don't stay in it all the time. Not saying it wouldn't work, but defenses would just tighten up the coverage and take away the short slant routes and screens. Teams try to stay as balanced in the nfl as they can be. Some lean one way or the other. But you need balance to be successful. It would be very hard to stay balanced running the no huddle all the time.

So defenses play soft in order to avoid the big play down the field? They dont want to get beat deep because that would give the go ahead TD and at that point in the game their offense wouldn't have enough time to answer? And that mentality in turn opens up the shorter routes...

That makes sense...when Baltimore played tight Pittsburgh couldn't get anything going, when they softened up on the last drive Pittsburgh went right down the field...like someone said, that type of prevent D prevents you from winning...

Another thing that came to mind for me was that the players on offense would become fatigued if they played at that pace the entire game and it would be difficult to get the entire offense on the same page at that pace for an extended period of time(i.e. every offensive possession for an entire game)...but my answer to that is these guys are professional athletes and shouldn't have an issue with either of those things

 

[thunder5]

That success is often the result of a defense playing soft in an effort to trade time for yardage. The Chavis is a perfect example of its ineffectiveness in today's game.

The reason teams don't stick with it is that it would kill their own defense over the course of a game / season. Some teams try it, but most of those are bent on simply outscoring the opposition, defense be damned (and likely can't stop anyone themselves). Typical defenses would also eventually pin back the ears and start bringing the horses on every play.

Malzahn at Tulsa is a huge proponent of the no huddle system and has some books out about it. He has been reasonably successful employing it, but has never given a rip about what it might do to his defense.

Has Malzahn ever had success at a high level?

I know he did well in highschool...and alot of people say he wasn't given the time to get it going at Arky...but it seems to me that this type of offense is neutralized by fast and aggressive D's....like the ones that almost every team in the SEC fields

 

[jakez4ut]

going no huddle or hurry up forces tempo for offenses......it's a nice change up to go to in the course of a game if your O is struggline, like hte Steelers last night.

i remember 3 years ago, TN was playing at GA and they weren't doing much in the 1st half offensively and came out in the 2nd half in the no huddle to force some kind of tempo on ooffense. it worked.

so, in short.......two reasons to do it.......1. force tempo for an offense to change or dictate pace 2. keep defenses from making substitutions and force a mismatch.

you don't do it the entire game because you simply can't afford to keep your D on the feild as long as you would if you did it that way.

 

[thunder5]

going no huddle or hurry up forces tempo for offenses......it's a nice change up to go to in the course of a game if your O is struggline, like hte Steelers last night.

i remember 3 years ago, TN was playing at GA and they weren't doing much in the 1st half offensively and came out in the 2nd half in the no huddle to force some kind of tempo on ooffense. it worked.

so, in short.......two reasons to do it.......1. force tempo for an offense to change or dictate pace 2. keep defenses from making substitutions and force a mismatch.

you don't do it the entire game because you simply can't afford to keep your D on the feild as long as you would if you did it that way.

I imagine it's hard for every offensive player to stay on the same page for that amount of plays too right(i.e. alot of busted plays)?

 

[BigPapaVol]

Has Malzahn ever had success at a high level?

I know he did well in highschool...and alot of people say he wasn't given the time to get it going at Arky...but it seems to me that this type of offense is neutralized by fast and aggressive D's....like the ones that almost every team in the SEC fields

it might be neutralized, but it's done the same way all prolific passing games are neutralized, pressure on the QB without getting beat deep.

Malzahn has enjoyed pretty solid success at Tulsa. Enough success that Saban invited him to the AL job.

 

[jakez4ut]

I imagine it's hard for every offensive player to stay on the same page for that amount of plays too right(i.e. alot of busted plays)?

well, you definitely increase the chance for mental errors......you do have to have a "smart" offensive football team to run that for any extended period of time.

but just about all offenses have one available to go go in a time of need.

that's the thing......w/the exception of the colts, generally going no huddle is the result of something......something seen on tape you think you can take adv. of, or and adjustment made during the game in reaction to what the D is doing.

 

[Cartervol]

So defenses play soft in order to avoid the big play down the field? They dont want to get beat deep because that would give the go ahead TD and at that point in the game their offense wouldn't have enough time to answer? And that mentality in turn opens up the shorter routes...

That makes sense...when Baltimore played tight Pittsburgh couldn't get anything going, when they softened up on the last drive Pittsburgh went right down the field...like someone said, that type of prevent D prevents you from winning...

Another thing that came to mind for me was that the players on offense would become fatigued if they played at that pace the entire game and it would be difficult to get the entire offense on the same page at that pace for an extended period of time(i.e. every offensive possession for an entire game)...but my answer to that is these guys are professional athletes and shouldn't have an issue with either of those things

Yes, soft coverage, keep everything underneath. Like BPV said, yardage for time. Prevent defense is ok at times, just not when the game is on the line.