Fast Break Offense

[DemsMyBoys]

I'd guess it had something to do with playing for John Wooden.

Yeah!

 

[Mainstreet]

Might want to consult with Mike D'Antoni formerly the coach of the Suns.

It sounds like a football version of seven seconds or less. DA's biggest downfall was a lack of defense but the Cardinals have a defense. Of course the Suns had Nash to run it. I'm thinking a football equivalent at QB could run it well such as Warner. Of course a lesser version should get the Cardinals some wins.

 

[kerouac9]

There's some problems with this offense. Oregon does it and is very effective but they also have superior talent. As Duck pointed out, inferior teams run the spread offense but not necessarily a hurry up offense. Where the superior have the biggest advantage in college is from a depth standpoint. So, it doesn't make sense to try and tire out the defense while tiring your own team in the process when the other team's 2nd stringers are much better.

As for the Cards, the no huddle is an option and could be utilized more often but it can't be the run all the time. What is going to happen when the Cards have 3 straight very quick 3 and outs, then score, and then 3 more quick 3 and outs? The defense will not only get burned out, they will develop animosity towards the offense for not getting them a breather. If the offense was guaranteed to work all, or most of the time, then, yes, it's a good concept. In reality, it's not going to work all the time and you're looking at shooting yourslef in the foot because the Cards would be actually be wearing out the strength of their team, the defense. Plus, Denver was coming back pretty strong at the end and that partly had to with NE's getting tired.

Also, Oregon plays maybe 3 good opponents a season. There is no Colorado or Utah on the Cards' schedule, last time I looked.

New England has superior talent, so they can run the hurry-up/fast break offense when they need to. Arizona does not have superior offensive talent.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Also, Oregon plays maybe 3 good opponents a season. There is no Colorado or Utah on the Cards' schedule, last time I looked.

New England has superior talent, so they can run the hurry-up/fast break offense when they need to. Arizona does not have superior offensive talent.

You mean something worse than scoring three points against a mediocre team could happen? I really don't see that we have much of a choice - it's gamble or roll over AFAIC.

Steve

 

[mrbyte]

The great news for the Cardinals is that on that day Ray Horton was two to three games ahead of Bill Belichick---Bellichick now has the answer, but he didn't have it ready then---it took what he saw in that game to motivate the change.

2. This also, when you think about it, could very well be the direction the Cardinals' offense now needs to take. Reasons?

a). Both Kolb and Skelton play better in the hurry-up. Kolb is always talking about "tempo" and this is exactly what he means.

b). The Cardinals can't run the ball effectively out of a traditional offense this year anyway.

c). The Cardinals have a defense that can support a fast-paced offense because it's strong enough to generate 3s and out or turnovers to get the ball right back in the hands of the offense.

d). The best playmakers on offense are the receivers---now more than ever.

e). This can slow down the pass rush by tiring it out---AND by giving it reason to worry about the running options, such as the straight shotgun handoffs, or the draws or the reverses....added to the variety of short RB passes, the flat, the circle, the flare, the screen and the longer sideline wheel route.

Mitch i love the idea but unfortunately I think
1. Whiz dosn't come here so he'll never know your ideas
2. Whiz really isnt that brave to change the whole axis of his offence and adopt something this radical. If anything he seems to want to move closer to a traditional offence.

 

[Cardiac]

Good stuff Gents.

Whiz is not against running a no huddle or hurry up offense, it's how he got Warner playing time when ML was the starter.

I don't see us going Fast Break offense for the entire game but wouldn't be suprised to see it early in the game.

 

[cardpa]

"The great ones always listen," NBA coach Hubie Brown told me and host of other coaches one day back in the early 1980s when we attended a Nike Coaches clinic.

Brown offered a salient example as proof. He said that in his first year as an assistant with the Milwaukee Bucks, he was assigned to coach the big men, one of whom happened to be NBA All-Star Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

"I mean here I was a relatively unknown coach barely over six feet tall who has been assigned to coach one of the game's great centers. Jabbar could have just taken one look at me and laughed. He never did. In fact, he chose to listen to what i had to say...and I learned right then and there that the great ones always listen---because they are always trying to get better...because they are always trying to come up with new ways to gain an edge on the competition."

Brown proceeded to give a clinic on the fundamentals of playing the center position that none of the coaches in the crowd had ever seen anywhere---it was so precise---every aspect of it, from the footwork to the body positioning, to the arm maneuverings.

When I brought this knowledge back to my high school basketball team---what Brown taught me enabled my smallish 6'2" center to average 17.5 ppg and 11.4 rpg and 5.6 apg---which garnered him All-League recognition. All because he had not only the fundamentals down pat, but the confidence that comes with having the competitive edge.

Fast forward to this past Sunday when the Patriots ran a no-huddle hurry-up offense versus the Broncos that was so fast and furious that they ran 89 plays, gained 35 first downs (a team record), gained over 200 yards on the ground and over 300 yards in the air which propelled them to a 31-7 lead---all this because Bill Belichick became fascinated with Chip Kelly's "Faster Show on Turf" offense at Oregon and decided to pick Kelly's brain on how he pulls his 52.5 ppg offense offense.

Kelly informed Belichick that the calls they make are single word calls---like "strike" or "whirl." Beliichick was thusly reminded of his first NFL coaching gig with the Colts in 1975 when the Colts actually made similar one word, one syllable calls.

The thing about the one word calls is that all 11 offensive players know exactly what the formation is, what the motions are, what the assignments, both blocking and routes, and they know the snap count. With one call, they are ready to go.

The other thing is---why has Oregon under Kelly been so successful at running the ball out of a spread formation and hurry-up tempo?

Here are the answers:

1. Running the hurry-up ensures that the defense can't switch personnel--- and because they are spreading the field, it makes it imperative that the opposing defense plays a nickel-type sub package.

Right there you have a competitive edge running the ball---because the traditional two down run stuffing defense is no longer on the field.

2. The defense has a much more difficult time running its blitz packages---because they have to adjust so quickly to formation that they don't know exactly where their personnel will be at the snap of the ball.

Again---competitive edge to the offense.

3. Then there is the fatigue factor---it's like turning a football game into a soccer game---all that running around---and having to keep the same players on the field much longer than any DC wishes.

Yes, once again---competitive edge to the offense.

So---you might be wondering what does this have to do with the Cardinals?

Actually you might be surprised by the two-fold answer.

1. When the Cardinals beat the Patriots in Foxboro---clearly Ray Horton---who had been targeting this game all summer---gained the competitive edge on defense in the game. When the Patiriots were having such a difficult time dealing with Horton's array of blitzes and pressures, Belichick had to think of a way to ensure that he wouldn't be outfoxed in this manner again---he at least had to come up with a counter, if not a total solution.

Now mind you---Horton was also smart enough to realize that he couldn't give his defense the competitive advantage in that game if he were to play the base 3-4 defense---instead he played a 4-2-5 virtually the entire game---and he had tendency blitz calls---off of formation and down & distance scenarios---and while Horton may not have been as accurate after the game in saying what he knew about the Patriots' tendencies, he sure was correct more often than not.

The great news for the Cardinals is that on that day Ray Horton was two to three games ahead of Bill Belichick---Bellichick now has the answer, but he didn't have it ready then---it took what he saw in that game to motivate the change.

2. This also, when you think about it, could very well be the direction the Cardinals' offense now needs to take. Reasons?

a). Both Kolb and Skelton play better in the hurry-up. Kolb is always talking about "tempo" and this is exactly what he means.

b). The Cardinals can't run the ball effectively out of a traditional offense this year anyway.

c). The Cardinals have a defense that can support a fast-paced offense because it's strong enough to generate 3s and out or turnovers to get the ball right back in the hands of the offense.

d). The best playmakers on offense are the receivers---now more than ever.

e). This can slow down the pass rush by tiring it out---AND by giving it reason to worry about the running options, such as the straight shotgun handoffs, or the draws or the reverses....added to the variety of short RB passes, the flat, the circle, the flare, the screen and the longer sideline wheel route.

Sorry Mitch this will not work. I will tell you why. It's not part of the system and the system works if the players execute it. Do you really expect Wiz to deviate from his system? C'mom Mitch you know better.

WE MUST STICK TO THE SYSTEM!

 

[conraddobler]

You can still run the clock using the no huddle. We used to run the no huddle with Warner and then he'd just stand behind the Center and not call for the snap until about 2 seconds were left on the play clock.

Several of us used to wonder what the heck was going on until we learned that the no huddle wasn't done to tire or catch the defense off guard but to limit their ability to inject different personnel packages.

A modified version of the no huddle isn't even a fast break offense, the point of it as you said is to prohibit substitutions.

To do this all you have to do is line up on the ball, there's nothing telling you that you have to snap it.

I think it's important to realize that the main goal of the thing is to get the defense on the field that you want then run this, and the best way to do this IMO has creative implications all day long.

Get the road grader defense on the field to stop a run then trap them on the field with their fat asses and then go pass attack on them, the possibilities are really endless.

What this really is IMO is a final evolution that exploits exactly one key aspect of offense.

Dictating to the defense.

Look at al the attention paid to time out management, clock management, setting up an offensive play late in the game by showing a formation a dozen times then running a different play out of it at the end, look at everything that's done to trick, counter or generally confuse the enemy but you're going to just lay around and let them substitute players when they want?

Never has made any sense to allow that.

Why doesn't it make sense?

Because the offense has an advantage, one adavantage, they snap the ball, they control the starting of the next play, when it's going to happen, the only logical thing to do is to maximize that advantage.

Take your best player package, any time you see that package optimized against a defense, even if the down and distance is on that play bad for you go for trapping the wrong defense on the field, pass the ball, get a first down, change it up so now the wrong defense is on the field and never let em off the rest of the drive, sometimes you wait all the time to snap the ball a few times you snap it when you line up, a few times somewhere in the middle, let them NEVER know what the hell is comming next and you retain your primary advantage on them.

Giving it back to them by sticking to an outdated concept of huddling is STOOPID.

For one thing the huddle was designed as time for the QB to figure out what to call the next play or have it signaled in, now the OC can simply tell the QB in his helmet.

Couple that with one word play calls and you're set you don't NEED to huddle, and since it's to your advantage NOT to give the defense that luxury, WHY GIVE IT TO THEM?

New England has already let the cat out of the bag, huddling is basically going to die, there's no reason to do it anymore.

I can see it going to a point where you would possibly in the middle of the drive substitute some players, giving the defense time to adjust but even if you do this because a RB is tired or something you can go right back to not huddling again because on every play it's best if you don't.

It doesn't even really matter if you have the best possible matchup of players, the control of when the ball is snapped is a big deal and should be treated as such.

 

[Garthshort]

Mitch, agree, agree, agree. Sunday will be interesting, keeping in mind the coaches have had EXTRA time to gameplan.

 

[JeffGollin]

...Oregon plays maybe 3 good opponents a season...

That's why they're ranked #2 in the nation.

...New England has superior talent, so they can run the hurry-up/fast break offense when they need to. Arizona does not have superior offensive talent.

Agree (sort of) - I'm not sure "superior talent" is the sole factor in making a fast-break offense click, but do suspect that a team needs the right kind of players (physically but mostly mentally) to execute it. Cards may lack the right types of players.

Biggest reason I'd like to see us run the fast-break is, so that on each offensive down, we get to guess what the giant flash-cards on the sidelines mean.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

That's why they're ranked #2 in the nation.


Agree (sort of) - I'm not sure "superior talent" is the sole factor in making a fast-break offense click, but do suspect that a team needs the right kind of players (physically but mostly mentally) to execute it. Cards may lack the right types of players.

Biggest reason I'd like to see us run the fast-break is, so that on each offensive down, we get to guess what the giant flash-cards on the sidelines mean.

Seeing the way people run down Whiz's offense and say Miller's play calling is ignorant, it shouldn't be too hard to guess. They probably only have 1 card, on 1 side it says PASS, the other says RUN .

 

[Early]

I have been thinking for long time if this would work. I was thinking about using numbers instead of single words, but similar concept. I have a few tricks on how to call any play in a playbook with a single double digit number. And numbers changing from play to play so that defenses would never ever guess them. Thus, play 55 on this play is another number on a different play. Defenses could listen all they want, without help. Also it can still be done faster, alot faster, than what Patriots did against Denver. It can be done with smaller lineman that on strech zone plays would completely wear down a defense if this was done in this manner.

Imagine if Houston picks this up. Double Fosters yardage, defenses would not be able to come back in a position.

Counter? Defenses would be forced to take out their big nose and tackles and play lineman with a better stamina. Offensive counter employs ability to play smash mouth football inside, with power blocking. This kind of football has been gone after the teams started using the 3-4 and the nose tackles so efficiently. With smaller defensive lineman, it will again be a solution for good yardage.

I think this concept has just started and will evolve more. Its logical and simple next step to where football is headed. We will see defenses getting tired and the smashmouth football renaissance following just after. Smaller Lineman, both offensive and defensive, will be preferred in future, just like in the old days. Having someone on the field without stamina, is nott going to be favorable against these offenses.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

I remember Whiz being questioned about running the no huddle offense and he gave some half ass answer about how it would put too much pressure on their own defense. The problem I have with that answer is that you can look at teams in the past like the Bills of the 90s or the Colts of the 2000s. They both effectively ran a no huddle offense and had great success with it. Will it be as effective as it would be with Manning? No, but with our defense it would be good enough to win games and even win some games comfortably. Fact is sometimes coaches need to take chances and maybe even think outside the box to be successful and to this point Whiz hasn't been willing to do that.

 

[john h]

"The great ones always listen," NBA coach Hubie Brown told me and host of other coaches one day back in the early 1980s when we attended a Nike Coaches clinic.

Brown offered a salient example as proof. He said that in his first year as an assistant with the Milwaukee Bucks, he was assigned to coach the big men, one of whom happened to be NBA All-Star Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

"I mean here I was a relatively unknown coach barely over six feet tall who has been assigned to coach one of the game's great centers. Jabbar could have just taken one look at me and laughed. He never did. In fact, he chose to listen to what i had to say...and I learned right then and there that the great ones always listen---because they are always trying to get better...because they are always trying to come up with new ways to gain an edge on the competition."

Brown proceeded to give a clinic on the fundamentals of playing the center position that none of the coaches in the crowd had ever seen anywhere---it was so precise---every aspect of it, from the footwork to the body positioning, to the arm maneuverings.

When I brought this knowledge back to my high school basketball team---what Brown taught me enabled my smallish 6'2" center to average 17.5 ppg and 11.4 rpg and 5.6 apg---which garnered him All-League recognition. All because he had not only the fundamentals down pat, but the confidence that comes with having the competitive edge.

Fast forward to this past Sunday when the Patriots ran a no-huddle hurry-up offense versus the Broncos that was so fast and furious that they ran 89 plays, gained 35 first downs (a team record), gained over 200 yards on the ground and over 300 yards in the air which propelled them to a 31-7 lead---all this because Bill Belichick became fascinated with Chip Kelly's "Faster Show on Turf" offense at Oregon and decided to pick Kelly's brain on how he pulls his 52.5 ppg offense offense.

Kelly informed Belichick that the calls they make are single word calls---like "strike" or "whirl." Beliichick was thusly reminded of his first NFL coaching gig with the Colts in 1975 when the Colts actually made similar one word, one syllable calls.

The thing about the one word calls is that all 11 offensive players know exactly what the formation is, what the motions are, what the assignments, both blocking and routes, and they know the snap count. With one call, they are ready to go.

The other thing is---why has Oregon under Kelly been so successful at running the ball out of a spread formation and hurry-up tempo?

Here are the answers:

1. Running the hurry-up ensures that the defense can't switch personnel--- and because they are spreading the field, it makes it imperative that the opposing defense plays a nickel-type sub package.

Right there you have a competitive edge running the ball---because the traditional two down run stuffing defense is no longer on the field.

2. The defense has a much more difficult time running its blitz packages---because they have to adjust so quickly to formation that they don't know exactly where their personnel will be at the snap of the ball.

Again---competitive edge to the offense.

3. Then there is the fatigue factor---it's like turning a football game into a soccer game---all that running around---and having to keep the same players on the field much longer than any DC wishes.

Yes, once again---competitive edge to the offense.

So---you might be wondering what does this have to do with the Cardinals?

Actually you might be surprised by the two-fold answer.

1. When the Cardinals beat the Patriots in Foxboro---clearly Ray Horton---who had been targeting this game all summer---gained the competitive edge on defense in the game. When the Patiriots were having such a difficult time dealing with Horton's array of blitzes and pressures, Belichick had to think of a way to ensure that he wouldn't be outfoxed in this manner again---he at least had to come up with a counter, if not a total solution.

Now mind you---Horton was also smart enough to realize that he couldn't give his defense the competitive advantage in that game if he were to play the base 3-4 defense---instead he played a 4-2-5 virtually the entire game---and he had tendency blitz calls---off of formation and down & distance scenarios---and while Horton may not have been as accurate after the game in saying what he knew about the Patriots' tendencies, he sure was correct more often than not.

The great news for the Cardinals is that on that day Ray Horton was two to three games ahead of Bill Belichick---Bellichick now has the answer, but he didn't have it ready then---it took what he saw in that game to motivate the change.

2. This also, when you think about it, could very well be the direction the Cardinals' offense now needs to take. Reasons?

a). Both Kolb and Skelton play better in the hurry-up. Kolb is always talking about "tempo" and this is exactly what he means.

b). The Cardinals can't run the ball effectively out of a traditional offense this year anyway.

c). The Cardinals have a defense that can support a fast-paced offense because it's strong enough to generate 3s and out or turnovers to get the ball right back in the hands of the offense.

d). The best playmakers on offense are the receivers---now more than ever.

e). This can slow down the pass rush by tiring it out---AND by giving it reason to worry about the running options, such as the straight shotgun handoffs, or the draws or the reverses....added to the variety of short RB passes, the flat, the circle, the flare, the screen and the longer sideline wheel route.

Great article Mitch. I have been a convert to a no huddle fast offense since Peyton Manning started using it. All the advantages of this offense are so obvious I often wonder why more teams are not into it. Of course Peyton is so darn smart he needs no calls from the sidelines and sometimes changes the call at the LOFS 4-5 times or more. He souds like he is reading outloud War & Peace to the troops. I sort of thought you had to have a smart guy like a Manning or Warner to run this but with the one word call from the sideline it makes it more possible for even a real smart rookie. Warner further convinced me with his no huddle fast paced offense. Like Manning he could change his calls at the line several times and was a genius at reading defenses. He could get rid of the ball fast and had the courage to stand in there and take the hit. Manning did not often have to do that. Maybe all this started with Warner and the greatest show on earth in St Louis. They turned the fast pass to the sideline into a running game yet no other teams seemed to have tried to imitate that. I would like to eventually see the Cards change to a no huddle offense but at the moment I do not think we have the personnel especially at QB and tackle positions. It seems such a no brain er when you can prevent the defense from making changes and not being able to make adjustments from looking over what people you change. The question is why do not other NFL teams adapt to this? Since some colleges are now using it successfully the QBs coming out of college have sometimes used it their entire career. I recently read that the West Coast Offense is starting to fade into obscurity. I guess over time the defenses can make their own adjustments to most anything. Not being able to change personnel or adjust to fast deployments (change of play calls) sounds like a military strategy. When I watch these no huddles it seems like the QB has all day standing out there making numerous play changes, looking over the defense and confusing the defense. I am not sure how you adjust to this but it also seems you need a very smart QB to run it. One who is great at reading defenses and making the right adjustments on play calls. I read the Luck has almost a photographic memory. Sounds like the right kind of guy for such an offense. I think this was a very time appropriate article of yours. I hope our leaders read your stuff. It seems some coaches are very reluctant to change what they learned years ago and will die with the game plan they have always used.

 

[Russ Smith]

I remember Whiz being questioned about running the no huddle offense and he gave some half ass answer about how it would put too much pressure on their own defense. The problem I have with that answer is that you can look at teams in the past like the Bills of the 90s or the Colts of the 2000s. They both effectively ran a no huddle offense and had great success with it. Will it be as effective as it would be with Manning? No, but with our defense it would be good enough to win games and even win some games comfortably. Fact is sometimes coaches need to take chances and maybe even think outside the box to be successful and to this point Whiz hasn't been willing to do that.

The problem is Buffalo's coach also famously said the downside to the no huddle was it hurt his defense. Said it repeatedly during the Jim Kelly years.

If you run it as others are suggesting to stop them subbing, but not necessarily in a rush, then maybe it doesn't harm the defense so much.

It's the quick turnarounds that's the problem the defense can't rest.

 

[conraddobler]

The problem is Buffalo's coach also famously said the downside to the no huddle was it hurt his defense. Said it repeatedly during the Jim Kelly years.

If you run it as others are suggesting to stop them subbing, but not necessarily in a rush, then maybe it doesn't harm the defense so much.

It's the quick turnarounds that's the problem the defense can't rest.

The entire point of it should be simply to dictate to the defense giving you that edge, what you do with the thing after that would be up to the OC and HC.

Sometimes you could hurry, most times I think you're just trying to force the defense to stay on the field as is.

 

[JC_AZ]

I think constantly giving the defense a short field to work with would tire them out more than playng with a lead... the no huddle is the ONLY thing our offense has done that works ('works' in the RELATIVE context)

 

[Russ Smith]

I think constantly giving the defense a short field to work with would tire them out more than playng with a lead... the no huddle is the ONLY thing our offense has done that works ('works' in the RELATIVE context)

Yep, Im not against if if we do as others have said and use the clock.

It's the 3 and outs in under a minute that destroy your defense over time.

I agree Kolb seems more comfortable in it and with Williams out I expect to see more no huddle since from what I read, Williams was the reason we weren't doing it. He wasn't far enough along in his development to do it. Not sure why but that's what they said.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I'm with you Mitch, 100%.

I'm a pass, pass, pass kind of guy, and I've never really been bothered that we don't run the ball. And with LSH getting more snaps and Smith being a sensational pass blocker, it actually fits to the strengths of the personnel.

 

[THESMEL]

Whiz is back to Glanville - with or without cris Miller

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/atl/1992.htm

 

[Duckjake]

I'm with you Mitch, 100%.

I'm a pass, pass, pass kind of guy, and I've never really been bothered that we don't run the ball. And with LSH getting more snaps and Smith being a sensational pass blocker, it actually fits to the strengths of the personnel.

Why not? 2008/9 Super Bowl Steelers ran 26 times for 58 yards*. 2009/10 Super Bowl Saints ran the ball 18 times for 51 yards. 2010/11 SB Packers ran the ball 13 times for 50 yards.

We held them to 2.2 yards per carry rushing and still lost.

 

[Seandonic]

Great write up Mitch. The hurry up "fast break" offense is the way to go for this team. I personally have been saying this for weeks now.

 

[THESMEL]

well

well lets start with the world record 17 sacks in the last 2 games? Kolb's bloody mouth and a broken Skelton- just this year - 60 drop backs 9 sacks and a fumble?

Get a grip. No Oline holds up to this game plan.

Why not? 2008/9 Super Bowl Steelers ran 26 times for 58 yards*. 2009/10 Super Bowl Saints ran the ball 18 times for 51 yards. 2010/11 SB Packers ran the ball 13 times for 50 yards.

We held them to 2.2 yards per carry rushing and still lost.