I don't like the no huddle

[Blitzkrieg]

To me, that is a gimmick, like the spread. We have a monster O-line, but if we go 3 and out in 45 seconds, we aren't using our strength.

I say use it on occasion, much like spreading the field, but we went into a funk and lost continuity. Line up and wear down the opponent, own the 4th quarter, and we wont have any finsihes liek we had at Boulder last year.

[Curly Bill]

Wrong assumption. If you are lining up without huddling the defense can't substitute, thus not being able to rotate bodies, also in making them play at a faster pace you tire them out faster.

...and you can go 3 and out huddle or not.

[badger]

blitz, just admit it - you were slipping out of your water flask for a second and the next second you know, OU already threw touchdown tight end. Are the quick snaps too quick for blitz, hmmm??? :D

;)










psst... i'm worried about how it's going to work out next weekend on enemy turf.

[1890MilesToNorman]

To me, that is a gimmick, like the spread. We have a monster O-line, but if we go 3 and out in 45 seconds, we aren't using our strength.

I say use it on occasion, much like spreading the field, but we went into a funk and lost continuity. Line up and wear down the opponent, own the 4th quarter, and we wont have any finsihes liek we had at Boulder last year.

Humm, Doesn't Blitzkrieg mean lightning attack or some such thing? Strange, very strange.

Edited: I looked it up and it is a lightning war.
Blitzkrieg (German for "lightning war"listen) is a popular name for an offensive operational-level military doctrine which involves an initial bombardment followed by the employment of motorized mobile forces attacking with speed and surprise to prevent an enemy from implementing a coherent defense.

Kind of like the no-huddle wouldn't you say?

[r5TPsooner]

If we had a great defense I wouldn't mind so much. But with this defense, it's kinda like TTU in the sense the D always seems to be right back on the field regardless if we score or not and we just not that good on the defensive side of the ball to be out there all day.

[soonerspudman]

I guess I've been watching a different football team. The no-huddle I've seen is currently the most dynamic, prolific offense in all of college football.

Let me know where I can find this undesirable no-huddle of which you speak.

[bri]

To me, that is a gimmick, like the Wishbone.

Fixed, circa 1968.

[soonerhubs]

Aye, but if we get behind, isn't it the No-Huddle that gets us back in the game quickly? (I suppose that's a two edged sword.)

[Curly Bill]

I'm not in favor of constant no-huddle, but I think it's a nice wrinkle to have.

[ouwasp]

well, I don't like listening to BBsr try and breathlessly describe a drive while the Sooners are operating no-huddle...I was away from my home for the first qtr saturday, I was so thankful to get to a TV...

[Curly Bill]

well, I don't like listening to BBsr try and breathlessly describe a drive while the Sooners are operating no-huddle...I was away from my home for the first qtr saturday, I was so thankful to get to a TV...

He's horrible regardless of huddle -v- no-huddle.

[Soonermagik]

I'm just glad to finally see that we're mixing it up.

After losing to Boise State and West Virginia the coaching staff has finally learned that we can't run the ball down every teams throat.

[jkjsooner]

Wrong assumption. If you are lining up without huddling the defense can't substitute, thus not being able to rotate bodies, also in making them play at a faster pace you tire them out faster.

...and you can go 3 and out huddle or not.

Plus, way too many people look at "time of possession" which is dependent on whether the clock stops between plays and how much time the offense takes between plays. Both are meaningless and in fact since defenses tire quicker than offenses the time between plays is advantageous to defenses.

[yermom]

I'm just glad to finally see that we're mixing it up.

After losing to Boise State and West Virginia the coaching staff has finally learned that we can't run the ball down every teams throat.

personally, that's what i was blaming the TCU loss on as well...

[adoniijahsooner]

Everyone speaks as though the defense is horrible; from what I witnessed, cincinnati only scored 2 offensive touchdowns off of turnovers, when the game actually mattered. One drive cincy needed 2 4th down conversions, so the d didnt do that badly. Remember itll get only better because of the amount of first year starters.

[r5TPsooner]

Everyone speaks as though the defense is horrible; from what I witnessed, cincinnati only scored 2 offensive touchdowns off of turnovers, when the game actually mattered. One drive cincy needed 2 4th down conversions, so the d didnt do that badly. Remember itll get only better because of the amount of first year starters.

Terrible is a bit strong. Inexperienced and inconsistent is more along the lines that I see.

[OUMallen]

The no-huddle is good, kreig. 52 points not enough??

[yermom]

i don't like the "no coverage on kickoffs"

[CK Sooner]

i don't like the "no coverage on kickoffs"

:D

[CatfishSooner]

there's always somethin to bitch about...

[CK Sooner]

there's always somethin to bitch about...

That's for sure..

[BudSooner]

Fixed, circa 1968.

Nevermind, you said it for me.;)

[soonerboy_odanorth]

To me, that is a gimmick, like the spread. We have a monster O-line, but if we go 3 and out in 45 seconds, we aren't using our strength.

I say use it on occasion, much like spreading the field, but we went into a funk and lost continuity. Line up and wear down the opponent, own the 4th quarter, and we wont have any finsihes liek we had at Boulder last year.

I would have been (but I'm not at all) tempted to agree with you if our offensive output was 398 yards and 50 yards rushing for the day. But we ran for 200 yards, with our backs averaging 'bout 6 bucks a carry.

No huddle gets too easily lumped in with the spread IMO. We were not necessarily in spread formations while running the no huddle. If you'll note, we lined up in power sets multiple times out of the no huddle, and consistently punched them in the mouth.

Our sputtering in the second quarter absolutely was because of one factor that Bob enumerated at halftime: We got greedy trying to bang some big plays downfield instead of staying with the rythm we had already established.

And, don't dismiss how important it is that we can run this offense with the new clock rules. It may actually give us more time to make snap adjustments and audibles.

[SbOrOiNaEnR]

To me, that is a gimmick, like the forward pass.


Fixed, circa 1968.

Fixed, circa 1905.

[anglachel]

I like the strategy of it. For a good offense it means more possessions and more opportunites to score. For a team like Ohio State it wouldn't make sense, they rely on their defense and want as few possessions as possible (in general). It tells me that our coaches see us as a great offensive team this year.

[bluedogok]

In many cases they ran no-huddle but snapped right before the play clock, that allowed for audibles to be called but put pressure on the defense because they don't know when you are a going to snap the ball, so substitutions are more difficult.

[OUmillenium]

And down the stretch they come...it's soonerboyodanorth by a mile!

[sooner59]

Gimmick, huh... What offense did we run when we won the MNC? Spread I think. Maybe the no huddle keeps the defense on its toes like the spread did and win win #8. Im not complaining until stops working.

[sooner59]

And on a side note...we can go from a spread to a bunch with a power formation which, like some people already noted, keeps the defense from subbing and confuses them. And we pose a mismatch.

[goingoneight]

FWIW... there is a little "gimmick" added to the game of college football this year called the 40-second play clock.

For those who are bitching about the up-tempo new style of offense... I seem to remember this no huddle style barely getting the snap off quite a few times the last couple of weeks. Now... I ask you... with what is quite possibly the best pro-set in college football, how many delay of game penalties would we have had with last year's set that almost every down waited until the clock was inside three seconds to snap the ball.

Me? I'm seeing a little growing pains on the left side of the line (the toughest side to play), but I am also seeing a lot more mature and improved line play with them being forced to be on their feet all the time. We were killing Cincy with the I-formation/Shotgun changeup this last game if you didn't notice. And with 10 guaranteed games ahead of us, most likely a bowl game and possibly a conference title, it can only expect to improve even more.

[starclassic tama]

good thing you are not coaching the team. our no huddle attack is going to be next to impossible to stop

[setem]

Nothing is good enough! I mean we make a change for the better and it's bitch bitch bitch!

With the new rules your burn as much clock if not more than with a regular O.

I was not a fan but I like it now. We look good running it and we are throwing up points galore!

I love the no huddle and we should run with it till we need to make a change.

[TopDawg]

It seems like quite a few other teams are incorporating more no-huddle this year. I like the way our personnel allows us to give several different looks without sending in subs.

We can line up five-wide with Eldridge, Gresham, Murray and two WR lining up wide and then go straight into a more traditional one-TE, I-formation with Eldridge at FB. That's fun stuff.

[SoonerTerry]

Humm, Doesn't Blitzkrieg mean lightning attack or some such thing? Strange, very strange.

Edited: I looked it up and it is a lightning war.
Blitzkrieg (German for "lightning war"listen) is a popular name for an offensive operational-level military doctrine which involves an initial bombardment followed by the employment of motorized mobile forces attacking with speed and surprise to prevent an enemy from implementing a coherent defense.

Kind of like the no-huddle wouldn't you say?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6IjBihUINIU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6IjBihUINIU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Echoes]

Honestly, I would be worried more about locking up the special teams. We have put up quite a bit of points in two games we have played.. So for me, it's so far, so good.

[Breadburner]

The only good thing about the special teams in watching the replay was, we had the coverage there to make the tackle they just did not get it done.......

[Blitzkrieg]

This is all over the place...... We won with the spread in 2000, great, we failed to win it all again with the spread and decided that we should go more traditional with a big powerful o-line and a running game complete with a tight end and fullback at times. Yes, the no huddle limits defensive substitutions, it also limits offensive substituions as well. We have the ability to go from a power running attack to a spread that few teams can match due to our talent and our offensive line having 4 seniors with over 125 starts. I like that we don't have to use one set all the time, I think we should throw the kitchen sink at opponents including the no huddle. I just don't like as a full time solution. I think you use it on 2nd down when you have a run stopping package on defense and we can split Murray out at WR and have Gresham on the other side. Use it as a spot situation that creates matchup problems, not as a base offense.

As far as quoting huge stats, does anyone really think we wouldn't have done the same thing last year against cincy without the no huddle? We put 51 on miami without the no huddle. Points and yards hardly endorse the no huddle, we can score points with our offense, we did it last year with a lesser team.

I've been watching MU the last few years running this offense, and just like we did in the second quarter against cinci, they go in spurts and that pressures their defense when they go 3 and out. The no huddle, IMO, needs a pace and rhythm to it. It is great when you have that rhythm, it puts the defense right back on the field when it doesn't.

I like it as a changeup, but to me it is not the right team and situation to use it exclusively. League play will be a lot tougher, and in those situations lining up and running downhill will come in handy in many situations. I always look at the NFL as a yardstick, and the successful teams don't use the hurry up except in situations. We have a rare luxury, and that is an exceptional o-line. We will score points is any set, any situation, especially agsint the like of cinci and most of our schedule. The real test will be in Dallas, the champ game, and the BCS championship game. We can see then if this experiment is really the right call or not. I have a feeling that if we are playing USC, the last thing in the world we will want to do is lengthen that game and give the other offense more snaps.

[Pieces Hit]

I like the ho nuddle.

[JohnnyMack]

I like it as a changeup, but to me it is not the right team and situation to use it exclusively.

It is something being used to change tempo and it isn't being used exclusively.

Would you be bitching if we came out and were running the exact same offense as last year?

[OUMallen]

This is all over the place...... We won with the spread in 2000, great, we failed to win it all again with the spread and decided that we should go more traditional with a big powerful o-line and a running game complete with a tight end and fullback at times. Yes, the no huddle limits defensive substitutions, it also limits offensive substituions as well. We have the ability to go from a power running attack to a spread that few teams can match due to our talent and our offensive line having 4 seniors with over 125 starts. I like that we don't have to use one set all the time, I think we should throw the kitchen sink at opponents including the no huddle. I just don't like as a full time solution. I think you use it on 2nd down when you have a run stopping package on defense and we can split Murray out at WR and have Gresham on the other side. Use it as a spot situation that creates matchup problems, not as a base offense.

As far as quoting huge stats, does anyone really think we wouldn't have done the same thing last year against cincy without the no huddle? We put 51 on miami without the no huddle. Points and yards hardly endorse the no huddle, we can score points with our offense, we did it last year with a lesser team.

I've been watching MU the last few years running this offense, and just like we did in the second quarter against cinci, they go in spurts and that pressures their defense when they go 3 and out. The no huddle, IMO, needs a pace and rhythm to it. It is great when you have that rhythm, it puts the defense right back on the field when it doesn't.

I like it as a changeup, but to me it is not the right team and situation to use it exclusively. League play will be a lot tougher, and in those situations lining up and running downhill will come in handy in many situations. I always look at the NFL as a yardstick, and the successful teams don't use the hurry up except in situations. We have a rare luxury, and that is an exceptional o-line. We will score points is any set, any situation, especially agsint the like of cinci and most of our schedule. The real test will be in Dallas, the champ game, and the BCS championship game. We can see then if this experiment is really the right call or not. I have a feeling that if we are playing USC, the last thing in the world we will want to do is lengthen that game and give the other offense more snaps.

Cincy coaches and players said we ran it great and had them gassed. OU coaches and players are quoted as loving it and it being an asset and well-run. Blitzkreig says it's a gimmick. I mean, you can argue your point all you want, but at the end of the day, 50+ points in each game played, tons of yards, and coaches and commentators think it's great probably outweigh our messageboard debates.

[Blitzkrieg]

We can outplay all but 2 or 3 teams in the nation. The formations don't matter so much when 11 out of 11 players are better than their defensive counterparts. The real test will be against a team that macthes up to us talent wise. This team was the #5 scoring offense in the country last year without the no huddle with basically every player back but kelly.

I think this team is a legit #1 right now. I want more than the way 2003 and 2004 ended. Maybe the no huddle is the key to getting over the hump, my personal opinion is that I don't like it being used this year and think it is a bit gimmicky. Time will tell, but 50 points against a non top 25 team don't mean much.

[badger]

Time will tell, but 50 points against a non top 25 team don't mean much.

The way the top 25 has been fluxing lately shows that just because a team is not top 25 now doesn't mean they won't be tomorrow - and just because you're in now doesn't mean you can stay in my winning this week!

Out Examples: South Carolina loses, is out. BUT, Illinois and UCLA win... and are out. :confused:

In examples: Clemson and Illinois lose in week one, but are still in, for losing to ranked opponents. East Carolina wins week one against a ranked opponent, but is still out :confused: then wins against another ranked opponent, and is further in than half the ranked teams in one poll!

Cinci, if they can find a rhythm later on in Big East play with another QB, will likely be another 9-10 win season and a low 20s ranking. This is, of course, assuming that these strange upsets continue for the next several months.

[TopDawg]

I don't have a problem with Blitz labeling it gimmicky. I just have a problem with the idea that gimmicky is inherently bad. 'Cause, for me, I'd rather be a national champion with a gimmicky offense than a 10-2 team with a traditional offense.

[adoniijahsooner]

I don't have a problem with Blitz labeling it gimmicky. I just have a problem with the idea that gimmicky is inherently bad. 'Cause, for me, I'd rather be a national champion with a gimmicky offense than a 10-2 team with a traditional offense.

If we couldnt line up in power I and run the football, then I would call it a gimmick; but when you are consistently running for 200, and passing for 300, that's not a gimmick, that is firepower.

[Theskipster]

I like it as a changeup, but to me it is not the right team and situation to use it exclusively.

I don't think you could ever find a better situation or team to run it with.

This year we have players that can line up and be a viable receiver away from the line, then line up and and run or block in a power formation. We can drastically change the type of offense we want to run every play without substituting and not lose much effectiveness. That puts the defense at a big disadvantage.

Get nine yards on a short pass from a 5 WR set with Murray and Gresham as receivers, then move to a 3 WR set with a TE and a running back and power the 1 yard before the defense can sub all their small DBs for their run stoppers.

[primetime43]

I love the versatility our offense has, but I'm curious to see how this new no huddle does on the road in a hostile environment.

[TopDawg]

If we couldnt line up in power I and run the football, then I would call it a gimmick; but when you are consistently running for 200, and passing for 300, that's not a gimmick, that is firepower.

The problem with the word gimmick is that it's got several different definitions. One of them is: "an ingenious or novel device, scheme, or stratagem" and another one is "A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick,"

There are others as well...I just tend to think of the no-huddle as more of the former than of the latter which is why I don't have a problem with the term.

[Blitzkrieg]

The wishbone was a total gimmick , but we loaded it with talent and won. You can do that with any offense, if you are better than the other team at it. Like i said, it's easy now because we are superior and playing from a comfort level. History indicates league play and games in December and January will not be that way. Will it work then?

[bri]

The no-huddle is a total gimmick, but we're loading it with talent and winning.

Do you kind of see where this whole discussion is going? :D

[stoopified]

I like the way we use the no-huddle,which is surprising because I normally don't care for that sort of thing.The key to OUr no-huddle is we don't always use it to GO-GO-GO.We can and did vary how quickly we ran our plays.Is it a coincidence that we have had very few offensive penalties fo delay of game or false statrt? I don't think so.

[CobraKai]

I'm curious why this is not teh right team for the no huddle. As was mentioned earlier, this is one of the few teams that can legitimately run out of multiple types of formations without changing personnel. Isn't that that absolute perfect offense for the no huddle? If it is not, then what is?

[bri]

I like the way we use the no-huddle,which is surprising because I normally don't care for that sort of thing.The key to OUr no-huddle is we don't always use it to GO-GO-GO.We can and did vary how quickly we ran our plays.Is it a coincidence that we have had very few offensive penalties fo delay of game or false statrt? I don't think so.

That's the difference between the no-huddle and the hurry-up. Most people don't understand the difference between the two, and that's why you get people calling the no-huddle a "gimmick" most of the time.

[Curly Bill]

I'm curious why this is not teh right team for the no huddle. As was mentioned earlier, this is one of the few teams that can legitimately run out of multiple types of formations without changing personnel. Isn't that that absolute perfect offense for the no huddle? If it is not, then what is?

You're right. Blitz is I think confusing no-huddle and hurry-up offenses. We are currently running the no-huddle some, but not necessarily a hurry-up. As skilled as we are across the board we are a perfect candidate to run the no-huddle to limit the defenses ability to substitute against us.

[ratedrsuperstar]

I liked the offense that West Virginia ran in their bowl game last season, the spread option. It made the defense for the other team look silly !

[Blitzkrieg]

I get the difference, and the hurry up would be awesome versus the no huddle. My issue is that we have versatility to line up from one extreme to another, power versus spread, but we limit ourselves when we run the no huddle to personell on the field.

The hurry up would be better because we could run on consecutive downs with a lead and really grind a defense into submission. People say the no huddle gives us more snaps, but when you sit on the line and snap the ball with 1 second, you are getting no more snaps. The best thing a strong O-line can do is line up and go on a quick snap, a defense has no rest and no jump on the ball.

Let's run the hurry up, not the no huddle.

[ratedrsuperstar]

I don't like the no-huddle / hurry up offense because Loadholt and Robinson get enough penalties when they have time to catch a breath, tired players this big are gonna have more false starts and holding calls as the competition picks up !

[Lott's Bandana]

Stoops has credited the no-huddle with trimming up our O-line some. This new scheme is great now, but the real benefit is coming in conference play, where defensive coordinators that think they have an inkling as to how to defend our offense, now have to figure out how to do it without making rampant substitutions. Stop us with what you got out there...

2nd and 3, Bradford starts under center, then goes shotgun/empty backfield, D'Marco into the slot. Whatcha gonna do now middle linebacker?

[goingoneight]

I liked the offense that West Virginia ran in their bowl game last season, the spread option. It made the defense for the other team look silly !

Somebody inform ratedrsuperstar that same offense managed three points against East Carolina last week, please.

[ratedrsuperstar]

Somebody inform ratedrsuperstar that same offense managed three points against East Carolina last week, please.

I could be a smart a$$ and ask if East Carolina's defense is that much better than OU's ?
But I'll point out that most of that coaching staff moved on to Michigan during the off season and the guy heading up the WV program now won something like 8 games in 3 years at his last HC job.

[sooner59]

I don't like the no-huddle / hurry up offense because Loadholt and Robinson get enough penalties when they have time to catch a breath, tired players this big are gonna have more false starts and holding calls as the competition picks up !

Duke! I knew it was you!

[OU_Sooners75]

I love the No huddle. 82 plays in Saturday's game! Hell Yeah!

More plays = more time out most experienced unit is on the field.

Edit: We just need to balance it out more on the run and pass attacks. sometimes slow down the nohuddle to take time off the clock, but be aware of substitutes coming in and out. I loved watching the quick snaps. It keeps big Phil Loadholt from jumping early. :D

[ashley]

What is better than to look at the defense and then call the play. Now you don't have to waste time changing the play as much.
Your guys don't have to go to the huddle and then run to the LOS.

[sendbaht]

"To me, that is a gimmick, like the spread"

That spead gimmick won a National Title in 2000 I believe.

[Blitzkrieg]

I say this killed our defense in the 4th quarter, just like I've seen it do many teams times before. It reminds me of 2000 F$U and how they couldn't get momentum going the whole game in the Orange Bowl. The Texas defense is not even the best we are likely to face, and we faltered at the end of the game and had no rhythm whatsoever.

I say shelve it for a week and run and run and run some more. Develop the run game then bring it back to life for the stretch run. Saddle up Chris Brown and start bruising peoples sternums and tailbones.

[A-M]

If we are going to go to the no huddle, we need to do it fast all of the time. Everytime we took 35-38 seconds to run a play, Texas was all over us. When we went with a fast no huddle, we made the plays. Why are we looking over at the side for 35-38 seconds before we run the play?

[swardboy]

I think the loss of Reynolds in the middle is the major thing that killed our D in the 4th quarter.

[Theskipster]

If we are going to go to the no huddle, we need to do it fast all of the time. Everytime we took 35-38 seconds to run a play, Texas was all over us. When we went with a fast no huddle, we made the plays. Why are we looking over at the side for 35-38 seconds before we run the play?

I noticed that when we audibled at the line, Muschamp would audible into the correct defense for our audibled play.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Here's the overarching problem - somewhere along the line, Bob has forgotten that defense wins championships.

Is all of the scoring nice? Yes. But, we didn't have a no-huddle offense when we whipped Texas 63-14 and 65-13 or when we shut them out in 2004. What we had was bad-as* defenses.

Quit jacking with different offenses and hire a dadgum secondary coach to replace BJW, and move BJW back to DE coach.

Yes, I understand this means not renewing the contract of former OU player Chris Wilson or firing him. I don't care.

What we need is the rock solid secondary and relentless pass rush we had from 2000-2004. Everything else is just talking out arses.

And, please Santa Claus, quit with the onside kicks and fake punts and other desperate measures. You don't surprise anyone anymore. We're not Boise State to where we have to rely on tricked up bullsh*t to win big games. You are ten years into this thing; you should have enough athletes to win on their ability alone. Just knock it the f*ck off, Bob.

[BoulderSooner79]

I noticed that when we audibled at the line, Muschamp would audible into the correct defense for our audibled play.

I noticed that too, and it makes me wonder if UT figured out our signs.

On the other hand, UT mostly just rushed 4 and covered with 7, so Muschamp may have just moved guys around to get into KWs head. We were snapping the ball with less than 5sec on the play clock too often and I think that gives the advantage to the D as we were rushed to get set.

I thought our O-line handled the 4 man rush pretty well. My surprise was that the UT coverage was pretty consistent and Sam was forced to roll out a lot after finding no one open.

My real surprise (and disappointment) was our lack of running success. Texas did not load the box like TCU and stuff the run at the expense of the pass. They mostly rushed 4 which should have opened some running lanes - especially on plays where they were guessing pass. But we got almost nothing.

[stoopified]

I f some of you have slept during the games let me point something OUt: You can run a lot of clock using no-huddle and OUr spread attack.I haven't checked the stats but IMHO the split between sub 2 minute drives and plus 4 minute drives is negligible.More importantly as Bob says TIME OF POSESSION is the most overrated stat there is.It isn't how long you HAVE THE BALL BUT HOW MANY POINTS YOU SCORE when YOU HAVE THE BALL.lAST TIME I CHECKED THE TEAM WITH THE MOST POINTS ALWAYS WINS,THE TEAM WITH THE TIME OF POSESSION WINS ABOUT 1/2 THE TIME.

[lloyd45]

Your offenses most powerful weapon is the no huddle. They'd be silly to not use it.

[tulsaoilerfan]

I think the loss of Reynolds in the middle is the major thing that killed our D in the 4th quarter.

U r correct; on the Sports Blitz with Dean the Dream and Holcombe last night, they showed the 2 key plays in the 4th quarter which were the Shipley catch to the 1, and the Ogoboyeaorueoutra 62 yard run which ended our hopes; on the catch Crow was covering Shipley, and on the run he took a bad pursuit angle and missed making the play; he wasn't the only one, but i'm thinking Reynolds at least is in position to make the tackle and the guy only gains 2 yards or so

[meoveryouxinfinity]

Someone in another thread posted this week's game winners and their running yardage stats. It was quite interesting to see that most of the winning teams out rushed their opponents--even if the total yardage was the other way around.

[lloyd45]

I've watched the game on my DVR three times. The single greatest reason OU lost the game is because your linbecker stud went down. Every big play after that he would have had an impact on.

[Curly Bill]

Someone in another thread posted this week's game winners and their running yardage stats. It was quite interesting to see that most of the winning teams out rushed their opponents--even if the total yardage was the other way around.

Being able to run the ball is indeed great, but your use of statistics is misleading and here's why:

1. The team that's ahead often starts running the ball more to run the clock
and cut down the possibility of a turnover.
2. The team that's behind starts throwing more and more to try and catch up
and forgets about running the ball.
3. This skews the rushing statistics in favor of the team that's ahead and
trying to protect a lead.

In other words sure the team that wins often rushes for more yards, but they often do much of that running after having assumed the lead.

[lloyd45]

spot on curly bill

[yermom]

the problem with that line of thinking is that if you can't run the ball, it's harder to protect that lead and shorten the game

see: OU 1999

[Curly Bill]

the problem with that line of thinking is that if you can't run the ball, it's harder to protect that lead and shorten the game

see: OU 1999

No argument there.

[JLEW1818]

Re : I don't like the no huddle


I don't like my life right now !

[The Maestro]

My deal is this: I want the best players to have the ball in their hands.

Best offensive players: Sam, Manny, Jermaine, Ryan and Joaquin.

NOT best offensive players (not being rude--just not the best weapon): our RB's running behind our OL. That nullifies Sam and our receiving corps, the people who give us the best chance to score which, um, is what offenses are supposed to do.

[tomtom]

1985 National championship with option wishbone must have been won
with gimmick offense.

[Blitzkrieg]

Texas scored every time they touched the ball to end the game because our pass rush died from exhaustion. We gave them more touches, and contributed to our own demise.