No huddle now?

[Parcells4Life]

With improved defense and this all star OL, any chance they go no huddle? This line out there for 90 snaps a game would be lethal.

 

[theogt]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

 

[Parcells4Life]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

Wouldn't they wear down faster if they had to be out there for more snaps? Who's going to stop them? Then in 4th quarter milk the clock and don't let defenses off the field.

 

[Chuck 54]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

EXACTLY.....it's about time, not about # of plays. You want the slow grind; grind em up; wear em down; keep the O on the sideline and out of sync.

 

[Jarv]

I like it, no huddle, just call the play at the line of scrimmage. I can see Tony now..."Hey guys, were going off tackle left...ha ha ha...try and stop it". RB runs for 15 yards...Lines up no huddle again.."Hey, were going to do it again". JPP slowly just walks off the field and says "I quit". Larry Allen, watching from home has a tear in his eye.

 

[texbumthelife]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

That's what I was thinking.

The problem with the no-huddle hasn't been the oline, from what I have seen. It's been Romo's ability to get in their and make the right read/call. Nothing has changed in that regard.

Honestly, I would rather they just do it how they did last season. I loved every second of it. Well, most of it...

 

[theogt]

That's what I was thinking.

The problem with the no-huddle hasn't been the oline, from what I have seen. It's been Romo's ability to get in their and make the right read/call. Nothing has changed in that regard.

It's not that he has a problem with making the right read. His theory from an interview several years ago is that if you wait until the clock runs down, the defense will eventually show you exactly what they're doing before the snap.

 

[Doomsday101]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

I agree. Pound the other team into submission

 

[CATCH17]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

I think it's good to pick up the pace at times and just overwhelm teams.

Allowing the defense to get set and match up personnel just seems so archaic at times.

I think there needs to be a compromise between what New England and Denver do and what Dallas does.

 

[CowboyRoy]

No. The exact opposite, actually. Control time of possession and wear teams down.

Agreed. Ground and pound. Exactly what we did last year, but this year I would expect some bigger plays in the run game. We were definitely missing that with Murray toting all the carries.

 

[CowboyRoy]

That's what I was thinking.

The problem with the no-huddle hasn't been the oline, from what I have seen. It's been Romo's ability to get in their and make the right read/call. Nothing has changed in that regard.

Honestly, I would rather they just do it how they did last season. I loved every second of it. Well, most of it...

Actually, the more you can do the better. No huddle will have its place. But not as the staple.

 

[Doomsday101]

I think it's good to pick up the pace at times and just overwhelm teams.

Allowing the defense to get set and match up personnel just seems so archaic at times.

I think there needs to be a compromise between what New England and Denver do and what Dallas does.

I think hurry up as a change of pace is a good thing, catch the other team napping as they try to change personnel groupings or just because things get stagnant and you what to change the pace. But even with a quality defense the more you keep them on the sidelines the fresher they are and the better they are.

 

[texbumthelife]

It's not that he has a problem with making the right read. His theory from an interview several years ago is that if you wait until the clock runs down, the defense will eventually show you exactly what they're doing before the snap.

I love him, but I don't trust Romo's ability to call the right play based on what he sees. It shows up when we play teams that blitz significantly. I think his only real weakness as a QB, is deducing defenses before the snap. For that reason alone, I wouldn't run much no-huddle and I think that's the main reason we haven't.

Once again, I am NOT trying to criticize Romo. Just stating my opinion.

 

[theogt]

I love him, but I don't trust Romo's ability to call the right play based on what he sees. It shows up when we play teams that blitz significantly. I think his only real weakness as a QB, is deducing defenses before the snap. For that reason alone, I wouldn't run much no-huddle and I think that's the main reason we haven't.

I couldn't disagree more. His numbers against the blitz are better than his numbers not against a blitz.

 

[Moderately_Askew]

Wouldn't they wear down faster if they had to be out there for more snaps? Who's going to stop them? Then in 4th quarter milk the clock and don't let defenses off the field.

I see you have been reading Chip Kelly's, Offense 101: Who Needs a Defense? coaching manual.

 

[texbumthelife]

I couldn't disagree more. His numbers against the blitz are better than his numbers not against a blitz.

Sure didn't look that way last year, but you're more into the stats than I am so I will defer to your judgement. Either way, I think it would be a mistake to go away from what worked last year and that was a grind it out style.

 

[Parcells4Life]

I see you have been reading Chip Kelly's, Offense 101: Who Needs a Defense? coaching manual.

You do it to protect the defense like last year, but with this offense you could get up 21-0 by halftime and then in the 2nd half close it out. Playing Princeton ball the hole game demands that you score every possession. Throwing fireworks early and then grinding the game down after halftime is optimal. Even the 90s Cowboys went to Irvin first and then Emmitt to close. It's the same thing with pace.

 

[Moderately_Askew]

You do it to protect the defense like last year, but with this offense you could get up 21-0 by halftime and then in the 2nd half close it out. Playing Princeton ball the hole game demands that you score every possession. Throwing fireworks early and then grinding the game down after halftime is optimal. Even the 90s Cowboys went to Irvin first and then Emmitt to close. It's the same thing with pace.

How many times did that backfire for the Eagles last year with a comparable OL and RB? I'd rather stick with the winning formula from last year.

 

[Parcells4Life]

The Eagles did not have anywhere near this OL. No one has seen this type of OL since the 90s. I just don't want to run into the game where it comes down to the 4th quarter against a team that it shouldnt be close with (i.e. Commanders) when this team has the talent to blow people out on both sides of the ball now. There's a difference between going crazy Philly/Denver pace the whole game and doing it just to get up 3 scores then use the big hogs to grind it out.

 

[theogt]

Sure didn't look that way last year, but you're more into the stats than I am so I will defer to your judgement. Either way, I think it would be a mistake to go away from what worked last year and that was a grind it out style.

He had a 124 passer rating against the blitz last year. Completing 69.4% of his passes and throwing for 9.4 yards per attempt, 14 TDs and 4 INTs.