Bills 4 wide, 1 RB base set?

[Coach Sal]

Part of my early may NFL rumors and news. Some other stuff from around the league (including all AFC East teams) everyone may be interested in, too:

http://www.salsports.com/NFLMayUpdate.htm (http://www.salsports.com/NFLMayUpdate.htm)

[OpIv37]

4 WR's with two rookies on the OL and an inexperienced QB? That sounds very Gilbride-like.

I'm also not sold on the no huddle idea. Our D frequently gave up long drives and lost the TOP battle last year. Even in its' K-Gun heyday, the no-huddle often left the D on the field too long.

[venis2k1]

Spread em wide...best way to slow down pass rushing LBs is to get em off the field.

[trapezeus]

if edwards knock is he can't throw the long ball, then i think going no huddle is going to help him. He shows he can hit the short pass and intermediate pass even with a rush. If he has more options and can get mismatches from getting personnel changes from the D, this has a chance to be very successful for the first half of the season. once the weather changes, we'll see if the knock on edwards arm strength are warranted.

also, edwards has run the 2 minute drill very well in his short time.if it helps get defenses off their game and mess up their constanting stopping of a predictable buffalo O, I'm all for this.

[justasportsfan]

Our D frequently gave up long drives and lost the TOP battle last year. Even in its' K-Gun heyday, the no-huddle often left the D on the field too long.
So what? We have high motor DE's.

[Lexwhat]

4 WR's with two rookies on the OL and an inexperienced QB? That sounds very Gilbride-like.

I'm also not sold on the no huddle idea. Our D frequently gave up long drives and lost the TOP battle last year. Even in its' K-Gun heyday, the no-huddle often left the D on the field too long.

What we've been doing for the past few years hasen't worked either. A no huddle offense CAN'T be any worse than 1-2-3 out (which is what the Bills do too often).

Our offense has been in the bottom third of the league that entire time. I am all for trying something new.

[TigerJ]

I think it's very much worth exploring. The no huddle does not have to be run as a hurry up offense, nor does it have to be done as a big play offense. It can be run at a slow pace and used as a ball control offense. When thus run, you may give up some of the benefits of tirng out the defense, but you still retain the advantages of preventing defensive substitutions, and thus having much more control over matchups. I would like to see the Bills use some different personnel packages in the no huddle too, instead of three WRs and Nelson split wide. I think they could run it with Lynch and Jackson on the field at the same time. Jackson could line up as a WR, or in the backfield with Lynch. With my limited technical knowledge of offensive schemes, I think it would only add to the matchup headaches fro the defense.

[Coach Sal]

By the way, Nelson being the 4th wide also will allow the Bills to move him tight if and when they need to, creating the "normal" 3 WR; 1 TE; 1 RB set.

Nelson's the key.

[Dr. Lecter]

4 WR's with two rookies on the OL and an inexperienced QB? That sounds very Gilbride-like.

I'm also not sold on the no huddle idea. Our D frequently gave up long drives and lost the TOP battle last year. Even in its' K-Gun heyday, the no-huddle often left the D on the field too long.

They did not lose the TOP battle last year. The offense averaged 30:04 per game.

Link. (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2008&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go)

[madness]

You don't sit back and let a 3-4 defense attack you and hope for the best. Make those 3-4 LB's cover!

We have the playmakers needed to make this offense work. Evans and Owens on the outside and a handful of variations between Reed, Parrish, Nelson, Jackson or Lynch on the inside.

The bar has been set and this offense better be nothing less than explosive by mid season. Turk is going into his second year and this is his biggest chance to show he deserves to be in this league. A top 15 offense will be at least expected at this point.

[OpIv37]

They did not lose the TOP battle last year. The offense averaged 30:04 per game.

Link. (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2008&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go)

Did you or did you not see our D give up 7 minute drives last year? In one game, they gave up a 9 minute opening drive. 9!!!!!

And they usually have to go right back on the field cuz the O pulls a 3 and out. If we run the no-huddle, they'll be going right back on the field regardless if we score or go 3 and out.

They won the TOP battle by a mere 4 seconds. If we were running the no-huddle, our scoring drives would have been much shorter and we would NOT have won the TOP battle.

[FlyingDutchman]

They should go with a change of pace offense where they huddle up at times, and then just go into a no huddle to keep defenses off balance. This would allow our defense to rest up at times

[Oaf]

Any set that keeps the pitful H-back/FB position off the field.

I would also like to see a lot of 2-back formations with Lynch and Jackson in the pro set and Reed/Nelson/Fine at that flex spot (though this might be a tell).

[OpIv37]

What we've been doing for the past few years hasen't worked either. A no huddle offense CAN'T be any worse than 1-2-3 out (which is what the Bills do too often).

Our offense has been in the bottom third of the league that entire time. I am all for trying something new.

the one thing I will say is that the Bills did seem to be slightly more effective in the 2 min drill than they were in their regular offense, so it can't hurt. But there are some flaws in this as well. There are reasons why most teams don't use 4 wide and/or no huddle as a base O.

[Dr. Lecter]

Did you or did you not see our D give up 7 minute drives last year? In one game, they gave up a 9 minute opening drive. 9!!!!!

And they usually have to go right back on the field cuz the O pulls a 3 and out. If we run the no-huddle, they'll be going right back on the field regardless if we score or go 3 and out.

They won the TOP battle by a mere 4 seconds. If we were running the no-huddle, our scoring drives would have been much shorter and we would NOT have won the TOP battle.

I never said they did not give up long drives, nor did I say they won it by a large margin. And yes, the no huddle will likely limit TOP.

Point is, they did not lose that battle last year. It was fairly even, so it was not as bad as you said it was.

[psubills62]

Did you or did you not see our D give up 7 minute drives last year? In one game, they gave up a 9 minute opening drive. 9!!!!!

And they usually have to go right back on the field cuz the O pulls a 3 and out. If we run the no-huddle, they'll be going right back on the field regardless if we score or go 3 and out.

They won the TOP battle by a mere 4 seconds. If we were running the no-huddle, our scoring drives would have been much shorter and we would NOT have won the TOP battle.

But the question is - does our defense perform better with rest (that it may or may not be getting), or with a lead?

I mean, if our offense can do what New England has done so many times the past few years, which is go up early and just keep the foot on the gas pedal, then I would have to imagine that helps our defense's confidence.

I just remember the Seahawks game last year. We played with a lead, our defense was very aggressive and we had something like 5 sacks. Maybe it was a fluke, but I'd have to imagine that Fewell is more comfortable taking chances mixing up the defensive scheme when he has a 2-TD lead.

Also, taking a big lead means teams will be throwing more often, and trying for the big play. This, imo, plays into the hands of our secondary, which is now set up to get takeaways.

Granted, this is contingent on our team scoring early and often when they have the ball. But with these weapons...if they don't score much, then everyone associated with the Buffalo Bills should be fired. Including the FO and Ralph.

[Goobylal]

Did you or did you not see our D give up 7 minute drives last year? In one game, they gave up a 9 minute opening drive. 9!!!!!

And they usually have to go right back on the field cuz the O pulls a 3 and out. If we run the no-huddle, they'll be going right back on the field regardless if we score or go 3 and out.

They won the TOP battle by a mere 4 seconds. If we were running the no-huddle, our scoring drives would have been much shorter and we would NOT have won the TOP battle.
The offense was abyssmal. The defense held-up well, considering the bad spots the offense put them in.

And using Nelson as one of the "WR's" would be amazing. The 3 WR's, 1 RB, 1 TE was the K-gun formation. Except McKeller and then Metz never split out wide like they may have Nelson do, and which would give much greater flexibility.

[psubills62]

the one thing I will say is that the Bills did seem to be slightly more effective in the 2 min drill than they were in their regular offense, so it can't hurt. But there are some flaws in this as well. There are reasons why most teams don't use 4 wide and/or no huddle as a base O.

Last I knew, New England essentially used that as a base O the last couple years, especially during the 16-0 year. KC also used it with Thigpen with relative success.

[madness]

Did you or did you not see our D give up 7 minute drives last year? In one game, they gave up a 9 minute opening drive. 9!!!!!

And they usually have to go right back on the field cuz the O pulls a 3 and out. If we run the no-huddle, they'll be going right back on the field regardless if we score or go 3 and out.

They won the TOP battle by a mere 4 seconds. If we were running the no-huddle, our scoring drives would have been much shorter and we would NOT have won the TOP battle.

Yes, the offense last year could have helped the defense stay fresher but it's the defense that is it's own worst enemy. I saw a defense that couldn't get off the field because they couldn't rush the passer on critical 3rd downs. I believe that's why we spent a first round pick on the quickest first step in college football.

When your offense is more worse off than your defense, it wouldn't be wise to further handicap your offense just to help out your defense's faults. Going against some very stingy defenses with complicated blitz schemes, this offense needs every advantage it can get. The no huddle proved it's worth last year against the notorious Ravens defense. It didn't allow the Ravens to set up and sell their "fakes" but left them no choice but to play vanilla and Trent was very successful moving the ball in that situation.

[OpIv37]

Last I knew, New England essentially used that as a base O the last couple years, especially during the 16-0 year. KC also used it with Thigpen with relative success.

NE has far better coaches and personnel than we do.

[psubills62]

NE has far better coaches and personnel than we do.

I agree. But don't you want to emulate those who succeed? NE had a record-setting offense that year. Of course we won't have a record-setting offense, but if it can improve our offense, then why not?

I also don't think NE had that great of a defense that year. But it sure made them look fantastic.

[MikeInRoch]

If it's an offense that is designed to get the ball out fast, that could even help a relatively weak offensive line.

[Throne Logic]

4 WR's with two rookies on the OL and an inexperienced QB? That sounds very Gilbride-like.

I'm also not sold on the no huddle idea. Our D frequently gave up long drives and lost the TOP battle last year. Even in its' K-Gun heyday, the no-huddle often left the D on the field too long.

I'm all for a no-huddle. You don't need to run it like the two-minute drill, much like the K-Gun usually was. You can run it Payton style and use up the entire play clock yelling out a bunch of jibberish with a key tidbit or two mixed in. I'd love to see Buffalo run it with a variable cadence. If this line is as smart and disciplined as they are hoping, the variable cadence coupled with limited substitution options should be a huge help. Think about that: 20 sec - snap, 20 sec - snap, 4 seconds - snap. Or flip it and draw someone off-sides with a hard count. Oh, the mind game opportunities. . .

That all being said, Gilbride's Run and Shoot is my all time least favorite style. The only time I enjoyed it was Jan 3, 1993. It's all flash and often high-scoring. However, it always seems to come up short in crunch time.

[OpIv37]

I'm all for a no-huddle. You don't need to run it like the two-minute drill, much like the K-Gun usually was. You can run it Payton style and use up the entire play clock yelling out a bunch of jibberish with a key tidbit or two mixed in. I'd love to see Buffalo run it with a variable cadence. If this line is as smart and disciplined as they are hoping, the variable cadence coupled with limited substitution options should be a huge help. Think about that: 20 sec - snap, 20 sec - snap, 4 seconds - snap. Or flip it and draw someone off-sides with a hard count. Oh, the mind game opportunities. . .

That all being said, Gilbride's Run and Shoot is my all time least favorite style. The only time I enjoyed it was Jan 3, 1993. It's all flash and often high-scoring. However, it always seems to come up short in crunch time.

You're going to pull all that off with two rookie offensive linemen, every player on the OL either new or in a different position, an inexperienced QB and a rookie TE as the 4th receiver? That sounds like a recipe for disaster.

[yordad]

I think I could game plan this team on a solid playoff run (we probably all feel this way, but...). Honestly, I think with one or two more players, here or there, this is a highly talented team.

However, due to the current coaching, I'm knocking off 4-5 wins, and assuming the offense they run will not fit the personal. It has been like that for years.

I know Fairchild ain't here anymore but when they had him, they were loaded with speed at wide out. No full back. A strong armed QB. And a line that was better at pass blocking then run blocking. Soooo.... we implimented a ball control style offense? Yeah, the guy who was the assistant to the coach who created the "greatest show on turf" utilized none of the players strengths.

In other words, 4 wide, no huddle, whatever; I will believe it when I see it.

[BillsWin]

I really want to type a long, educated response to this wonderful news, but it is 85 degrees and sunny out, I think I'm going to get the backyard set up for a BBQ... sooooooooooo

in response to us moving to a 4 WR, 1 RB set...........................

"CHAMPIONSHIP!"

[TigerJ]

By the way, Nelson being the 4th wide also will allow the Bills to move him tight if and when they need to, creating the "normal" 3 WR; 1 TE; 1 RB set.

Nelson's the key.

Yup, his versatility enables the Bills to create missmatches depending on how he's line up, since the defense can't substitute in a no huddle situation. Jackson can do something of the same thing given his ability to line up in the backfield, or on the line as a WR.

[Night Train]

As long as it eliminates Jaurons' master plan of playing for FG attempts instead of TD's, I'm all for it.

[jmb1099]

The no-huddle is a high risk high reward system that is beautiful when it works and maddening when it doesn't. On one hand there are a lot of reasons on paper why we might want to think twice about implementing a no huddle. As it has been pointed out we have rookies playing line, others out of position, and the danger of exhausting our defense. However the counter points are relevant as well:
Force the 3-4 schemes we play against to spread and run.
Force linebackers to cover receivers
A speedy pass catching , versatile TE
An intelligent center
An intelligent quick decision making QB

That being said... as has been pointed out we're trying to accomplish this with a lot of rookie presence. It isn't to say it can't or won't work, but an awful lot needs to be accomplished between now and opening day.

[jmb1099]

Oh... one final thought.
Its a myth that Edwards cannot throw the long ball. The truth is he throws the long ball very well. Just because he didn't throw 10 to 15 long passes a game doesn't mean he can't throw one. It has already been established that Evans, our one deep threat, was typically double covered. Perhaps Edwards simply didn't throw the ball into double coverage.
Truth is the few times Evans was open long Edwards hit him in stride