Patriot use of the Quick No Huddle Offense

[RelocatedPatFan]

I know I'm not going to express my ideas well and hopefully you guys can come to some interesting conclusions as well. Though this may be a bit premature try and forecast anything based on 1 game, but the "newish" offense does have to get you excited for possibilities

Thinking about our offense and what they have done recently, you can’t help but feel impressed. And that’s with one of our “main” weapons not available since pretty much game 1 (Hernandez). I wanted to take a look at the number of plays the offense has been churning out and wondering how that might impact the players over the course of a season.

For the season so far, we are averaging nearly 78 plays per game. The league average is about 64 plays per team which means we have about 20% more than the average team. Though, it’s a small sample, we have averaged about 81 plays per game over the last 3. Last year we averaged about 67 plays per game (and in looking at a full season most teams were much closer to the average than comparing this season’s average so far).

For example, the min/max average for teams is 56 and 78 respectively (yes, we are #1 in that particular category). Last season the team average was still about 64 (though about 1 play per team off) with a range of 59 to 71 average per team (our 2011 average was 67 as stated above).

Potential Issues:

• While we will be facing a different defense every week, the same offensive unit will be on the field. What would be the cumulative net effect of 20% more plays on that unit? Fatigue, injury potential?
• NFL stands for Not For Long. Will teams be able to figure out the 1 word offense so that it needs to be changed more frequently? If I can think of this in a few moments, I’m sure BB has this aspect covered.

Positives:

• Defense will be well rested by comparison if the offense continue generating that number of plays.
• Our ability to ruin opponent defensive plans by changing our offensive game plan. Defenses may be so focused on this that we could put a more complex plan in effect by not doing the no huddle.

Balancing it out

• I’d be curious how the team prepares for this from a conditioning perspective and if it will lead to more time off towards the end of the season. Would this place a greater emphasis on getting a first round bye?
• As the weather turns for the worse, will the offense tone it down? With this smash mouth running style, it would be hard to imagine that running would get toned down and actually might pick up.
• Would we potentially need more linemen so we can substitute them more frequently? Should a move be made to sign more o-linemen to the practice squad. Would this pique Brian Waters interest to come back some time after the bye week (sorry if this causes a rainstorm of comments, please go easy)?
• I really want to see what it does against a top defense (vs the seahawks). You would think a 1 word command would make it that much easier to get an offense to execute in such a loud stadium. But, this is strength vs strength and should have some good highlights.
• I wonder what % of the fast attack will be used going forward and any other wrinkles they have up their sleeve. Could they alter the tempo to draw aggressive defenses offsides more often.

Question – What tires an offense out more? Pass Defense or Run Blocking? The way they have been going about it, I would think run blocking would be more tiring.

I pulled the data from: NFL Football Stats - NFL Team Plays per Game on TeamRankings.com

Rank Team                     2012      Last 3    2011 
1    New England              77.6      81        67.2 
2    Detroit                  73.8      76        65.4 
3    Kansas City              73.2      75.3      63.8 
4    Indianapolis             72.5      75.7      59.4 
5    Philadelphia             70        62.3      64.8 
6    Miami                    69.6      72        61.9 
7    New Orleans              68.8      67.7      71   
8    Denver                   68.2      73        63.5 
9    Pittsburgh               67.8      66.7      63.7 
10   Houston                  67.6      62.3      64.8 
11   Atlanta                  67        71.7      66.9 
12   NY Giants                66        66.7      65.7 
13   Arizona                  65.2      69.3      62.1 
14   Minnesota                64.4      66.3      62.9 
15   Green Bay                64.4      65        62.4 
16   Chicago                  64.2      64.7      61.1 
17   Baltimore                64        65.7      64.9 
18   Washington               63.8      63        64.4 
19   Cincinnati               63.8      62.7      63.5 
20   San Francisco            62.4      63        62.1 
21   Dallas                   62        63.7      63.6 
22   San Diego                62        60.3      65.5 
23   Seattle                  61.4      58        62.7 
24   Cleveland                61        61.3      64   
25   NY Jets                  60.2      62.3      64.4 
26   Oakland                  60        57        63.4 
27   Buffalo                  59.6      61.7      62   
28   St Louis                 58.2      57.3      63.3 
29   Tennessee                58.2      63.3      61.5 
30   Tampa Bay                56.8      55        60.4 
31   Carolina                 56.2      56.7      62.5 
32   Jacksonville             55.6      55        62.6
     Average                  64.5      65.1      63.7
     Minimum                  55.6      55        59.4
     Maximum                  77.6      81        71

 

[rookBoston]

... Seattle's a top-rated defense. But in context, they've seen the Titans, Broncos, Chiefs and Raiders.

To me the interesting component of executing the Quick No Huddle, doing it well and consistently, is depth. What makes it work is the fact that we have four legit tailbacks in Ridley, Bolden, Vereen and Woodhead. I lose no confidence as a fan with any of those guys in the backfield. The idea of Gronk, Hondo, Fells and Hoomanananana in a TE rotation is encouraging, but nearly not as bulletproof. The idea of replacing Mankins with Thomas, Connolly with McDonald, Vollmer with Cannon as the game wears on is... well, it's okay... not thrilling. But hopefully, by then, the defense is too tired to put up much of a fight anyway.

The conceptual key to the QNH offense is the idea that "we will compete with you deep into our full depth chart... we will neutralize your pro-bowlers, get them exhausted, and then force you to beat us with your 2nd stingers faced off against our 2nd stringers. And we bet our depth chart, 53-players deep, is better than yours."

It worked against the Broncos.

Now that it's out there, let's see if the NFL (1) can break it, or (2) can beat it. If no one finds a solution, this could be one of those seminal moments in football history that changes everything. To start, it would make 2nd and 3rd round picks more valuable than ever; it would make veteran minimum FAs a prized commodity; and it would make the Practice Squad a vital component of the roster. Ultimately, it might force the league to expand from 53 players to more... 60 or so.

But, first things first. Let's see if this idea goes the way of the Wildcat (and is made quickly irrelevant) or if it goes the way of the West Coast Offense or the Tampa-2 D.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

... Seattle's a top-rated defense. But in context, they've seen the Titans, Broncos, Chiefs and Raiders.

This is true, but also true is that no team has to travel much further for an away game. So the lag, wil lcertainly work in Seattles favor. But, I agree, they haven't faced a powerhouse offense.

key to the QNH offense is the idea that "we will compete with you deep into our full depth chart... we will neutralize your pro-bowlers, get them exhausted, and then force you to beat us with your 2nd stingers faced off against our 2nd stringers. And we bet our depth chart, 53-players deep, is better than yours."

Right you are. Also, we get to control when we turn it on and when we shut it down.

Now that it's out there, let's see if the NFL (1) can break it, or (2) can beat it. If no one finds a solution, this could be one of those seminal moments in football history that changes everything. To start, it would make 2nd and 3rd round picks more valuable than ever; it would make veteran minimum FAs a prized commodity; and it would make the Practice Squad a vital component of the roster. Ultimately, it might force the league to expand from 53 players to more... 60 or so.

But, first things first. Let's see if this idea goes the way of the Wildcat (and is made quickly irrelevant) or if it goes the way of the West Coast Offense or the Tampa-2 D.

Right, it is too early to get too detailed, though I was trying to come at some other angles as well (Could it cause fatigue for our guys, but rotational depth + getting some 2nd string guys some solid real game reps would be benficial long term and help as well).

I imagine we'll start to see some fake injuries as the patriots start to play. I would think BB has some plans for this because we could go back to traditional and wait to get the matchup we want before pulling the trigger again as well.

Still, this is actually a real offense and not a gimmick like the wild cat. While it could still go the way of the wildcat, this feels "real" and just another tool that BB/TB/McD can use to their advantage. Biggest thing I like, is that the offense is taking what the defense gives them. Not goign out to say this is what we are goign to do to you, try and stop us.

 

[jmt57]

Typically it is the defense that gets worn down towards the end of a game rather than the offense. Think back to clock killin' Corey Dillon and the way the Pats utilized him a few years ago late in games as an example.

You would think that running more plays and the no huddle would exacerbate that situation; at least that's the conventional wisdom. In the Denver game however, it was the Pats offensive line that appeared to be more tired in the 4th quarter than the Denver defense. One thing the Pats did to try to counteract that was to bring in Nick McDonald and use him as a third tight end to help out in blocking.