No Huddle?

[aliveon2legs]

I know that Bruce started to mix it in towards the end of last year in small doses, but what is the expectation for this year, under Pep?

If I recall, Bruce said that Luck was ready for it from the beginning, but that everybody else had to catch up.  Last year almost every skill position player on offense was a rookie.  This year there are none.  With a year under everybody's belt, will we see more no huddle?

[cjwhiskers]

I would hope so, if I remember correctly some of our most successful and fluid drives last year were under the no huddle/2min offense. 

[HtownColt]

You can read all about Andrew Luck and the no huddle from last year here to see just exactly how much it was effective.

NO PROMOTIONAL POSTING ON THE SITE2013-articles/july/coordinated-bedlam-is-the-no-huddle-worth-it.html

[supremecoltsfan300]

I'd like to see a lot more No Huddle this year. I think Andrew is ready for it, and the young receiving core should have a greater mastery of the playbook this year and should be capable of adjusting on the fly.

[21isSuperman]

I'm all for running some no huddle.  It certainly can't hurt.  If it works, use it.  If it doesn't, don't.  At the very least, you have it at your disposal

[AntonMcG]

The nature of what Pep Hamilton is trying to do, and any 2-TE sets, are perfect compliments to the no-huddle.

 

I hope to see a lot of it.

[gacker65]

Let's see a little more consistency before we talk no-huddle

[wig]

I wouldn't expect much of it from Pep.

[aliveon2legs]

I wouldn't expect much of it from Pep.

 

Why?

[AntonMcG]

I wouldn't expect much of it from Pep.

 

Based on?

[Pelt]

I can see us using it in spurts, but not all the time. It's seems we're more about different looking formations and personnel packages out there from play to play and I'm not sure how well that will mesh with a no-huddle type of offense where you obviously have to keep the same personnel out there.

[oldunclemark]

The nature of what Pep Hamilton is trying to do, and any 2-TE sets, are perfect compliments to the no-huddle.

 

I hope to see a lot of it.

Why A Mac?

 

Because a two TE set is at once...a pass and a run set

 

..and the defense cant sub against a player group that can equally produce runs and passes...?

[AntonMcG]

Why A Mac?

 

Because a two TE set is at once...a pass and a run set

 

..and the defense cant sub against a player group that can equally produce runs and passes...?

 

Yeah, many try to say that tiring out the defense is the main benefit of the no-huddle, but I don't buy that, these are well conditioned athletes in a sport that is not stamina-intensive.

 

The main benefit is creating mismatches by keeping favourable defensive personnel on the field. The only way to do this effectively is by having versatile TE's who can run block, line up at different spots, and be difficult to cover by LBs and DBs in the passing game. I don't see why a team with potentially two very good TEs would not take advantage of the no-huddle.

[braveheartcolt]

I'm not sure about this. Perhaps Andrew should gather his offense in a group and chat about whether to go with it or not?

[aliveon2legs]

I'm not sure about this. Perhaps Andrew should gather his offense in a group and chat about whether to go with it or not?

 

I would say it's safe to assume that this conversation has been had in the 56'th St complex.

[Superman]

I think the biggest advantage to being a no-huddle team is that you're more prepared and practiced for hurry-up situations. But I'm not infatuated with the idea of being a no-huddle team. All I care about is seeing our yards/play increase, scoring more touchdowns, especially in the red zone, and not turning the ball over as much. Huddle or not, just get the job done.

[AntonMcG]

I think the biggest advantage to being a no-huddle team is that you're more prepared and practiced for hurry-up situations. But I'm not infatuated with the idea of being a no-huddle team. All I care about is seeing our yards/play increase, scoring more touchdowns, especially in the red zone, and not turning the ball over as much. Huddle or not, just get the job done.

 

Yes but it is how they get the job done. Most of the league's most efficient passers utilize the no-huddle, and we are a prime candidate for it given the players at our disposal and supposed offensive philosophy.

[Superman]

Yes but it is how they get the job done. Most of the league's most efficient passers utilize the no-huddle, and we are a prime candidate for it given the players at our disposal and supposed offensive philosophy.

 

I don't know that most of the league's most efficient passers are no-huddle guys. The Saints huddle, the Pats huddle, the Packers huddle. All have the ability to go no-huddle at any time, and that's great. But it's not a prerequisite. 

 

I also don't know that we are ready to do that, given how young our offense is, and how little time they've all been together. Luck, Brown and Reggie would be fine, but Hilton, Allen, Fleener and Ballard are all second year guys. DHB and Bradshaw are new, as are Thomas and Cherilus. Castonzo, Satele, and whoever the right guard is going to be have never played extensively in a no-huddle offense. I think our guys still need more time to refine their games before we throw a full-time no-huddle at them.

 

And really, I think Colts fans as a whole are taken with the idea because we're so used to the Manning days. We know that a no-huddle can work, and we know that it has advantages. I think that increases the desire to see more no-huddle from the current offense.

[atapcl]

I know that Bruce started to mix it in towards the end of last year in small doses, but what is the expectation for this year, under Pep?

If I recall, Bruce said that Luck was ready for it from the beginning, but that everybody else had to catch up.  Last year almost every skill position player on offense was a rookie.  This year there are none.  With a year under everybody's belt, will we see more no huddle?

Was the Luck to Hilton TD against the Giants from a no huddle?

[Dark Superman]

Luck is a monster when there's only two minutes left.

[aliveon2legs]

And really, I think Colts fans as a whole are taken with the idea because we're so used to the Manning days. We know that a no-huddle can work, and we know that it has advantages. I think that increases the desire to see more no-huddle from the current offense.

You're absolutely right, I'm guilty as charged. It's more than that, though. I don't want Andrew to be Peyton-like just because I'm used to it. I want Andrew to be Peyton-like because the potential is there for him to be. When a QB can read the defense from the line and put the offense in the best play to beat that defense, you're guaranteed to have a prolific offense. That is far more optimal of a situation than calling a play and hoping the defense doesn't call a good one to stop it, with very little time to change things up.

Andrew is intelligent enough to do it. That's my motivation for wanting to see it from him.

[Superman]

You're absolutely right, I'm guilty as charged. It's more than that, though. I don't want Andrew to be Peyton-like just because I'm used to it. I want Andrew to be Peyton-like because the potential is there for him to be. When a QB can read the defense from the line and put the offense in the best play to beat that defense, you're guaranteed to have a prolific offense. That is far more optimal of a situation than calling a play and hoping the defense doesn't call a good one to stop it, with very little time to change things up.

Andrew is intelligent enough to do it. That's my motivation for wanting to see it from him.

Tons of quarterbacks audible at the line though. You don't need to go no-huddle. I agree that Luck could handle it. I just don't think it's necessary.

[aliveon2legs]

It's not a requirement but it does give the QB much more time to get the defense to show their hand and adjust.