Time to scrap the hurry up offense

[gAUlf 1]

Florida and Auburn are in the SEC. That's 3 BCSNC running a hurry up in 5 years.

Correct me if Im wrong, but I don't believe FLA ran a hurry up offense. Spread. Yes.

I believe they did, yes. But Oregon ran a hurry up, as did every Oklahoma team, as well as Auburn. I'm sorry I assumed you wanted to go to a pro-style.

[DyeCampAlum 335]

Someone raised the first valid argument I've seen against the hurry-up.  Does it cause defenses to decline as the season progresses, due to wearing down?

I don't know how you assess that argument.  Clemson this year might be an example.  But Oklahoma State certainly isn't.  Oregon isn't.  And Auburn definitely improved on defense in 2010; I think we improved in 2011 too.

[shceagle 0]

We do NOT need to scrap the HUNH!!

I agree that at times during a game we need to slow it down a little, to focus on ball control and time of possession.

I am all for slowing it down when the time is right.  Slowing it down could allow our young players to focus on reacting instead of thinking.

However, with a mobile QB, the HUNH can take the wind out of a defense especially In 3rd and 4th quarters. Up-Tempo offense is very important in today's college game, I think we should still have it in our arsenal  to put extreme pressure on the defense at diffent times over the course of a game.

Plus if we have possession and we need to run a 2 minute drill at the end of the 1st half or at the end of the game we have to run an Up-tempo style.  

The most important thing the new O Coordinator can do is make our offense execute.

[MIGMAN 16]

We scrapped the hurry up about mid-season. We stopped scoring points.

THANK YOU!!!!!!

[Wrights_Mill_Road 2]

yeah, i say we score less points.  :-\

WVU hung 70 on clemson.  that's the kind of O i want.

[AUFanSince81 0]

First of all, this thread is about the hurry up and not the spread.  I know the teams that have won or made it to the National Championship game with spread offenses.  I am talking about the hurry up and how it puts the defense in bad situations if you are not making first downs and go three and out and only take about 45 seconds off the play clock.  We did not run that much hurry up in 2010 and played more ball control because Cam could make plays.  And yes West Virginia did put up a lot of yards on LSU but they also lost to some poor teams this year.  I think Syracuse and Lousiville.  Clemson looked very bad against NC state, South Carolina.  Any team can put up one game against an SEC team and look good but honestly.... How many people think that the hurry up (Oregon, West Virginia, Boise State, Clemson, etc....) would dominate week in and week out in the SEC.  Its not about one game, its about the whole season.  Btw, We slowed down Oregon and held their hurry up to 19 points.  Why????? Because we played ball control offense.  To set the record straight, I would like an offense that can run downhill and be physical, but can also spread the field and make defenses have to guard us.  As long as we get a coordinator that is innovative and can use multiple schemes, then I will be very happy.  I believe in Chizik  that he will make the right choice.  I believe in Auburn and love it!!!

[CalgaryTiger 0]

Great article by P Marshall. Lays out how there are literally ZERO schools who run the hurry up and are also strong on defense. Even the schools who win a lot. You might can get away with it in other conferences, but not in this one.

Don't know about you, but I'm sick of giving up 30 points a game. It's not SEC football.

I'm an admitted football novice, but I don't believe that wide open offense = bad defense.  I think you need 4 things to have good defense no matter what offense you run.

1.  Superior coaching (x's & o's during the week and good game day play calling)

2.  Superior recruiting (talent at every position, not just key positions)

3.  Players with discipline = no penalties and no missed assignments.

4.  A second string that is almost as talented as the first string so everyone can get some rest

For three years we have been getting #2 on defense and we were working toward #4.  #1 & 3 have killed us.

I will admit, if you pair a fast paced offense that isn't very good with a poorly coached defense, you will lose big (see AU this year).  But you can't tell me that if WV's offense was paired with LSU's defense, the defense will get soft overnight?  When the 1st team gets winded, put the 2nd team in.

The advantage of a fast paced offense is once you get ahead, the other team gets demoralized because they start thinking they can't catch up (see Clemson last night).

Anyway, if the coaches think going back to 3 yards and a cloud of dust is best then I will support it, but I like seeing a strong fast paced offense and a powerful well coached defense.  I think we can have both.

Just one person's opinion.

[mdp5150 167]

The hurry up offense basically relies on your ability to out pace and score the other team, and if your defense can make a few stops or get a few turnovers you can build a lead.  This is what Oregon does because they do not have the size to grind it out.  But as we saw this year with Auburn, if the offense struggles, the defense is left on the field virtually the entire game. However, in our national championship year, the time of possession vs. SEC opponents was pretty even in every game and favored Auburn more often than not.  Yet our defense was still very average.  I don't think the offensive scheme is a problem for the defense....I think the defensive scheme has been the problem for the defense.

Best description of the problem so far...

[JamesG 0]

Obviously there are other factors involved, but I dont think it is a coincidence that the 3 years we ran a hurry up offense were also the 3 worst defensive years (statistically) in Auburn history. IMO we need a change in philosophy (not necessarily pro style) and I think when the new OC is announced you will see that coach chizik agrees. I'm just freaking tired of watching average teams go UP and DOWN the field with little resistance, even in winning efforts....

[alexava 6,974]

We do NOT need to scrap the HUNH!!

I agree that at times during a game we need to slow it down a little, to focus on ball control and time of possession.

I am all for slowing it down when the time is right.  Slowing it down could allow our young players to focus on reacting instead of thinking.

However, with a mobile QB, the HUNH can take the wind out of a defense especially In 3rd and 4th quarters. Up-Tempo offense is very important in today's college game, I think we should still have it in our arsenal  to put extreme pressure on the defense at diffent times over the course of a game.

Plus if we have possession and we need to run a 2 minute drill at the end of the 1st half or at the end of the game we have to run an Up-tempo style.  

The most important thing the new O Coordinator can do is make our offense execute.

^^^^ this you dont have to pace every possession but choose when to kick it in and when not to. our defense would have been bad the last three years with any offense, just not had as many opportunities to be bad. we were as bad in the 1st quarter or worse than the 4rth.

[keesler 5,934]

It's gonna be hard as hell to run the HUNH/fast paced offense when a different QB gets shuffled in and out on every freaking snap of the ball.  

Then, when the rotating QB gets to the line a appears to be set to run a play, every offensive player on the field has got to stand up and look to the sideline to get direction from the coach.

[DyeEraTiger 0]

It seems to me that the key is an OC/DC/HC knowing when and how to implement its use. I think Malzahn was very effective at utilizing the up tempo O last year. It seemed to help wear D's down and we could hammer them later in the game. This year, likely due to personnel and inexperience, we didn't use it as much later. Our TOP was terrible early in the year if I remember correctly. I still beleive it has its merit when used by someone who knows how and when.

[vpsi333 5]

It’s not the hurry-up offense that’s the problem.  It’s that the conventional wisdom is when you run this offense you must run a “Bend but don’t Break” type D.  That philosophy alone is what keeps your D on the field and allows them to be worn down late in games.  CGC seems to adhere to this philosophy.  Imagine a Joe Lee Dunn aggressive attacking D with an attacking fast paced O.  So many possessions, so many points.

[AUbritt 611]

I don't get it, really.

Three-and-out is bad whether you run a hurry-up or a slow-it-down offense. I doubt there's an appreciable difference in time between a hurry-up three-and-out and a slow-it-down three and out. The biggest difference on the play clock would occur between a three-and-out that involves three incomplete passes and a three-and-out that involves three running plays that stay in bounds -- regardless of whether one is trying to run plays quickly or not.

Time of possession seems way less important than number of plays run (and number of possessions should factor in).

The defense that struggles most with hurry-up offenses is the opposing defense.

PM cites Oregon, WVU, Oklahoma State, and a few others and says they all play the hurry-up offense and all give up a lot of points. I don't know about y'all, but I don't think any of those teams have an impressive defense (hated the Oregon-Wisconsin game, for instance). If LSU had OSU's or Oregon's offense but kept their defense, they'd still have a dominant D (so would Bama).

[AUIH1 1,515]

We haven't run a hurry up offense under Gus since 2009 and even then it was slower than he designed the O to run.  PM is just trying to make his buddy (Ted Roof) look good again.  A good DC with a good D staff can have a good D no matter what type of offense is being run.  I don't doubt it is may be more difficult to have a top 10 D when the O is running something like the HUNH, but a top 25 is very doable with the right D staff.  And again, we have not run the HUNH for the last two years so PM trying to justify our bad defense since 2009 by blaming the HUNH is simply baseless.

wde

[gAUlf 1]

It’s not the hurry-up offense that’s the problem.  It’s that the conventional wisdom is when you run this offense you must run a “Bend but don’t Break” type D.  That philosophy alone is what keeps your D on the field and allows them to be worn down late in games.  CGC seems to adhere to this philosophy.  Imagine a Joe Lee Dunn aggressive attacking D with an attacking fast paced O.  So many possessions, so many points.

[keesler 5,934]

All sorts of schemes have proven they can work if talented players properly execute and play fundamentally sound football.   Prostyle/air raid/spread/HUNH/option/wishbone/wing T/west coast/gulf coast/fun 'n gun.  

Why not stick with what worked and what got us to the BCSNC Game a year ago, and let these young inexperienced players show what they can do?    

Changing just to be like someone else is not always the right approach to take when you have a team full of young players that have only been a part of your system for a year or two.  This program has been in constant flux for over a year now, players have come and gone, coaches will be going and coming.  There are just a few things that are a constant at AU anymore.  But, Gene Chizik is the hub of the wheel, I we all have to trust that he knows what is best and he knows what he is doing for the good on AU.

[gr82b4au 5,568]

I just want a run first type offense that scores a ton of points. Don't care if it is HUNH, read option, triple option, spread, pro, I formation, etc, etc, etc...

But if we go to a grind it out pro style offense, we better have a good defense.

[DyeEraTiger 0]

I think semantics between the "hurry-up" and "up-tempo" may be confused by some of us (me included) sometimes. I use them interchangeably and I don't think they shoud be. Malzahn has certainly used both, imo, at various times since 2009.

[JamesG 0]

All sorts of schemes have proven they can work if talented players properly execute and play fundamentally sound football.   Prostyle/air raid/spread/HUNH/option/wishbone/wing T/west coast/gulf coast/fun 'n gun.  

Why not stick with what worked and what got us to the BCSNC Game a year ago, and let these young inexperienced players show what they can do?    

Changing just to be like someone else is not always the right approach to take when you have a team full of young players that have only been a part of your system for a year or two.  This program has been in constant flux for over a year now, players have come and gone, coaches will be going and coming.  There are just a few things that are a constant at AU anymore.  But, Gene Chizik is the hub of the wheel, I we all have to trust that he knows what is best and he knows what he is doing for the good on AU.

Cam Newton ain't walking back through that door....

[AUIH1 1,515]

FWIW, I would not mind scrapping a hurry up O (although we don't really have one now) for a "traditional O".  Both types can be effective.  I just do not buy the BS that if you have a hurry up O you are dooming your D to be what we have had the past 3 years other than TRocker's DL and run D in 2010.  It is all about the right coaching and talent.  

wde

[gAUlf 1]

All sorts of schemes have proven they can work if talented players properly execute and play fundamentally sound football.   Prostyle/air raid/spread/HUNH/option/wishbone/wing T/west coast/gulf coast/fun 'n gun.  

Why not stick with what worked and what got us to the BCSNC Game a year ago, and let these young inexperienced players show what they can do?    

Changing just to be like someone else is not always the right approach to take when you have a team full of young players that have only been a part of your system for a year or two.  This program has been in constant flux for over a year now, players have come and gone, coaches will be going and coming.  There are just a few things that are a constant at AU anymore.  But, Gene Chizik is the hub of the wheel, I we all have to trust that he knows what is best and he knows what he is doing for the good on AU.

Cam Newton ain't walking back through that door....

It worked with Chris Todd.

[aubcali 436]

It's time to panic.  It's time to buy high.  The sun is setting dangerously close to the ground.  It's time to sell low.  It's time to scrap the offense that won the NC last year.  It's pitch black outside.  It's time to scrap the 4-3.  It's time to do what those guys are doing.  It's time to hire that guy.  Buy. Buy. Buy.  Everything is coming apart at the seams.  We're becoming obsolete. It's time to fire that guy.  Sell. Sell. Sell. Change it now.  Scrap everything and begin anew before the sun lifts off -- leaving us all behind.

[Auburn2004 0]

Obviously there are other factors involved, but I dont think it is a coincidence that the 3 years we ran a hurry up offense were also the 3 worst defensive years (statistically) in Auburn history. IMO we need a change in philosophy (not necessarily pro style) and I think when the new OC is announced you will see that coach chizik agrees. I'm just freaking tired of watching average teams go UP and DOWN the field with little resistance, even in winning efforts....

You're basically telling us that even though we won a national title, an SEC title, and won 10 games per season with the HUNH offense, you want us to change our philosophy because you care more about defensive statistics.

[AUIH1 1,515]

Obviously there are other factors involved, but I dont think it is a coincidence that the 3 years we ran a hurry up offense were also the 3 worst defensive years (statistically) in Auburn history. IMO we need a change in philosophy (not necessarily pro style) and I think when the new OC is announced you will see that coach chizik agrees. I'm just freaking tired of watching average teams go UP and DOWN the field with little resistance, even in winning efforts....

You're basically telling us that even though we won a national title, an SEC title, and won 10 games per season with the HUNH offense, you want us to change our philosophy because you care more about defensive statistics.

You can have both if you have good coaches.  We lacked on D (and still lack at certain positions) a good DC.

wde