Seems that the no huddle offense will inevitably be the offense of choice for at least some teams in both college and the pros. That being the case, I would like to ask: What is the proper defensive scheme to slow down the no huddle offense? I know that if the offense substitutes a player, the defense is then allowed an opportunity to substitute a player. Would there be a way the defense can kind of drag its feet making the substitution so as to slow down the opposing offense, at least for a bit? But if the offense doesn't substitute a player, that ruins that idea. I can't think of a good strategy to stop the no huddle offense. What would your strategy be?
this. pretend your leg is broken. because of the advancement in medical technology, you can jump right back in a play later.
I always thought too often the defense gets too conservative and starts playing too much base defense. I think you have to attack and keep the offense guessing. But just like a no huddle offense is predicated on a QB's playcalling and command of the offense, a defense needs to have players who are able to quickly relay the calls and make adjustments.
that is a tall task at every level, but I see where you are going with the statement. I think the easy answer here is QB pressure. you hit a guy enough and he is going to start making mistakes.
Against a team like Oregon, if you sell out to attacking the QB, they will put up 7 points faster than you can blink. Not only are they a "run first" team that specializes in traps and misdirection, their bubble screens are deadly with guys like DAT and Barner. The only way to "stop" teams like UO or WVU, your D-line has to be talented enough to control the line of scrimmage and also pressure the QB. Auburn beat UO in the BCS championship game because they couldn't block Nick Fairly.
Offense has become more favored in both leagues so that's not quite fair. The good defenses do fine against it but the competitive disadvantages take shape in the lower tiers. That's why guys like Leach start running it, so a Tech-level program can upset athletically superior, more talented teams.
During his years at Texas Tech, how many times did Leach defeat athletically superior, more talented teams? I don't think it was very often. IMO, his teams at Tech were mostly blue smoke and mirrors. They were entertaining and ran up the score on weaker teams because of the tempo game. Better teams usually beat them down.
They knocked off plenty of teams that had better recruits - Texas, OU, TAMU, Cal, etc... the entire scheme was designed to level the playing field. They definitely struggled against good defenses, I even saw a Leach team manage 9ish points a bowl game versus a crummy Bama team, but that offense enabled them to get away with some wins.
Another IMO: The fact defenses aren't used to facing high-speed offenses has a lot to do with leveling the playing field. The more common fast-tempo becomes, the less of an advantage it will create in college football.
I think the Leach Tech teams routinely beat more talented teams - they even had a surprisingly decent record against top 10 teams. Their problem was that they often lost to some random crappy teams.
Maybe I should have paid more attention to them. Besides the one year they were actually good, seems like they always started off the season 5-0 or 6-0 against sorry teams and would end up 8-5 or 7-6. Probably should give Leach more credit I guess. Were they always fast-tempo or just pass-happy? Not that I saw them much, but I remember pass-pass-pass more than fast tempo.
