Why is the eagles offense a Gimmick?

blazen2392 · Dec 5, 2014

what does that even mean? I really don't get why people throw that word around.

The bill appeared in 4 consecutive superbowls with a no huddle offense. So someone please explain to me what a gimmick offense is?

Sgt. Largent · Dec 5, 2014

I don't like the word "gimmick" because it's a derogatory word to describe the offense (just like "game manager").

But if people are using the word, then they're talking about Kelly's style of using tempo, misdirection, complex formations, etc as a way to gain an advantage.........thus gimmicky as opposed to traditional "let's just line up and see who's the better team."

hawknation2014 · Dec 5, 2014

The word gimmick is appropriate when referring to the up-tempo offense because it's intent is to snap the ball quickly so as to prevent the defense from substituting. The traditional use of up tempo was intended to conserve time at the end of the first and second halves. Now up tempo is being exploited in order to prevent tired and/or beat up players from leaving the field.

So it's called a gimmick because of this intent, which is sort of like being really great at winning chess games with a one minute time limit. It's not like that person is actually better at checkmating their opponent, rather they are merely good at moving their pieces fast enough to prevent their superior opponents from checkmating them.

The stupid looking placards and the fact that Kelly's up tempo has not been successful at beating more physical teams (i.e., Oregon's loss of the conference championship to Stanford, getting dominated by Ohio State in the Rose Bowl, losing the National Championship to Auburn, and the Eagles' loss to the Saints in last year's Wild Card game) have helped cement this style of offense as a gimmick in the eyes of a lot of people.

Consider the chess metaphor of a player who opens himself up to a checkmate against a more disciplined opponent by moving before he has considered a critical defensive hole. Maybe this offense backfires against the more disciplined teams because it puts their own defense at a disadvantage by not giving them time to rest after quick three and outs.

If it ever does prove to be a blueprint for a "championship" offense, then that perception will probably change, unless the rules change first due to fairness and player-safety concerns.

Sgt. Largent · Dec 5, 2014

hawknation2014":1jn17s9e said:
The word gimmick is appropriate when referring to the up-tempo offense because it's intent is to snap the ball quickly so as to prevent the defense from substituting. The traditional use of up tempo was intended to conserve time at the end of the first and second halves. Now up tempo is being exploited in order to prevent tired and/or beat up players from leaving the field.

Maybe in college when there's such a big disparity in talent and styles from one program to the next, but I don't think that's Kelly's intent in the NFL with using tempo.

He himself has said that running more plays gives your offense more snaps to succeed. The less snaps, the less room for error, and we certainly saw this in the SD game where our offense only ran 40 plays and had the ball for 17 minutes.

idk, gimmicky to me means using cheap trick plays like the Rams did to beat us. Just running a faster offense? Not gimmicky IMO.

blazen2392 · Dec 5, 2014

hawknation2014":250wjp0v said:
The word gimmick is appropriate when referring to the up-tempo offense because it's intent is to snap the ball quickly so as to prevent the defense from substituting. The traditional use of up tempo was intended to conserve time at the end of the first and second halves. Now up tempo is being exploited in order to prevent tired and/or beat up players from leaving the field.

So it's called a gimmick because of this intent, which is sort of like being really great at winning chess games with a one minute time limit. It's not like that person is actually better at checkmating their opponent, rather they are merely good at moving their pieces fast enough to prevent their superior opponents from checkmating them.

The stupid looking placards and the fact that Kelly's up tempo has not been successful at beating more physical teams (i.e., Oregon's loss of the conference championship to Stanford, getting dominated by Ohio State in the Rose Bowl, losing the National Championship to Auburn, and the Eagles' loss to the Saints in last year's Wild Card game) have helped cement this style of offense as a gimmick in the eyes of a lot of people.

Consider the chess metaphor of a player who opens himself up to a checkmate against a more disciplined opponent by moving before he has considered a critical defensive hole. Maybe this offense backfires against the more disciplined teams because it puts their own defense at a disadvantage by not giving them time to rest after quick three and outs.

If it ever does prove to be a blueprint for a "championship" offense, then that perception will probably change, unless the rules change first due to fairness and player-safety concerns.

Oh ok that makes more sense. When I hear the word gimmick, it makes me think of something that is not made to last in the longs wrong. The bells and whistles looks nice and shiny right now, but they will rust very soon. So my next question is this. Is Chip kelly's offense inferior to your more classical NFL offense? 2 years down the road will this offense have no success running Chip kelly's game plan?

blazen2392 · Dec 5, 2014

Sgt. Largent":3ahwvq50 said:
I don't like the word "gimmick" because it's a derogatory word to describe the offense (just like "game manager").

But if people are using the word, then they're talking about Kelly's style of using tempo, misdirection, complex formations, etc as a way to gain an advantage.........thus gimmicky as opposed to traditional "let's just line up and see who's the better team."

Why is there such a negative connotation associated with this style of football? It produces results does it not? Is it just more of the morality and unsportsmanlike nature of doing it?

Sgt. Largent · Dec 5, 2014

blazen2392":1u1de9xm said:
Sgt. Largent":1u1de9xm said:

I don't like the word "gimmick" because it's a derogatory word to describe the offense (just like "game manager").

But if people are using the word, then they're talking about Kelly's style of using tempo, misdirection, complex formations, etc as a way to gain an advantage.........thus gimmicky as opposed to traditional "let's just line up and see who's the better team."

Click to expand...

Why is there such a negative connotation associated with this style of football? It produces results does it not? Is it just more of the morality and unsportsmanlike nature of doing it?

I agree, and that's why I don't like the word. Because as people like hawknation think, it means you're using tempo as a way to gain an advantage over a superior opponent. Thus the negative connotation.

But in a parity league like the NFL, I just don't think that's true.

hawknation2014 · Dec 5, 2014

Sgt. Largent":1o590lcb said:
blazen2392":1o590lcb said:

Sgt. Largent":1o590lcb said:

I don't like the word "gimmick" because it's a derogatory word to describe the offense (just like "game manager").

But if people are using the word, then they're talking about Kelly's style of using tempo, misdirection, complex formations, etc as a way to gain an advantage.........thus gimmicky as opposed to traditional "let's just line up and see who's the better team."

Click to expand...

Why is there such a negative connotation associated with this style of football? It produces results does it not? Is it just more of the morality and unsportsmanlike nature of doing it?

Click to expand...

I agree, and that's why I don't like the word. Because as people like hawknation think, it means you're using tempo as a way to gain an advantage over a superior opponent. Thus the negative connotation.

But in a parity league like the NFL, I just don't think that's true.

Look at the Eagles' last game. I would say the Cowboys probably have more overall talent, but using up tempo allowed them to run 17 more plays against a tired and beat up Cowboys' defense. MInd you, they accomplished this with Sanchez at QB.

I am betting the "gimmick" will not work against a disciplined team like the Seahawks, just as it didn't work against the 49ers, Cardinals, and Packers. Despite the fact that the Eagles have a great running attack, they were dominated in time of possession against SF - 18 min. vs. 42 min. That kind of disparity puts a lot of strain on their defensive players at the end of the game.

Disciplined defense and ball control offense tend to win out against this style.

Sgt. Largent · Dec 5, 2014

hawknation2014":1obxk8fe said:
Look at the Eagles' last game. I would say the Cowboys probably have more overall talent, but using up tempo allowed them to run 17 more plays against a tired and beat up Cowboys' defense. MInd you, they accomplished this with Sanchez at QB

Right, like I said Kelly uses tempo in the NFL to run more plays, which gives his offense more snaps to succeed.......and not so much to wear down the defense. That's just a byproduct, and not the majority of intent.

btw, the Hawks run the ball over 50% of the time..........also to beat and wear down the opposing defense so the 4th quarter opens up. Is that gimmicky?

hawknation2014 · Dec 5, 2014

Sgt. Largent":3rs6a6lk said:
hawknation2014":3rs6a6lk said:

Look at the Eagles' last game. I would say the Cowboys probably have more overall talent, but using up tempo allowed them to run 17 more plays against a tired and beat up Cowboys' defense. MInd you, they accomplished this with Sanchez at QB

Click to expand...

Right, like I said Kelly uses tempo in the NFL to run more plays, which gives his offense more snaps to succeed.......and not so much to wear down the defense. That's just a byproduct, and not the majority of intent.

btw, the Hawks run the ball over 50% of the time..........also to beat and wear down the opposing defense so the 4th quarter opens up. Is that gimmicky?

No, it has a proven history of being a blueprint for championship teams and therefore not a gimmick. In stark contrast, Kelly's up tempo looks more like smoke and mirrors against disciplined defenses and ball-control offenses. Against those teams, it has tended to do more to wear down their own defensive players than in actually succeeding in keeping their opponent's tired players on the field.

Sgt. Largent · Dec 6, 2014

hawknation2014":fgrqkcev said:
Sgt. Largent":fgrqkcev said:

hawknation2014":fgrqkcev said:

Look at the Eagles' last game. I would say the Cowboys probably have more overall talent, but using up tempo allowed them to run 17 more plays against a tired and beat up Cowboys' defense. MInd you, they accomplished this with Sanchez at QB

Click to expand...

Right, like I said Kelly uses tempo in the NFL to run more plays, which gives his offense more snaps to succeed.......and not so much to wear down the defense. That's just a byproduct, and not the majority of intent.

btw, the Hawks run the ball over 50% of the time..........also to beat and wear down the opposing defense so the 4th quarter opens up. Is that gimmicky?

Click to expand...

No, it has a proven history of being a blueprint for championship teams and therefore not a gimmick. In stark contrast, Kelly's up tempo looks more like smoke and mirrors against disciplined defenses and ball-control offenses. Against those teams, it has tended to do more to wear down their own defensive players than in actually succeeding in keeping their opponent's tired players on the field.

So because tempo is unsuccessful it's a gimmick?

Lots of styles of offense over the years have been unsuccessful, and they weren't considered "gimmicks." Wingback, Wildcat, Run and Shoot, even west coast in it's infancy was unsuccessful until Walsh got a hold of it.

I just don't think because Kelly's tempo offense hasn't won a college championship or Lombardi trophy yet makes it gimmicky. It is merely a different way of running an offense, just as all the other styles I mentioned, including our own heavy run zone blocking scheme.

Spin Doctor · Dec 7, 2014

Chip Kelly's offense isn't a gimmick, but I would say that it's rather one dimensional. Kelly isn't doing anything ground breaking, they are concepts that have been used in the NFL for quite sometime, what is different is the tempo, and implementation of these concepts. Peyton Manning is a fan of the no-huddle offense, the difference is he doesn't run 75+ plays a game.

The problem with Chip Kelly's system is that he relies too much on spreading the field out horizontally, misdirection and deception. Against disciplined, and athletic defenses this approach gets the Eagles in a lot of trouble.

Another thing to consider is that the Eagles don't really have a good QB. I think Foles, and Sanchez are a result of the system. They're throwing to guys that are wide open, or in the flat most of the time. Kelly is brilliant with his pick plays, and is the best in the NFL at executing misdirections. That kind of scheme will inflate a QB's numbers, I think even a QB such as T-Jack could look decent in that offense. I'd be interested to see what his offense would look like if he had a good QB.

Really, I think Bevell was trying to emulate Kelly during the first 3/4s of the season. In that kind of offense Wilson would be an absolute stud.

BirdsCommaAngry · Dec 7, 2014

This question reminds me of the theory of diffusion of innovations, which details any new entity (or in the case of Kelly's offense, something that seems new as similar styles of offenses have been done before) as only gaining wide social acceptability through a deliberate process of more truth-oriented and forward-thinking individuals first accepting the innovation on its own merit and then being followed by the early and then late majorities. The quirky implications of this theory are that humanity overall is essentially incapable of not initially distrusting anything new and in the very early stages our distrust has very little foundation in reality. When it comes to the assertions made about Kelly's offense, some of the criticism is only lingering skepticism from this distrust.

It's a "gimmick" because like all NFL offenses, it's not without its own precarious set of limitations and those limitations open it up to criticism. It's a "gimmick" because all forms of criticism can be simplified into overgeneralizing buzz-words designed to satisfy inherent human biases compelling us toward simplicity and leaving no question left unanswered. Most of all, it's a "gimmick" because it seems new and like any other innovation, we simply need more time to digest its legitimacy before we can weigh it more truthfully.

sutz · Dec 7, 2014

You shore do talk purty.

Sgt. Largent · Dec 7, 2014

BirdsCommaAngry":37zxdfy4 said:
It's a "gimmick" because like all NFL offenses, it's not without its own precarious set of limitations and those limitations open it up to criticism.

What are it's limitations? The Eagles actually have a very balanced offense, almost 50/50 run and pass......they merely run plays at a quicker tempo to try and gain tactical advantages.

We can discuss whether that tempo hurts or helps the team overall, because I do believe it might help their offense, but actually hurts their defense. Quick offensive series, whether successful or not puts your defense on the field also at quicker rate.......which is why Philly has a hard time closing out close games, hard to slow it down and eat up clock with a tempo offense.

So that's my criticism of Kelly's style, but is it gimmicky? I still haven't read a compelling argument as to why it is.

RunTheBall · Dec 7, 2014

139 total yards at home, it's a gimmick.

rideaducati · Dec 7, 2014

The eagles offense is a gimmick because they run 5 plays and the teams they beat are too stupid to figure this out.

Why is the eagles offense a Gimmick?

blazen2392

New member

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member

hawknation2014

New member

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member

blazen2392

New member

blazen2392

New member

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member

hawknation2014

New member

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member

hawknation2014

New member

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member

Spin Doctor

Well-known member

BirdsCommaAngry

Well-known member

sutz

Well-known member

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member

RunTheBall

New member

rideaducati

New member

Similar threads

Latest posts