No huddle offense…

[Bear-Hawk]

Someone said that the Commanders no huddle offense causes problems for opponents’ defensive coordinators, because they do not have the usual opportunity to mix up their alignments between plays. How valid is that argument? Do you need a special type of QB like Daniels to do it? Is that why most teams do not use it as much?

 

[Hawkinaz]

Possibly, a lot of times when teams run no huddle it’s to keep the opposing team from making substitutions

 

[sutz]

No huddle is a high risk/high reward style of offense. While yes, it can prevent the D from substituting and getting setup properly, it can also cause problems on offense. Everybody better be on the same page, or stupid mistakes ensue. It's why it is usually reserved for 2-minute drills and times when a team is down a couple of scores.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

No huddle is a high risk/high reward style of offense. While yes, it can prevent the D from substituting and getting setup properly, it can also cause problems on offense. Everybody better be on the same page, or stupid mistakes ensue. It's why it is usually reserved for 2-minute drills and times when a team is down a couple of scores.

Does the QB call plays, or do they still call it into him from the sidelines for him to communicate to the other players? Watching the Commanders, it wasn’t clear how they did it, but seemed to work without any confusion.

 

[DarkVictory23]

Someone said that the Commanders no huddle offense causes problems for opponents’ defensive coordinators, because they do not have the usual opportunity to mix up their alignments between plays. How valid is that argument?

Very valid. In addition to not being able to substitute (unless the offense substitutes as well) during the actual game, if a team knows you often run no-huddle they have to prep for that in the week before differently than they do other teams. That's practice minutes working on defensive communication and no-huddle specific plans that you can't spend working on running reps on actual plays.

Do you need a special type of QB like Daniels to do it?

Yes and no. There are a few ways to run no-huddle but personnel are an important factor for pretty much all of them, but it's not specifically about the QB. The key is versatility. If you aren't substituting (which keeps the other team from substituting), you need to have guys who can execute a run play as well as a pass play as well as a play action as well as... well, you get it.

Jayden Daniels IS a cheat code in this regard because he's showing up like a Lamar Jackson level dual threat already in his rookie year. He provides you with versatility out of the box.

But the team that really set the world on fire originally running the no-huddle as a primary offense (the Jim Kelly led Buffalo Bills) named their version of their offense after their TE, because he was that versatile threat for their offense. Jim Kelly didn't run all that much for a QB (even for that timeframe).

Two of the guys who ran a no-huddle for significant stretches were Tom Brady and Peyton Manning... who were statues.

Is that why most teams do not use it as much?

First, I'd just say everything in the NFL is cyclical. No-huddle was big in the late 80s/early 90s, faded, then Manning and Brady made their no-huddle a big deal and Chip Kelly came in and brought his more college style no-huddle, and then it faded again, now the Commanders might be bringing it back.

Washington ran no-huddle about 2.5 times more than the next closest teams (which happen to be the Bears and Seahawks).

But in terms of why no-huddle is currently not as popular as it used to be (outside of the Commanders) was a couple of things.

First, teams started using motion more to read defenses rather than just having a QB diagnose the pre-snap alignment ala peak Manning/Brady. Defensive disguises have become more common, there are more defensive players who can be a safety/a corner/a light LB and can be lined up in way more spots pre-snap, and you've even got guys like our own Coach Mac who will not irregularly drop a DL into coverage. QBs often can't tell what they're looking at until you've already started your drop back.

Second, Chip Kelly's super speed college style no-huddle was bottom of the league for offensive TOP for four straight seasons. It was essentially a track meet style of offense and controlling the clock in key moments is way more important in the NFL than it is in college. Chip Kelly's stuff burned super bright for a season or two then plummeted to earth and a lot of teams eschewed it after that.

Does the QB call plays, or do they still call it into him from the sidelines for him to communicate to the other players? Watching the Commanders, it wasn’t clear how they did it, but seemed to work without any confusion.

This is a good question and I'm not familiar enough with the Commanders way of running their offense to say.

I can comment on the Seahawks, who ran a lot of no-huddle early and we were doing it a very college style way (which makes sense given Grubb's pedigree) where we'd line up and they'd get a look at the defense and then a call would often come from the sidelines.

We started doing less and less of that as the season went on and started doing a more standard (at the NFL level) checks system, where we would huddle and have a couple of plays called in the huddle, and then Geno would just check into one based on the defensive look at the LOS. We'd still call in from the sidelines occasionally (you could literally see everyone look over to the sideline), but it wasn't like how we started the season.

 

[Bear-Hawk]

How do you think Commanders offense matches up with Eagles defense?

 

[DarkVictory23]

How do you think Commanders offense matches up with Eagles defense?

Hard to say. Mixed results during the regular season. The first game against Philly was probably one of the worst overall games for the WAS offense. The second game, Philly forced a LOT of turnovers but still lost and Daniels did much better outside of the INTs. (5 TDs)

Philly approached the second game differently, though, and blitzed a lot more. In the first game, even though they held Washington's passing game in check they didn't generate much pressure so they went from one of their lowest blitz rates all season to one of the highest. In the end, they got more pressure but let Washington do more damage.

I think it's worth noting that the second game was the game Hurts went out and Kenny Pickett took over, so maybe that affected their planning?

 

[Bear-Hawk]

Daniels has 105 QBR vs. blitz. I think Eagles will get pressure without blitz, but if Mitchell is out, McLaurin might have a big game anyway. If Hurts cannot run very well with the injured left knee, the commanders Could be in the Super Bowl. That would be fun to see, as one of my pals on Bears forum thinks Williams is as good as Daniels. I believe Poles drafted the wrong QB. I also told them it will go on Poles tombstone that he drafted Wright instead of Jalen Carter.

 

[DarkVictory23]

Yeah, Daniels has been really good against the blitz, so that was kind of shocking.

I decided to go back and rewatch the Commanders last game vs. the Eagles (well, at least when the Commanders were on offense) and a few thoughts:

• It's ridiculous Washington won this game but the failures on Eagles' offense probably played a bigger role then defensive miscues, to be honest. They were in position to put this game out of hand multiple times and couldn't do it, which gave the Commanders the opportunity to get back in it.

• Focusing on the Commanders' use of no-huddle, it's pretty interesting: They actually substitute a good amount, so the defenses are able to sub in fairly often for how much no-huddle they run. Also, Jayden is clearly getting the call in his ear from the sideline in a very similar manner to how you'd normally do it with a huddle, they just don't huddle up to share the call.
  
  Trying to look into it more, I get the sense that the Commanders are running their no-huddle mostly as a way to disrupt defensive communication rather than creating personnel mismatches. The other team can get whoever they want in, but it's harder for them to implement the various disguises and schemes because they can't huddle up because the offense isn't huddling up.
  
  In other words, rather than what--for example--a Peyton Manning did, which was diagnose a defense at the LOS in his no-huddle, Washington is trying to force defenses to play simpler, so their young QB actually has less to read after the ball is snapped.

• Eagles had some defensive injuries (and disqualifications) that I think might have led to the overreliance on the blitz as the game wore on. Daniels cooked them for multiple big plays when they did it, so it was probably still a mistake, but I think Fangio thought he was protecting his secondary by trying to generate pressure faster.

• Finally, for Caleb vs. Jayden, one point in favor of your pal's argument is this: When pressure gets to Jayden, he's still prone to taking sacks. He's a great athlete and his legs have generated all kinds of yards, but college QBs almost always need a season or two before their alarm bells actually go off at NFL speed vs. college speed. (The 5 guys most likely to turn pressure into a sack are all rookies or second year starters... and Jalen Hurts.)
  
  Washington has a scheme that protects Daniels. Not only do they use their no-huddle scheme to try and limit the complexity of the defenses he's looking at, but their passing game is also based on relatively quick and short throws, and you can see that he's encouraged to pull it down relatively quickly if his first or second read isn't there.
  
  There is hope that Caleb can get there with an offensive coordinator who protects his QB and designs a system around him the way Kingsbury is. I mean, just last year CJ Stroud had 'the best ever rookie QB season', and he fell back to earth pretty darn quick.
  
  I mean, if you were to ask me, did Poles draft the wrong QB? I'd probably say yeah but that could change.