Talk:Hurry-up offense

	American football portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject American football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of American football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.American footballWikipedia:WikiProject American footballTemplate:WikiProject American footballAmerican football articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Invented?[edit]

I wonder why so many people say the Bills "invented" the no-huddle / hurry-up offense if the Bengals were the first to start using it. It's hard to imagine the NFL without it. The last few minutes of every game wouldn't be the same without it!

In Education of a Coach Marchibroda is credited with incorporating the two-minute drill into the regular offense while he was offensive coordinator for the Buffalo Bills, thereby "inventing" the no-huddle offense. Bill Chastain, in his book about Steve Spurrier, credits Spurrier with "inventing" the no-huddle offense. I would not be surprised if the real invention is decades ago. George Allen maybe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.23.30 (talk) 14:33, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately that's easily historically proven incorrect. They can claim they were the 1st to incorporate it, but clearly, just by viewing the historical events, it was actually done intentionally by Wyche & co. years before. Calling it the hurry-up, & specifically declaring a link to the 2-min drill was definitely done in Cincy before the Bills emulated it. That book is inaccurate --Duemellon (talk) 15:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Ted Marchibroda's Wikipedia entry, I find "The National Football League would later impose a rule that forced offenses to allow time for the defense to make substitutions". Perhaps someone could comment here (and possibly edit the article being discussed here) about the effect this has on hurry-up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Defense may only substitute if the Offense has. Missaeagle (talk) 20:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That rule is actually the defense must be allowed time to substitute if the offense has. If the offense huddles without substitutions and the defense has time then they can substitute players as they wish.

i’m hoping you can do me a favor— I came here hoping to add the below citation from Forbes.com to this article regarding the origin of the K-Gun name for the Bills’ 1990s offense but don’t have the coding chops to reliably add it in. I would be grateful if you or someone else reading this could add it for me. Thank you.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/curtisrush/2019/11/03/looking-back-at-marv-levy-who-was-hired-by-the-bills-on-this-date-in-1986/ 2601:407:C500:16E0:B0BD:D191:C68A:D126 (talk) 00:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kneeling to stop the clock?[edit]

Who is the idiot that thinks kneeling is a way to stop the clock? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.205.11.220 (talk) 19:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC) I don't know who the idiot is. However, he may be mistaking it for spiking the ball. Spiking the ball is a way to stop the clock.[reply]

No huddle vs. hurry up[edit]

Are these the same terms? the article notes that most passing plays are out plays, and there are few rushing plays; this may be accurate re: hurry-up, and 2-minute drill, where the clock is important, but is there not (at least currently) no-huddle offence that has nothing to do with saving the clock, for which these comments are not accurate?

This article is confusing. The header indicates that hurry-up offense, no-huddle offense or two-minute drill are synonymous, and then, 3 sections into the article, there's a section called "No-huddle offense"... isn't that the topic of the whole article? I think this article need some restructuring from someone with enough football knowledge. TheHYPO 00:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Please review, comment, & adjust --Duemellon 15:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is the first sentence wrong?[edit]

I'm not an American football fan, so don't trust myself to edit, but the first sentence seems slightly muddled. It makes more sense (to me) if "categories" is changed to "categorised", but even then you have 'as the "two-minute drill" and even a "no-huddle offense".' That "even" looks wrong when there are only two examples given - it's like saying "World Wars are usually categorised as WW1 and even WW2"! 86.132.137.5 (talk) 14:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

regarding no-huddle and can't-run-clock[edit]

So I removed a full section with a quick note that "no-huddle isn't pass-predominant". I figured I'd spell this out a bit more. The no-huddle, as discussed in this article, isn't about hurry-up in a clock sense (and perhaps that should necessitate an article split soon). Additionally, the general notion that "smashmouth" football, however you define it, inherently uses more clock time than a no-huddle offense is quite flawed on the surface. A quick sample of teams from the 2007 season demonstrates:

New England, no-huddle
Indianapolis, no-huddle
Minnesota, smashmouth (most rushing yards per game)
Tennessee, smashmouth (most rushes per game, highest ratio of rushing to passing plays)
Pittsburgh, wild-card (most time of possession per game)

Doing some quick math (time of possession here, number of possessions here) ranks time per drive as:

New England, 3:18/drive
Pittsburgh, 3:07/drive
Indianapolis, 3:01/drive
Tennessee, 2:45/drive
Minnesota, 2:34/drive

Yes, it's OR, and no, it's not going in the article -- but the contrasting view shouldn't, either, unless reliable sourcing is presented. — Lomn 15:02, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rule Changes and Controversy[edit]

It would be great to have more about the rule changes and controversy resulting from the no-huddle offense. I know very little about football myself and don't feel qualified to make many changes. But I'm originally from Cincinnati, and while I didn't live there at the time and didn't follow it much, the (no doubt POV) sense from fans was that the Bengals were making the game more exciting and the league was screwing them at the behest of TV advertisers and teams that weren't able to keep up. And there were longer-term changes to limit faked injuries and around player substitutions. Bennetto (talk) 18:56, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Example[edit]

I'm a Patriots fan, but I don't think the example given here is accurately presented. At least twice during that drive, the clock was not stopped "by rule," but rather the officials stopped the clock to measure for first downs. Samer (talk) 18:01, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What about Oregon?[edit]

Oregon's all-game no-huddle offense under Chip Kelly seems remarkably unique. I think with the play cards and several profiles of their strategy (e.g. in the New York Times), there is some good content there.

"Some people call it a no-huddle offense, but I call it a no-breathing offense,” Mark Asper, an Oregon offensive lineman, told me. “It’s still football. We hit people. But after a while, the guys on the other side of the line are so gassed that you don’t have to hit them very hard to make them fall over.” [1] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.151.118.73 (talk) 03:14, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oregon definitely needs a section in this article. Their offense hasn't had a huddle in years. At this point the no-huddle offense is more closely associated with Oregon than any NFL team. In fact, the sentence: "The Bills are considered the only team to ever use the no-huddle offense consistently and completely throughout an entire game for several seasons," should probably be amended as well, as Oregon has made that statement false.

Even the section on "college approaches" reads like a biased rant by an Oregon hater. It describes the hurry-up offense as "a way to gain an advantage when lacking talent" (Oregon having one of the most talented offenses in the country, according to most polls, rankings, and experts). The section also makes a broad claim that the hurry-up offense in college is widespread, without even an anecdotal mention of Oregon's particular significance in this area. This whole article seems like whomever wrote it went out of his or her way to avoid mentioning Oregon.

I should probably point out that I'm not really an "Oregon fan" per se. I think the team is alright, but I've noticed that Oregon games have a pace that is particularly fun to watch, and I was really just curious about its "uptempo" offense. I came to this page expecting to find at least some basic information about Oregon's offensive style and how it changed under Chip Kelly, and was sorely disappointed by this page's complete failure to provide even a miniscule portion of what I was looking for. This was a rare miss for Wikipedia.

fan bias[edit]

This article reads a bit stupidly.

Peyton Manning has ran this offense since about 1999! He's without doubt the guy people think about when you say the words "no huddle" in the modern era

Tom Brady, and Matt Ryan have used it in games, from about 2007. And it's only part of their game plan. They don't use it exclusively.

I have no idea why Manning's modern pioneering of the system is ranked behind a couple of guys who use it occasionally in games, over the last 3-4 years

80.254.158.4 (talk) 16:31, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gus Malzahn[edit]

Fairly certain (according to the talk page, references) that Auburn head coach Gus Malzahn did not invent the hurry-up/no-huddle offense. Nor do I find this mentioned in the supporting reference for this statement added by Oldsoutherner. Reverting this edit. 67.3.74.24 (talk) 19:43, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]