On EVERY PLAY?!

[GoGoGopher12]

The biggest issue is that the clock is often less than three seconds and often at one second when the ball is snapped. IMO this gives any and every defense they play an advantage of knowing when the ball is going to be snapped. There is no chance of a hard count and drawing a team off sides. Execution wins football games, so lets get the process started sooner. Give the offensive players a full couple of seconds to digest their assignment on each play rather than changing (or appearing to change) at the last tics of every play clock.

So you reckon those Dlinemen and those who are going to blitz are looking up at the play clock ready to launch at "0"? Seems like that would be a Gopher advantage. Hopefully that's exactly what is happening.

 

[A_Slab_of_Bacon]

I don't think this really happens. What d-lineman is looking at the playclock? They're looking at their assignments and the formation.

Yeah I don't see DLmen jumping based on the clock.

They're still looking for the play to start the same way they always do.

To tell a DL to watch the clock seems like a good way to get wiped out by an OL when the ball gets hiked at 1... or any time really. But that isn't happening.

 

[WinLoseOrTy]

I don't think this really happens. What d-lineman is looking at the playclock? They're looking at their assignments and the formation.

Agreed. If the defender is looking at the play clock and not the ball, then offense is at a significant advantage getting off the ball at snap.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

If they're calling plays based solely on defensive personnel, by the end of the first quarter they shouldn't have to take as long because they would know what the defense will send out based on what we send out.
They are most definitely looking at defensive alignment and coverages then are trying to signal a play in based off what they see from up above. Sometimes the initial play they signal in they feel will work against what they see, but they still look over and then snap the ball. Other times they don't like the look of the defense so when they all look over they get a different play than what was originally sent in. Defenses are now waiting to show their true alignment and coverage for as long as possible to give the offensive coaches less time to make a call. They are also changing their defensive calls sometimes as well
I was at a DIii game Saturday where both teams ran no huddle offenses looking to the sidelines then snapping the ball or looking a second time as well. Not once did either team have to use a TO because the play clock was going to run out. There were also times wher they would snap it well before 10 seconds left on the play clock Along with that, one defense would change their defensive call after the offense would turn to the sidelin as defenders would move to different alignments prior to the snap.

As to to your first point, I don't think defenses always counter with the exact same personnel and it's almost impossible to tell much about their defensive alignment and coverages by the time the play starts being called in. If the defense lines up and shows them everything, I would hope we would consider that in our play calling, but watch when they start bringing the play in, the defense is usually in a pretty basic set-up, the only thing you can really tell is personnel and maybe some bits re: formation.

Sure, it's a game of cat and mouse and GSU also had 12 men on the field trying hard to adjust to this issue. So it's a back and forth.

We need to be more efficient getting the play in, but this is a really common way to get the play in throughout all of college football.

 

[tikited]

I feel a lot of the hand wringing has to do with how rushed Tanner looks out there. He looks rushed so the fans feel rushed.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Agreed. If the defender is looking at the play clock and not the ball, then offense is at a significant advantage getting off the ball at snap.

Obviously the defensive players are not watching the play clock, a quick glance at it before getting in position will tell them how much time is left on the play clock and they will absolutely know when we are in the final seconds of the play clock if they have any kind of internal clock at all.

Not to mention if you are a blitzing LB and the play clock is anywhere in your field of vision you can absolutely use that to your advantage when that clock gets down into the final few seconds.

If you know a team is rushing to get the snap off you can disregard a lot of the tricks that offenses use to try and draw defenders offsides.

 

[WinLoseOrTy]

Obviously the defensive players are not watching the play clock, a quick glance at it before getting in position will tell them how much time is left on the play clock and they will absolutely know when we are in the final seconds of the play clock if they have any kind of internal clock at all.

Not to mention if you are a blitzing LB and the play clock is anywhere in your field of vision you can absolutely use that to your advantage when that clock gets down into the final few seconds.

If you know a team is rushing to get the snap off you can disregard a lot of the tricks that offenses use to try and draw defenders offsides.

When are they making this quick glance? 5 seconds left on the clock? You have 4, 5, 6 defenders around the line of scrimmage, so stands to reason if each is sneaking a quick glance at the play clock when their own "internal clock" says there is 5 seconds left, then you are going to catch 1 or 2 of them off guard. Likewise, if a defender knows the snap is coming within next 5 seconds, I'm not sure how big of an advantage that is. Seems like they would be susceptible to a hard count because they would be extra eager to get going.

Long story short, I think defenders look at the ball, and they are coached to do so.

 

[hello-world]

Yeah, we should stop calling audibles at the line based on defensive alignment. It's not like this system has been proven to work at top 5 programs. Definitely not worth doing anymore after it sprung Bateman on two touchdowns against SDSU.

You know what causes delay penalties? Asking your QB to read the entire defensive alignment and check into new plays before the snap.

Definitely doesn't make sense to have a quick check-with-me.

Idiots.

 

[GFBfan]

Yeah, we should stop calling audibles at the line based on defensive alignment. It's not like this system has been proven to work at top 5 programs. Definitely not worth doing anymore after it sprung Bateman on two touchdowns against SDSU.

You know what causes delay penalties? Asking your QB to read the entire defensive alignment and check into new plays before the snap.

Definitely doesn't make sense to have a quick check-with-me.

Idiots.

I'm not making a case that we shouldn't do it. That's idiotic.
I am saying we have issues with it as it pertains to the play clock.
I don't see other P5 programs continually having to use TO's to avoid delay of game penalties.

The advantage of checking with the sideline is it takes quite a bit of the burden of thinking off of the QB, but that advantage is lost somewhat when the QB has to rush to get the snap off and doesn't have time to check the defense over before the snap.

 

[hello-world]

I'm not making a case that we shouldn't do it. That's idiotic.
I am saying we have issues with it as it pertains to the play clock.
I don't see other P5 programs continually having to use TO's to avoid delay of game penalties.

The advantage of checking with the sideline is it takes quite a bit of the burden of thinking off of the QB, but that advantage is lost somewhat when the QB has to rush to get the snap off and doesn't have time to check the defense over before the snap.

Minnesota has been called for one delay of game penalty all year. There are a lot of other things Minnesota should be prioritizing over refining the pre-snap process.
Things like defensive holding have caused far more damage this year.

 

[Ski U Mah 55]

It looks frazzled and without confidence, but it doesn't seem to be the cause of our problems. It bleeds a lot of clock which doesn't help in crunch time situations, but we performed well despite having no timeouts at the end of last game. It's not a problem until it's a problem even if it looks weird.

 

[Panthadad2]

Nobody bats an eye when pro-style offenses have all kinds of time-draining pre-snap motion going on with the quarterback under center waiting for the play clock to hit 1 second. But when it's a no-huddle scheme with the QB in the shotgun getting the signals from the sideline, people on this board go insane. Kind of funny when you think about it.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

Also the folks who boo kickoff fair catches.

Speaking on fair catches on kickoffs, it's my opinion that the kickoff out of bounds was supposed to be a directional kick short of the 10-yard line to make GSU return the ball and drain clock.

The lesson is don't make a player do something they aren't used to.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

https://www.sbnation.com/2013/9/13/4722170/no-huddle-hurry-up-offense-nfl-peyton-manning-chip-kelly
Interesting article (2013) on differences between “no huddle” and “hurry up” offense: tempo. Oregon back then played a slow, medium and fast tempo. Slow was Quarterback looks to sidelines, etc. Opinion expressed was that if you varied the tempos used, advantage is to the offense. But if you used one tempo only, slight advantage might swing to defense, presumably based on predictability of when to get set, snap time, etc. I know DL aren’t watching the clock, but I think that while Tanner is running around trying to change play with 5 seconds left, a good LB or DL will glance at the play clock and, by internal counting, have some enhanced idea of when snap will occur. I could be wrong, but predictability of tempo in no huddle, esp. last second snaps, isn’t an advantage for the offense per the masters of no huddle theory.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

https://www.ninersnation.com/2016/1...ddle-slow-tempo-offense-chip-kelly-kaepernick
More current article on advantages of slow pace, no huddle. There are many. Still think that running down to last second on play clock hurts offensive performance some. More than happy to admit this is a bias, not an objectively proven fact.

 

[Gophergrandpa]

Bleeding the clock in slow, no huddle offense is a substitute for time taken in huddle. Keeps offense on field longer; gives the defense a better rest in case of three-and-out or series of short possessions. It’s complicated!

 

[hello-world]

Bleeding the clock in slow, no huddle offense is a substitute for time taken in huddle. Keeps offense on field longer; gives the defense a better rest in case of three-and-out or series of short possessions. It’s complicated!

I also think it's important that it gives us the _option_ to install a tempo system essentially whenever we want.
There's a reason that this system took off at the college level.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

I also think it's important that it gives us the _option_ to install a tempo system essentially whenever we want.
There's a reason that this system took off at the college level.

If it "gives us the option to instal a tempo system", then why do the plays still take so long to get communicated when we are in the hurry up?

 

[watertown 1987 guy n]

Of things to get excited about this would seem pretty low on the list.

 

[t-docious]

call me crazy but this doesnt bother me, what does bother me is changing the play to inside zone 20 plus times a game when it aint working. I hate stubborn coaches, drives ya nuts. I get its our bread and butter, but sometimes you have to do something different to get those bread and butter plays rolling.

 

[GophersInIowa]

call me crazy but this doesnt bother me, what does bother me is changing the play to inside zone 20 plus times a game when it aint working. I hate stubborn coaches, drives ya nuts. I get its our bread and butter, but sometimes you have to do something different to get those bread and butter plays rolling.

I'm guessing many times they're not changing it to a run but rather flipping it to the other side.