Are the Niners good with a hurry-up offense?

Originally posted by Raul98:
They did do a little hurry up offense against the Cardinals in week 17 but very little. I don't know how we could ever run it when every play is snapped at 0 and were wasting about 4 time outs a game cause the play isn't called on time. A time out right after half time has even been called. If that stuff happens in Seattle tomorrow the crowd is going to jump all over it they need to fix it A.S.A.P. as in today!

The timeout called at the start of the third quarter was due to Kap forgetting to bring his wristband with plays into the huddle. It had nothing to do with the clock running down.

Originally posted by longtime49erfan:

Originally posted by Raul98:
They did do a little hurry up offense against the Cardinals in week 17 but very little. I don't know how we could ever run it when every play is snapped at 0 and were wasting about 4 time outs a game cause the play isn't called on time. A time out right after half time has even been called. If that stuff happens in Seattle tomorrow the crowd is going to jump all over it they need to fix it A.S.A.P. as in today!

The timeout called at the start of the third quarter was due to Kap forgetting to bring his wristband with plays into the huddle. It had nothing to do with the clock running down.

okay i'll give them that one. But seriously they have to fix this now this stuff cant happen tomorrow.

Seriously we need to script our first 20-25 plays. no audibles and we should only deviate from it for situational purposes.

Our offense is slow by design. Not only do all the pre-snap motions take time to execute, but part of our offensive philosophy is to slow the pace of the game and chew up clock. This is consistent with a power run team that has a great defense and special teams. This approach has worked very well against high-tempo passing teams. We always beat those teams. We can run no-huddle and put up quick points if we need to. But what we really want is the 13-play, 80 yard, 10-minute drive that ices the game.

Originally posted by SofaKing:
Our offense is slow by design. Not only do all the pre-snap motions take time to execute, but part of our offensive philosophy is to slow the pace of the game and chew up clock. This is consistent with a power run team that has a great defense and special teams. This approach has worked very well against high-tempo passing teams. We always beat those teams. We can run no-huddle and put up quick points if we need to. But what we really want is the 13-play, 80 yard, 10-minute drive that ices the game.

This is generally true but when a team has a significant advantage (noise) for the defense, it is good to try and gain an edge on offense. It worked in the 1st game.

SF ran the no huddle three times in the loss in Seattle, once in each the first, third and fourth quarters. CK gained 2 yards in the first, gained five in the third and ran for a first down and 16 yards in the fourth quarter. So all three were positive yard plays. No reason to give up on the no huddle. Seems like it might be better to use it more.

My concern in Seattle is play management and errors due to noise. I think having a script would really help reduce the errors. If the line jumps off-sides to kill the first drive...I'll lose my mind!

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by SofaKing:
Our offense is slow by design. Not only do all the pre-snap motions take time to execute, but part of our offensive philosophy is to slow the pace of the game and chew up clock. This is consistent with a power run team that has a great defense and special teams. This approach has worked very well against high-tempo passing teams. We always beat those teams. We can run no-huddle and put up quick points if we need to. But what we really want is the 13-play, 80 yard, 10-minute drive that ices the game.

This is generally true but when a team has a significant advantage (noise) for the defense, it is good to try and gain an edge on offense. It worked in the 1st game.

SF ran the no huddle three times in the loss in Seattle, once in each the first, third and fourth quarters. CK gained 2 yards in the first, gained five in the third and ran for a first down and 16 yards in the fourth quarter. So all three were positive yard plays. No reason to give up on the no huddle. Seems like it might be better to use it more.

My concern in Seattle is play management and errors due to noise. I think having a script would really help reduce the errors. If the line jumps off-sides to kill the first drive...I'll lose my mind!

Very true, I agree. Whether we use no-huddle or not, we don't have time for all the pre-snap motions we normally use. The crowd noise makes that close to impossible. We need to be able to line up and play.

Originally posted by SofaKing:
Very true, I agree. Whether we use no-huddle or not, we don't have time for all the pre-snap motions we normally use. The crowd noise makes that close to impossible. We need to be able to line up and play.

Originally posted by SofaKing:
Our offense is slow by design. Not only do all the pre-snap motions take time to execute, but part of our offensive philosophy is to slow the pace of the game and chew up clock. This is consistent with a power run team that has a great defense and special teams. This approach has worked very well against high-tempo passing teams. We always beat those teams. We can run no-huddle and put up quick points if we need to. But what we really want is the 13-play, 80 yard, 10-minute drive that ices the game.

Yeah. I think all the pre-snap motions are about being cute rather than being effective, but it is what it is and Roman will do what he'll do. I do agree the offensive philosophy and Roman's only strength is the run game, but against a Seattle D that can put 8+ men in the box and play man + the crowd noise I wish we had better passing schemes. I think a conservative power run scheme can work against high-tempo passing teams, but Seattle is the opposite. They have a higher ranked D and rely more heavily on the run than we do so we'll be playing to their strengths. Too bad we don't have better passing schemes. I think in terms of talent, we're near the top in the league at the skilled positions: Kap, Gore, Boldin, Crabtree, Vernon, Patton. Hopefully we can utilize them better and hopefully Kap can just overcome bad schemes with his talent. Otherwise I'm hoping we escape with a 15-14 win on five FG's and great defense.

It definitely would help, but that style of offense and all the formations (like 75 formations) before the snap would wear them out fast. Imagine the Eagles (with their up-tempo / hurry-up offense) trying to do all the formations (before the snap) 49ers do in a game... they would be gassed by the 2nd qtr.

Having said all that, I think there will be some hurry-up at times and some other things they haven't done all season (they'll surprise us). Hopefully, the plays turn into points. Besides the SB (last year and this year), this will be the 49ers' biggest and most intense game since Harbs arrived.

Originally posted by Jd925:
Yeah. I think all the pre-snap motions are about being cute rather than being effective, but it is what it is and Roman will do what he'll do. I do agree the offensive philosophy and Roman's only strength is the run game, but against a Seattle D that can put 8+ men in the box and play man + the crowd noise I wish we had better passing schemes. I think a conservative power run scheme can work against high-tempo passing teams, but Seattle is the opposite. They have a higher ranked D and rely more heavily on the run than we do so we'll be playing to their strengths. Too bad we don't have better passing schemes. I think in terms of talent, we're near the top in the league at the skilled positions: Kap, Gore, Boldin, Crabtree, Vernon, Patton. Hopefully we can utilize them better and hopefully Kap can just overcome bad schemes with his talent. Otherwise I'm hoping we escape with a 15-14 win on five FG's and great defense.

Yes, I wish our passing game was more dynamic too. We have the skill position players to do it. We can't become one-dimensional running or passing against a great defense like Seattle's. We need balance. Last week was very promising because we made plays both running and passing against Carolina's stout defense.

I actually like the Saints' approach last week, they just screwed themselves over with mental errors and mistakes. They were running the ball with consistent success. A costly turnover, penalties, and botched special teams killed them. Seattle barely had to lift a finger, and they had a 16-0 lead.

Seattle's defense can be run on. We have to establish that, because we don't want to sling the ball against that secondary and pass rush. The more effect our running game is, the easier time we'll have throwing the ball.

Those cute multi-movement plays didn't work too well for Stanford either. During their Orange Bowl win in Harbaugh's last year they were winning in almost every way but stalled when they went into what I call the "Rockette's Routine" offense.

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by Jd925:
Yeah. I think all the pre-snap motions are about being cute rather than being effective, but it is what it is and Roman will do what he'll do. I do agree the offensive philosophy and Roman's only strength is the run game, but against a Seattle D that can put 8+ men in the box and play man + the crowd noise I wish we had better passing schemes. I think a conservative power run scheme can work against high-tempo passing teams, but Seattle is the opposite. They have a higher ranked D and rely more heavily on the run than we do so we'll be playing to their strengths. Too bad we don't have better passing schemes. I think in terms of talent, we're near the top in the league at the skilled positions: Kap, Gore, Boldin, Crabtree, Vernon, Patton. Hopefully we can utilize them better and hopefully Kap can just overcome bad schemes with his talent. Otherwise I'm hoping we escape with a 15-14 win on five FG's and great defense.

Yes, I wish our passing game was more dynamic too. We have the skill position players to do it. We can't become one-dimensional running or passing against a great defense like Seattle's. We need balance. Last week was very promising because we made plays both running and passing against Carolina's stout defense.

I actually like the Saints' approach last week, they just screwed themselves over with mental errors and mistakes. They were running the ball with consistent success. A costly turnover, penalties, and botched special teams killed them. Seattle barely had to lift a finger, and they had a 16-0 lead.

Seattle's defense can be run on. We have to establish that, because we don't want to sling the ball against that secondary and pass rush. The more effect our running game is, the easier time we'll have throwing the ball.

Yeah. Balance would be great and is key. Keeping the Seattle defense guessing is even more important.

I didn't watch the game, but I assume the Saints were running because Seattle played nickel/dime and dared them to run. The Niners definitely have more balance with talent than the Saints so the Niners can really keep the Seattle D more off-balance by keeping a good mix of run/pass.

I was thinking that ! hurry up calls coming out of the gate with hand singles !

Hurry up offenses work for the simple reason that they can tire a defense out and also deprive it of the ability to substitute. But they also hurt the team doing the scoring because they put the scoring team's defense that much sooner back on the field and also limit TOP.

You can use it at the end of the half....or spring it on the defense when they aren't expecting once or twice. But it's not a sustainable style of offense.

Roman used the no-huddle (2 minute drill), in the first series in week 2 against the Seahawks and went three and out, he abandoned it right after. I felt he should have stuck to it, but they never used it again until it was too late.