Question: The future of Defensive Philosophy and the HUNH

257WBY

Suspended
Aug 20, 2011
2,077
1
0
Is it just coincidence that Mizzou and Aub are playing in the SEC title with inferior talent than several SEC teams or is it a superior offense?
 

JIB

Suspended
Nov 2, 2011
1,431
0
0
Sterrett
Is it just coincidence that Mizzou and Aub are playing in the SEC title with inferior talent than several SEC teams or is it a superior offense?
Coincidence. The best team in the SECE is USC and they beat Mizzou. Mizzou played a depleted UGA and didn't play any of the top 3 in the west.
 

WildTusk

BamaNation Citizen
Aug 26, 2009
50
12
27
No other sport I can think of has a loophole in the rules that allows the offense to go before the defense is ready. Can you imagine if there was an equivalent HUNH in tennis? The server would be racing to sevice line once he got the ball hands to serve the ball in hopes the defense was not ready or even there before he served. Its a crummy loophole that is ruining the game.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk
 

JessN

Administrator & Editor-in-Chief
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
6,269
3,821
432
Is it just coincidence that Mizzou and Aub are playing in the SEC title with inferior talent than several SEC teams or is it a superior offense?
Is it coincidence that Oregon lost (again) to Stanford, which has about 75 percent of the athleticism of Oregon across the board?

Or that Clemson lost (again) to South Carolina, despite having more talent on its offense than South Carolina had on its defense?

Or that Auburn lost to LSU?

Or that Missouri lost to South Carolina?

You seem to think the HUNH solves everything. We haven't even established it's a superior offense. Only one team running the offense has ever won a NC (AU, 2010). Florida's spread-option was a completely different thing and Alabama has three titles with a multiple pro-set. The HUNH basically doesn't exist at the pro level. More than half the BCS top 10 runs something besides it. You really need to find a new schtick.
 

257WBY

Suspended
Aug 20, 2011
2,077
1
0
Is it coincidence that Oregon lost (again) to Stanford, which has about 75 percent of the athleticism of Oregon across the board?

Or that Clemson lost (again) to South Carolina, despite having more talent on its offense than South Carolina had on its defense?

Or that Auburn lost to LSU?

Or that Missouri lost to South Carolina?

You seem to think the HUNH solves everything. We haven't even established it's a superior offense. Only one team running the offense has ever won a NC (AU, 2010). Florida's spread-option was a completely different thing and Alabama has three titles with a multiple pro-set. The HUNH basically doesn't exist at the pro level. More than half the BCS top 10 runs something besides it. You really need to find a new schtick.
Doesn't exist at the pro level? Have you ever watched Peyton Manning?
 

257WBY

Suspended
Aug 20, 2011
2,077
1
0
The reason a HUNH hasn't won a NC is because the most talented teams play keep away much like the old Dean Smith Four Corner Offense in basketball. LSU did fall to Clemson in a bowl last season. TAMU and Aub did beat a vastly superior Alabama team. If a team with the talent of Alabama or LSU ran it, they'd be more incredible than they already are.
 

Ldlane

Hall of Fame
Nov 26, 2002
14,253
398
102
Did you see the Seattle Game last evening where Russell Wilson (on my Fantasy Team) got his team to the line and snapped the ball before the Saints Gallette made it back across the LOS and set? It's there to be exploited in the NFL.

No other sport I can think of has a loophole in the rules that allows the offense to go before the defense is ready. Can you imagine if there was an equivalent HUNH in tennis? The server would be racing to sevice line once he got the ball hands to serve the ball in hopes the defense was not ready or even there before he served. Its a crummy loophole that is ruining the game.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

AlexanderFan

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
11,064
7,467
187
Birmingham
As long as they cater to the crowd that wants points on the board this is only going to get worse. The gimmick offenses will continue to "evolve" ( take advantage of the loopholes created for them) and pretty soon they will have twelve men on offense or two footballs. Maybe I should start watching more soccer and hockey, where the rules aren't so lopsided....

Sent from my HTC6500LVW using Tapatalk
 

Bamabuzzard

FB Moderator
Staff member
Aug 15, 2004
30,501
18,102
237
48
Where ever there's BBQ, Bourbon & Football
Doesn't exist at the pro level? Have you ever watched Peyton Manning?
I think what Jess means is you don't see the hyper pace in the NFL as you do in college where defenses can't even physically line up. I've watched the Broncos and though they get to the line of scrimmage quick Manning still takes an eternity to signal the snap due to his pre snap signals and adjustments at the line.
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,173
3,295
187
Sorry, ca, it is called HUNH, not HURP. Because they don't huddle, it is a "hurry up", as the primary point is to prevent subs on defense by getting the offense in place quickly; qb can take as long as he wants once offense is set, because especially in the pro's, qb wants to see what defense is doing. Defense tries to sub, ball is snapped, penalty on defense. It is an added bonus if they can run the play quickly and catch defense off guard.
There are those who want to run plays quickly, but that isn't a prerequisite for a HUNH, especially when a team has problems getting play in quickly. Manning and the pros do not, but he runs a HUNH. JMO
 
Last edited:

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,382
67,082
462
crimsonaudio.net
Sorry, ca, it is called HUNH, not HURP.
My point is that's not what most NFL teams do. The HUNH is what GM runs at the barn - you'll notice they not only tried to get to the line quickly, but also snap quickly - HUNH is not only about preventing subs (no huddle has been around for ever for that purpose), but also to limit the defense's ability to make pre-snap adjustments. Outside of two-minute type offenses, I've not seen anyone do this consistently in the NFL.
 

257WBY

Suspended
Aug 20, 2011
2,077
1
0
The tempo and rules is a lot like the old 40 minutes of hell that Arkansas basketball ran. There were a lot of fouls that could've been called on Arkansas that weren't because the pressure dictated the pace of the game and the refs went along with it. The same is happening with football.
 

gtgilbert

All-American
Aug 12, 2011
3,131
3,908
187
My point is that's not what most NFL teams do. The HUNH is what GM runs at the barn - you'll notice they not only tried to get to the line quickly, but also snap quickly - HUNH is not only about preventing subs (no huddle has been around for ever for that purpose), but also to limit the defense's ability to make pre-snap adjustments. Outside of two-minute type offenses, I've not seen anyone do this consistently in the NFL.
I have to go with twofbyc here; The purpose of the HUNH is really to keep the same Defensive personnel on the field and limit substitutions. GM has very often run his offense where they line up quickly, but then also take a lot of the play clock before snapping the ball. A lot of that is because he's calling the plays in over from the sideline based on what the D does, and if the D shifts, sometimes he'll call the audible instead of having the QB do it. He takes a big burden off his QBs by doing this. That's honestly the only thing I really hate about the HUNH as I love seeing the QB and MLB making all the adjustments on the field as I think is shows how good the opposing coaches are since they have to teach the players what adjustments and calls to make. We don't see this in the pro game because they have rules that limit the communication from the sidelines. The calls have to come in via the headset in the QB or MLB helmet, and they're turned off at a set time past once the ball is set. I'd love to see that rule implemented in the college game, along with none of those silly signs that get used. That way at least the offensive coaches would have the burden of coaching/teaching the QB how to make the checks on the field, OR would have to slightly slow down the pace.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,382
67,082
462
crimsonaudio.net
Yiup - more bending / changing of the rules to benefit the offense. We've been seeing this trend for years as the neophyte/ casual fan thinks offense is exciting, defense is boring.
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,810
15,647
182
Boone, NC
I'm looking at the overall picture of the future. To we keep the complicated Nickel Schemes (Which I love) or do we do some tweaking to handle these problematic offenses. There has to be some sort of Defensive "Evolution" to meet the demands of new offensive philosophies and athletes. Not hung up on yesterdays loss. The losses we've had have been to these sorts of teams. I mean I'm happy with our team, staff, etc.... but there is always room for improvement. I know CNS thinks that way also.
I think this is a fair and balanced approach. "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater."

When we play a pro-set team (similar to ours) CNS can do his scheming like no other!!!

But one of the things that made Coach Bryant so successful was his willingness to change and adjust.

CNS, if he's the coach I think he is, will be willing to do so too!!!

I'm not an x's and o's guy in football but something as simple as a "triangle and 2" (to use a basketball approach) might would have been more effective. Mosely struggled with his reads the whole game and was essentially taken out of the game with his confusion. What if Mosely would have always been assigned Mason or the running back off the option and our Jack Linebacker, Hubbard or a saftey in the box would have always had Marshall?

Maybe that's too simple, but take away those two options on every play and the other 9 players do their part and who knows?
Auburn's blocking scheme, to me, seems predicated on first level blocking, so two spies at the second level might work.

I know CNS or CKS knows more about this than most of us combined, but is it possible CNS and company have over-thought the HUNH???

Edit: I posted this before reading past the second page, but now going back and reading other comments throughout the thread I see where many are saying some similar things. This is a awesome place to talk football!!!
 
Last edited:

nx4bama

All-SEC
Apr 8, 2010
1,141
1
57
NW Alabama
This may have already been mentioned and if so, just disregard, I guess. But, I think the big reason we were not as successful defending the run aspect of Malzahn's offense saturday as opposed to the other 3 meetings is our defensive line. If I understand correctly, our nose guard is supposed swallow up 2 blocks on every play and while we have some good players at that position, they aren't terrence cody or jesse williams. So, rather than overpower the offensive line like we are accustomed to under saban, we were having to scheme a little more to defend the middle of the line. Maybe I'm oversimplifying things. But, that's just been my observation all year. Our Defensive line doesn't seem up to the standard that we are used to.
 

BradtheImpaler

All-American
Nov 16, 2010
2,001
0
0
Sugar Hill, GA
The tempo and rules is a lot like the old 40 minutes of hell that Arkansas basketball ran. There were a lot of fouls that could've been called on Arkansas that weren't because the pressure dictated the pace of the game and the refs went along with it. The same is happening with football.
And this is a good thing?
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.