Chip Kelly offence?

The Game Room
1

Saw a meme on my facebook today about this. I had no idea who Chip Kelly was let alone what sort of offence he runs, so I’ve tried to look it up. However most of what I’ve read assumes (as you’d expect) a good knowledge of NFL already. Unfortunately, that’s not me. I’ve got a decent grasp of the basics, as good you’d expect from a casual fan of the sport from Australia anyway.

If I understand it correctly, (I haven’t seen an Eagles game so far this year) the offence operates without a huddle (aka a hurry up offence right?), and it seems to revolve around having multiple play options on every play? Am I vaguely correct? and either way. anyone care to give me the ‘Dummies Guide’ to Chip Kelly’s offence, and why some pundits consider it to be revolutionary?

Thanks.

2

On a very base level, you already have it. Each play has a handful of options or plays that can all be run out of it with similar formations and similar personnel. The threat of Mike Vick at quarterback bolsters it (for as long as he stays healthy) because of his skills of running, too. The defense, when the play is started, has to react. Dependent on how a few key defensive personnel react, that determines what offensive weapon gets utilized.

3

I guess there are two separate but related aspects here. The first is the tempo of the offense. Kelley tries to push things as fast as possible, to get the plays off very rapidly, which prevents the defense from substituting and makes it harder for them to utilize exotic schemes, among other potential benefits. This is rare, but not exactly unprecedented. The Jim Kelley Bills in their heyday ran plays nearly as rapidly if you go back and watch their games.

The other part is the read-option, which has already been discussed: at the snap, depending on what the defense is doing in the first couple seconds of the play, the QB might hand the ball off, pass it, or run with it himself (and then there might be some sub-options branching out from those basic three). This is only just starting to creep into the NFL, but it’s been a staple of college football for years.

So, it’s novel for the NFL, but “revolutionary” might be overstating it. “Evolutionary” is more like it.

4

It’s the same sort of up tempo offense he used at Oregon, and several college teams are trying to imitate. In the NFL, it’s kind of gimmicky. Also has the potential to wear down his players, with the offense running so many plays per game, and the players taking more big hits.

5

See that was part of it I didn’t get. Why does it involve running more plays and why does it expose the players to more hits?

6

The sooner you snap the ball after the previous play ended, the less time runs off the game clock. The less time you take on your offensive drives, the more time is available for more drives overall, so that translates to running more plays.

More plays means more hits, at least theoretically. Not every play ends in a tackle, but there are collisions of other sorts during plays.

7

Pros:

  • It’s fast, so the defense can’t substitute. That means if you’ve got run-stopping personnel in there, they can air it out and vice versa.
  • It’s versatile, so the players are more comfortable making adjustments at the line.
  • It’s new, so defenses can’t figure it out.

Cons:

  • It’s tiring, so even though the defense is fatigued, the offense is too. Plus the offensive players are the ones getting hit.
  • It’s complex, so instead of just memorizing plays, the offense needs to understand the plays and the options off of it. Plus the have to know the different formations to run out of and who’s on the line, who’s off the line, who’s eligible, etc. Some guys just aren’t smart enough to learn it.
  • It might be gimmicky. Once the defense is drilled what to do, they could potentially shut it down. Fool the league once, shame on the eagles, but fool the league twice? Let’s just say they might be able to fool the league again.

is a good read for the pro’s.

8

The possibility of all the players running more plays and getting hit more is one concern, but not the main one. Kelly’s system makes hits on the quarterback, specifically, significantly more likely than NFL offenses have been willing to tolerate.

In a traditional (i.e. last 50 years or so) NFL offense, a good team can limit the defense to a mere handful of solid hits on the QB per game (this includes plays where he’s hit after releasing the ball). When Tom Brady or Peyton Manning are at their best, they might go a whole game without taking more than one or two hard hits.

The nature of Kelly’s offense makes at least occasional hard hits on the QB almost inevitable. This is mitigated if the QB is good decision maker … but Vick is not. He has never been good at protecting himself and avoiding hits, and this scheme may exacerbate this weakness.

9

On a conceptual level, maybe here’s the thing to understand, and the Grantland article illustrates: Kelly (and others like him, he’s just example 1a of a trend) takes what traditional offenses do in 3-4 plays, and do it in one.

A traditional offense has core plays it wants to run, and then other plays that are based off that. So maybe your core play is an off-tackle run from an I formation. One complement of that is a counter play, where the RB takes his first step like it is an off-tackle run, then breaks the other way. Another complement would be a play-action pass, where they fake that off-tackle run, but then throw the ball. The idea is to get the defense trying to stop play A, and then run play B or C (or D or E). The offense and defense are constantly trying to outguess each other as to which one is coming. That’s what QBs are doing at the line when they’re pointing and changing the play … they started with A, but after seeing the defense lined up, they switch to B or C or D.

In Kelly’s offense, A and B and C are all being run at the same time. Again, read the Grantland article to see this explained specifically. On the one play, they may have an off-tackle run by the halfback, a counter play (in the form of the QB keeping it himself), and a play-action pass (or two) all already built in. Thus there is seldom a need for the QB to change the play at the line – whatever the defense is doing, the proper response is usually already built into the play, the QB just needs to be able to make the right decision.

The irony of everyone talking about how many snaps the Eagles take, is that they will probably run the fewest number of plays of anyone in the league – Kelly has a short playbook, and often runs the same play again and again. It doesn’t *look *like the same play on TV, because one time the back gets it, another time the QB keeps, and another time he throws it … but the call from the sideline was the exact same.

Kelly has said the ideal QB for his offense would be Rajon Rondo. His plays look like basketball plays, with a sequence of if/then commands, rather than a single, definite course of action.

10

It should be noted that the Eagles are 1-2 so far this season, so defenses are obviously coping with Chip’s offense.

I think the major problem I have with this is:

  1. This system was designed when Chip had 100 kids playing for him. Now he has 53 (many of whom are NOT kids by any stretch).
  2. Those same kids played 12-14 games a year with 2 off weeks. Now, there’s at least 16 games with 1 off week and another 3 games possible.
  3. Many of those games were against teams with a substantially lower talent pool than Oregon had. Now, while certainly not all pro teams are created equal, the difference between first and worst is not as sharp as it was in college.

I just don’t see how this is viable as a long term strategy - especially as defenses learn to slow things down (“injuries”, etc). I could also eventually see some rule tweaks to allow the defense some minimum amount of time for substitutions.

11

They scored 30 points and gained more than 500 yards in the Chargers game. San Diego “coping with Chip’s offense” had nothing to do with that loss. Were the Eagles even adequate defensively, they’d be 2-1 for certain, and maybe even 3-0.

12

They’re second in the league in total yards.

13

That’s skewed a bit by the hurry-up offense, but they are 6th in yards per drive and 4th in points per drive (and, not surprisingly, 29th in time of possession per drive).

Of course, that’s through Week 2; I’m sure they’re gonna drop a bit after last night’s game.

14

I don’t think they are skewed, actually. They’re second in yards per play overall, too; first in yards per rush and fifth in net yards per pass.

15

Thanks everyone for your replies. Very helpful and enlightening.

16

Granted to all of those stats, but here’s the problem. A lot of times the offense will run a long drive (i.e., try to use up clock) at least partly to let the defense rest. The Eagles defense doesn’t get that break and I wonder how much of the massive numbers they’re giving up is a result of that. Sure the opposing team’s defense gets worn down (ideally), but so does your own.

17

In the OP you could probably insert my handle for GreedySmurf. I know something but not enough. I too haven’t watched the Eagles.

Reading the thread it sounds a lot like the wishbone except for the no huddle. Is that correct at all? What is the positioning of the backs?

Fight my ignorance.

18

Eagles fan here. Don’t bother to learn his offense. We’re firing him next week. :smiley:

19

Yup, looks like the Chip Kelly offense lasted about 1/2 of a game before people adjusted.

That said, I don’t think he should try to change in mid-stream; these aren’t the Browns, after all. Maybe once his players get used to doing this full time in real games then things will settle down and they’ll have more consistent success. All I know is the first half of their first game I was watching with my jaw on the floor - as were the Redskins, and everyone else in the league. Keeping Vick upright is going to be a big factor however.

For the record, I HATE the Eagles. I have two favorite teams - the Cowboys and whoever is playing the Eagles. :stuck_out_tongue:

20

I so hate the two different words spelled “offense.” I thought this must be some player I’d not heard of that did something offensive and was looking forward to reading about a scandal, even if it was going to be a in a sport I was not familiar with.