West Coast Offense
Can anyone explain it in simple terms.
I understand the "Run to setup the Pass" basic theory, but I don't quite understand the logic of the West Coast. Seems like a lot of random passing and throwing, but little logic.
I understand the "Run to setup the Pass" basic theory, but I don't quite understand the logic of the West Coast. Seems like a lot of random passing and throwing, but little logic.
0
-
In the NFL rarely do you run to setup the pass anymore, it's quite the opposite.
as far as the west coast offence goes it's a bunch of quick drops, 3 steps or so and release. precise routes must be run and intermediate routes are the ticket. the "little logic" quote you had is just the point.0 -
I don't know. Seems like I've seen a lot of teams try this West Coast and fail. They had the talent, but were unable to play the system, what ever it is.
Does Dallas do some sort of West Coast? The first thing I noticed about him was this exceptional sense of timing. He would drop back and pass to an exact position watching the receiver. Looked like great timing.0 -
To have a good "West Coast Offense" the team has to be built a specific way. A solid group of recievers is naturally a must, along with a quarterback capable of instant, correct "reads" of defensive alignments, ala Dan Fouts, Kurt Warner, etc. The running game is somewhat secondary, with the RBs catching many short passes out of the backfield rather than a dedicated running attack. These short passes happen very quickly and really are a form of the "run". If you can put together the right personnel (easier said than done) it can prove very effective. You need to have not only quick, fast people, they also have to have a brain that functions at high speed, and this is the trait that's hardest to find these days. Things are designed to happen FAST, four or five recievers blasting off, and the QB finding a target and hitting the man NOW, and it's beautiful when it's executed properly, and can be disastrous when not. At this point in football "evolution" there's not anything really "new", it's not rocket science, and it's all been done before somewhere, and a lot of it forgotten. A lot of NFL passing records date back 50 and more years, the old Rams of the early 50s come to mind, they had some amazing plays executed by some amazing athletes. I like to watch a good "West Coast Offense" in action, but I'm not a big fan of it for winning championships. There's more than one way to skin a cat. The only true West Coast Offense team to win a Super Bowl was the Saint Louis Rams, and they were losers if Mike Jones doesn't make "The Tackle". A lot of teams have had winning seasons with the wide open style of the West Coast Offense, most notably the Chargers under Don Coryell, but have always come up short. I'll take a strong offensive line, a couple of real horses in the backfield, run the ball to set up the pass and control the clock when necessary, and rely on a great defensive unit. Old time power football, it has worked much more often than the pass happy offenses that have come and gone over the years. Woody Hayes used to say, "There's three things that can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad". 0 -
"I'll take a strong offensive line, a couple of real horses in the backfield, run the ball to set up the pass and control the clock when necessary, and rely on a great defensive unit. Old time power football, it has worked much more often than the pass happy offenses that have come and gone over the years. Woody Hayes used to say, "There's three things that can happen when you throw the ball, and two of them are bad"."
Amen.
This offensive plan reminds me of playing volleyball as a kid. Everyone want to spike the ball and play a dominating offense. Most of the time it failed. Just get the ball over the net and let the other team screw up seemed like a better strategy.
The Bears version of the West Coast seems to be a typical case. When it works, the quarterback looks like a hall of flamer. When it doesn't work, the fans want to sacrifice the quarterback. When it fails, there doesn't appear to be a game plan where one play sets up another. When it fails, the first and second quarters don't set up the fourth quarter.
I still believe good old fashion Ditka-ball would clean up in today's NFL. Run the ball down their throats. Wear out the defensive line. Then throw deep later in the game. The fourth quarter is when the big runs come as the defense is worn out. Classic ball control and clock control.
Like 75% or perhaps 99% of football fans, I understand very very little of the game, but it is very fun to watch. We criticize the quarterback when it is more than likely the offensive coordinator. We criticize the running back when it is more than likely the offensive line. A weak defense is many times an indication that the offense is just plain poor, but when the west coast wroks, it is fun to watch.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Captplaid
Like 75% or perhaps 99% of football fans, I understand very very little of the game, but it is very fun to watch.
And like 99% of the football "experts" in the media. Most of these guys are wrong in their analysis of things that already happened! Listen to the retired jocks and coaches, watch what happens and draw your own conclusions, but don't put much credence in the journalists, most of them have never put on a pad at any level. There are a lot of misconceptions about the game. The three most important things in footbal are, #1 the players, #2 the players, and #3 the players. The coaches make no blocks, no tackles, catch no passes, make no runs, etc. Too much is made of the importance of coaching, coaches are villified by the fans and media for poor performance by teams staffed with too many bad players. You can't make a silk purse from a sows ear. The coach naturally can be expected to do the best with the personnel the front office provides him with, but it's not his fault if that talent is sub par. With todays structure of free agency, the draft, which penalizes good records, and salary caps, the front office is the most important part of the teams management. The team that fields a competitive team year after year, ala the Patriots, has a superior personnel director. This is been proven many times over the years by coaches who have a long record of poor results and get hooked up with a good bunch of players and look like geniouses, and vice versa. A good example was Chuck Knoll, my grandmother could have won four Super Bowls with that bunch of monsters.
The offense starts and ends, lives and dies, with the offensive line. A bad line makes great QBs, running backs, and recievers look average. A good line makes average QBs, backs and recievers look good, and good ones look great. Throw in a truly great offensive backfield and you have a Champion. If the QB does not have time he will be ineffective most of the game, if he has time he will do good things as he can have a sec or two to scan the defensive alignment and find his targets as they have time to run the routes and get open. Given time NFL recievers will get open, they are impossible to cover for long. If a poor line can't effectively run block, there goes your running game, backs have to have blocks made that open holes and lanes for them to be effective. ANY back in the NFL will be effective behind a good line. Put a L. Tomlinson behind a good line, and he is, and look what you have. If he was running behind a poor line it would be La Danian who? When an offense is struggling through a season if you watch close you will realize it's the line. If you want proof of the importance of the offensive line, or the difficulty of putting a good one together, the only players making more money on the average are QBs.
This is also true on the defensive unit. It's the line. The defense starts here, and you better have linemen that can pass rush and block running lanes. Everything to reverse the offense, pass rush strong enough to limit the QBs time, tackling quick and strong enough to shut off a running back. If the defensive line does it's job properly the defensive backfield has a much easier task.In short, the lineman on both offense and defense are, the vast majority of the time, the players with the most impact on the teams success, or lack thereof.
It is a team effort, and of course the coaches are important, but remember, the players make the plays that win or lose the game. There's lots of good football coaches out there that would be winners with enough good players, and losers without them.0 -
Then we have what we call in Philly "The East Coast Offensive".
Fueled by cheesesteaks, Oxygenated by hot air, and exhausted with aplomb.
And our weekend song "Oh when the Saints get buried now"
GO BIRDS!!!0 -
I agree with you 100%. Great read. Bad Offenses start at the line. Consider how good the Bears were in 2005. Hutchinson & Orton were basically zombies at the quarterback position and the still made the playoffs. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by stankemp
Then we have what we call in Philly "The East Coast Offensive".
Fueled by cheesesteaks, Oxygenated by hot air, and exhausted with aplomb.
And our weekend song "Oh when the Saints get buried now"
GO BIRDS!!!
hey philly wanna see a Lombardi trophy?
better google it.0 -
In the West Coast offense the idea is for the receiver to run patterns based off of the "read" he gets in the coverage of the defense. A simplified example would be to start the route straight downfield and look to see where the covering LB or DB goes. If the DB drops into coverage, cut off the route and run a buttonhook. If the DB closed, run a streak route on a post or flag pattern. If the DB covers you to the inside, square out to the outside, if he covers you outside, square in to the inside. A short pass is considered as good as a run.
That's an oversimplification, but the basic idea is to run whatever route the defense gives you rather than always predefining where you are going to go. The difficulty is that the QB and several receivers have to make exactly the same decisions in seconds, and then run exactly a precision route of the type chosen on the fly so that the QB can essentially throw to a spot. Better be there, or the interceptions will get pretty out of hand - ask Favre last year with the receivers he had![:)]0 -
That makes sense! I understand why so many teams fail with it. Now that I think of it, I don't see many teams with variations of the W.C. ever make audibles. Players are suppose to identify the defense and automatically see the same things. Good luck getting a QB and receivers thinking the same.
Again the volleyball analogy.0 -
Thanks guys, you gave me more to look at in todays Bears/Seahawks game. I understand the West Coast more. Rex did a better job utilizing the short pass today. He would look down field bet knew where his open short man was. I understand the game plan logic a little better.
I still prefer Run-to-setup-the-pass offense better.0 -
The West Coast Offense seems to be effective at the collegiate level more so than at the pros.....I'm not sure why but Urban Meyer, Bobby Petrino, Steve Kragthorpe, and Steve Spurrier have had good success with it. With Spurrier, he couldn't make it work at the professional level and I reckon that has more to do with overall team speed on defense in the NFL where matchup problems are harder to create. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments