There are 166 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Is this the type of WCO you expected?

Is this the type of WCO you expected?

Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Originally posted by NCommand:
Another thing Bill Walsh was a master in was attacking defensive weaknesses with the WCO and continuing to exploit it. Aside from that Seattle TD drive the only time I see us sticking to a play that works is in the running game.

Yes, and I really liked the short passes to the backs! Some call them checkdowns but under Walsh the drip, drip drip of these types of passes would drive defenses nuts until they started over playing them...then boom! TD. I hope Roman has the same intent, but as you say--they don't stay with one thing long enough for the D to over react.

Correct me if I'm wrong (shocker), but the main difference between a "checkdown" and a short pass is one guy is running a route and hopefully could be hit in stride with space to run, while the other guy is just a release valve that stands there with no real designed space to run.
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
As soon as I heard "run to set up the pass" I knew it wasn't the original WCO. I'm a Stanford fan so knew JH did not run a traditional WCO, but did expect a more proficient passing game by now.

Problems:

  • To run in order to set up the pass, 1st down runs have to make significant yards...yet it seems passes have worked better on 1st down this year.
  • Experimenting is great but sooner or later you have to develop your go-to plays...hasn't happened yet.
  • Run first means the line has to impose its will every game, hasn't happened, although it is looking much better.
  • Running teams traditionally have either a very effective screen pass game or a vertical pass game, or both. The first spreads the D laterally, the second vertically.
  • Smith and the receivers have to be so in sync that they achieve a very high efficiency rate...hasn't happened yet.
  • Fewer take-aways means opportunities have to lead to higher scoring efficiency.
  • ST has not scored or forced turn overs as they did last year, but the team is still winning.

The good news is that even though the D and ST have not scored or taken the ball away, the team is still successful. I attribute that to the offense being able to sustain drives and limit time of possession in most games. The two games we lost were both negative in time of possession. Det was also negative but by a minute.

The huge problem that we have is that we don't have a QB good enought to "pass to set up the run"
Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Correct me if I'm wrong (shocker), but the main difference between a "checkdown" and a short pass is one guy is running a route and hopefully could be hit in stride with space to run, while the other guy is just a release valve that stands there with no real designed space to run.

In the Zone, a short pass play is a 'checkdown' to make it sounds worse for Smith to implied that he basically gave up on the more sophisticated route patterns of receivers. At this point any short, crossing pattern, underneath clear out pattern, or RB coming out for a pass is a 'checkdown' in the zone. We get it
No. defining the WCO: the offensive system popularized by Bill Walsh characterized by short, horizontal passing routes in lieu of running plays to "stretch out" defenses, opening up the potential for long runs or long passes.
Haven't seen even a version of it really ...I keep thinking that they're holding the real playbook back our offense is way to simple and vanilla
"Type" of WCO?

LOL @ people even thinking there are "types."

For that matter, what the 49ers ran in the Walsh years wasn't even the "West Coast Offense." The West Coast Offense was Sid Gillman's system in San Diego.

All these idiotic, inaccurate definitions of it are just revisionist history...people trying to define what the 49ers ran during the Walsh years after the fact.

It was not a short passing game (no more than anyone else's). It was not a "pass to set up the run" offense. It did not rely on big receivers.

Apparently people have forgotten Freddie Solomon. Apparently people have forgotten that the 49ers signed Renaldo Nehemiah. Apparently the countless bombs on deep posts to Rice have vanished from their memory, replaced with 4-5 long runs after the catch by Rice or Taylor that stick out in their minds, but were actually far less common forms of the big play than a simple vertical throw. The huge yards/catch averages for Solomon, Rice, and Taylor over the years evade their attention.

The fact that Walsh preferred both Steve Fuller and Steve Dils to Joe Montana in the 1979 draft is never talked about. Nor is the fact that he had Eddie Brown ahead of Jerry Rice on his draft board in the 1985 draft ever mentioned.

Walsh ran plays to take advantage of his personnel. Period, the end. When the team couldn't get anything going on the ground, he had to pass more.

Now, as far as attributes that defined Walsh's offense (though weren't exclusive to his), that continued to be used by the 49ers into the mid-90's?

1. The vast majority of plays were run out of the pro set. If your team doesn't make heavy use of the split backfield, you're not running Walsh's system. Period, the end. Don't call it "West Coast Offense" unless you're running the Gillman offense (nobody's doing that either).

2. Because of 1, only rarely was a 3rd receiver involved.

3. Little to no shotgun. There was a little shotgun with Montana in the 1986 season, but, for the most part, it was about as much of a gadget play to the Walsh offense as when they put Freddie Solomon in at QB and ran the option.

And that last part of 3 goes back to the "run plays that take advantage of personnel" aspect - Solomon was a QB at Tampa in college. A star one, at that. A running QB. Walsh made use of that fact with some tricks and gadgets. That's never talked about.

Instead, a bunch of drones babble on about all the classic "WCO" cliche myths.

And now we have people talking about different "types" of WCO. What a joke. So apparently if the 49ers line up every down in the shotgun and run the option every single play, and the coach claims to be from the "WCO tree" and the media claims they are running the "WCO," they are still running the WCO...just a different "type."

That's as idiotic as saying circles are a different type of square.
Originally posted by 1For13On3rdDown:
"Type" of WCO?

LOL @ people even thinking there are "types."

For that matter, what the 49ers ran in the Walsh years wasn't even the "West Coast Offense." The West Coast Offense was Sid Gillman's system in San Diego.

All these idiotic, inaccurate definitions of it are just revisionist history...people trying to define what the 49ers ran during the Walsh years after the fact.

It was not a short passing game (no more than anyone else's). It was not a "pass to set up the run" offense. It did not rely on big receivers.

Apparently people have forgotten Freddie Solomon. Apparently people have forgotten that the 49ers signed Renaldo Nehemiah. Apparently the countless bombs on deep posts to Rice have vanished from their memory, replaced with 4-5 long runs after the catch by Rice or Taylor that stick out in their minds, but were actually far less common forms of the big play than a simple vertical throw. The huge yards/catch averages for Solomon, Rice, and Taylor over the years evade their attention.

The fact that Walsh preferred both Steve Fuller and Steve Dils to Joe Montana in the 1979 draft is never talked about. Nor is the fact that he had Eddie Brown ahead of Jerry Rice on his draft board in the 1985 draft ever mentioned.

Walsh ran plays to take advantage of his personnel. Period, the end. When the team couldn't get anything going on the ground, he had to pass more.

Now, as far as attributes that defined Walsh's offense (though weren't exclusive to his), that continued to be used by the 49ers into the mid-90's?

1. The vast majority of plays were run out of the pro set. If your team doesn't make heavy use of the split backfield, you're not running Walsh's system. Period, the end. Don't call it "West Coast Offense" unless you're running the Gillman offense (nobody's doing that either).

2. Because of 1, only rarely was a 3rd receiver involved.

3. Little to no shotgun. There was a little shotgun with Montana in the 1986 season, but, for the most part, it was about as much of a gadget play to the Walsh offense as when they put Freddie Solomon in at QB and ran the option.

And that last part of 3 goes back to the "run plays that take advantage of personnel" aspect - Solomon was a QB at Tampa in college. A star one, at that. A running QB. Walsh made use of that fact with some tricks and gadgets. That's never talked about.

Instead, a bunch of drones babble on about all the classic "WCO" cliche myths.

And now we have people talking about different "types" of WCO. What a joke. So apparently if the 49ers line up every down in the shotgun and run the option every single play, and the coach claims to be from the "WCO tree" and the media claims they are running the "WCO," they are still running the WCO...just a different "type."

That's as idiotic as saying circles are a different type of square.

Good luck with this post.
Originally posted by paperplanemedia:
Good luck with this post.

What does that even mean?

People don't want to take me on in a discussion of the old 49er offenses. I have so many old 49ers games on DVD the FBI probably has a file on me.
Originally posted by Oakland-Niner:
Correct me if I'm wrong (shocker), but the main difference between a "checkdown" and a short pass is one guy is running a route and hopefully could be hit in stride with space to run, while the other guy is just a release valve that stands there with no real designed space to run.

A check down by definition is one intended consequence of the play. So whether you call it a route or standing around it is the same. I really doubt that effective "check downs" can be consistently completed if players are just standing their. My favorite "check downs" in the Walsh days were the five to fifteen yard passes to the TE or RB after he blocks/chips the DE and then just slowly eases out into the middle of the field. Similar to the old button hooks. The passes in the Seattle game were very similar to those. If you recall the old button hook the idea was to circle the DB and come back toward the QB so the DB would be behind the receiver...easy completion and sometimes a long run afterwards.
Originally posted by 1For13On3rdDown:
"Type" of WCO?

LOL @ people even thinking there are "types."

For that matter, what the 49ers ran in the Walsh years wasn't even the "West Coast Offense." The West Coast Offense was Sid Gillman's system in San Diego.

All these idiotic, inaccurate definitions of it are just revisionist history...people trying to define what the 49ers ran during the Walsh years after the fact.

It was not a short passing game (no more than anyone else's). It was not a "pass to set up the run" offense. It did not rely on big receivers.

Apparently people have forgotten Freddie Solomon. Apparently people have forgotten that the 49ers signed Renaldo Nehemiah. Apparently the countless bombs on deep posts to Rice have vanished from their memory, replaced with 4-5 long runs after the catch by Rice or Taylor that stick out in their minds, but were actually far less common forms of the big play than a simple vertical throw. The huge yards/catch averages for Solomon, Rice, and Taylor over the years evade their attention.

The fact that Walsh preferred both Steve Fuller and Steve Dils to Joe Montana in the 1979 draft is never talked about. Nor is the fact that he had Eddie Brown ahead of Jerry Rice on his draft board in the 1985 draft ever mentioned.

Walsh ran plays to take advantage of his personnel. Period, the end. When the team couldn't get anything going on the ground, he had to pass more.

Now, as far as attributes that defined Walsh's offense (though weren't exclusive to his), that continued to be used by the 49ers into the mid-90's?

1. The vast majority of plays were run out of the pro set. If your team doesn't make heavy use of the split backfield, you're not running Walsh's system. Period, the end. Don't call it "West Coast Offense" unless you're running the Gillman offense (nobody's doing that either).

2. Because of 1, only rarely was a 3rd receiver involved.

3. Little to no shotgun. There was a little shotgun with Montana in the 1986 season, but, for the most part, it was about as much of a gadget play to the Walsh offense as when they put Freddie Solomon in at QB and ran the option.

And that last part of 3 goes back to the "run plays that take advantage of personnel" aspect - Solomon was a QB at Tampa in college. A star one, at that. A running QB. Walsh made use of that fact with some tricks and gadgets. That's never talked about.

Instead, a bunch of drones babble on about all the classic "WCO" cliche myths.

And now we have people talking about different "types" of WCO. What a joke. So apparently if the 49ers line up every down in the shotgun and run the option every single play, and the coach claims to be from the "WCO tree" and the media claims they are running the "WCO," they are still running the WCO...just a different "type."

That's as idiotic as saying circles are a different type of square.


Like Harbaugh, Walsh was always rewriting his offense to make it more effective. There was no play that he would not have already thought of and would use in the right situation.

My only major disagreement with you is that Walsh only "...ran plays to take advantage of his personnel. Period, the end." While this is certainly a Walsh strength, an equal emphasis was to know and take advantage of the opposition. His talks comparing football to boxing, with jabs and counter-jabs demonstrate this. He would set up players and coaches throughout the season, game by game, and into the playoffs...because he knew football so well that he really had a feel for what other coaches were trying to do.

I believe this work ethic over years is the thing that best connects Walsh and Harbaugh...not the system or particular play calling.
Originally posted by 1For13On3rdDown:
What does that even mean?

People don't want to take me on in a discussion of the old 49er offenses. I have so many old 49ers games on DVD the FBI probably has a file on me.

Growing up watching this team, everyone and their mamma "coined" it the "West Coast Offense" so it's idiotic to think otherwise unless you want to talk in technical terms. So it's really idiotic to try to even take you on in a discussion. It's also idiotic to think that the FBI has a file on anyone because of DVD films. Just saying.
Originally posted by paperplanemedia:
Originally posted by 1For13On3rdDown:
What does that even mean?

People don't want to take me on in a discussion of the old 49er offenses. I have so many old 49ers games on DVD the FBI probably has a file on me.

Growing up watching this team, everyone and their mamma "coined" it the "West Coast Offense" so it's idiotic to think otherwise unless you want to talk in technical terms. So it's really idiotic to try to even take you on in a discussion. It's also idiotic to think that the FBI has a file on anyone because of DVD films. Just saying.

It is a federal offense.. Just saying
Crabtree needs to run slants the few times he runs them he gets great YAC plus its an easy throw for Alex... Like the Detroit game... Too bad Harbs dont see it
Originally posted by NCommand:
Hell no!

I call it the Anti-WCO...it relies on big, physical OL dominating the DL's in the running game, we have micro-sized WR's, only one is excellent off the LOS (quick hands, release, first step, etc.), we have zero prototypical-sized WR's, on good pass catching RB, a QB that comes from a spread offense, etc. And that's just personnel.

As far as scheme, we rarely run staple plays such as the slant, post-pattern, crossing route, rarely use the TE's to exploit zone holes, rarely use the FB & RB in the passing game, etc.

In fact, I'm struggling to find any semblance of a WCO on any level. I want to hear a "red, 59 razor" at the LOS, not a "kill" or "roll."
I have to somewhat agree. We neeed to get some more plays to get our TEs open. play action with Moss running deep and VD running the post out(anybody with madden knows the play lol), but seriously. Anybody not named Moss should be running cross routes. And im still not understanding how we have the worlds most athletic O-line, yet, we rarely run any screens. WR screens to KW or RB screens to Hunter or LMJ, I just dont understand. We have alot of guys that can make plays in space but we dont give them the chance.
In regards to the QB from a spread offense, he's been out of the spread for 7yrs now, but if he excells in the spread, then we should run more spread. If we're running slants like you said and we have VD, Moss, KW/Ham and Crab on the field, somebody will be open for an 8yrd+ catch. They wouldnt take moss or davis one on one so it would open up space. We're not even factoring in what the RB could be doing. idk if just sounds really simple or if it really is.
Originally posted by paperplanemedia:
Growing up watching this team, everyone and their mamma "coined" it the "West Coast Offense" so it's idiotic to think otherwise unless you want to talk in technical terms. So it's really idiotic to try to even take you on in a discussion. It's also idiotic to think that the FBI has a file on anyone because of DVD films. Just saying.

You must have grown up in the 90's. Nobody was calling it the "West Coast Offense" until Bill Parcells slighted the team following the Giants' win in the 1985-86 wildcard playoff game. He meant it as an insult, but it stuck. Nobody and their "mamma" coined the term. It was a term coined for the Sid Gillman Chargers' offenses.

What's really idiotic is that you took a tongue-in-cheek remark about the FBI having a file on me literally.
Originally posted by 1For13On3rdDown:
Originally posted by paperplanemedia:
Growing up watching this team, everyone and their mamma "coined" it the "West Coast Offense" so it's idiotic to think otherwise unless you want to talk in technical terms. So it's really idiotic to try to even take you on in a discussion. It's also idiotic to think that the FBI has a file on anyone because of DVD films. Just saying.

You must have grown up in the 90's. Nobody was calling it the "West Coast Offense" until Bill Parcells slighted the team following the Giants' win in the 1985-86 wildcard playoff game. He meant it as an insult, but it stuck. Nobody and their "mamma" coined the term. It was a term coined for the Sid Gillman Chargers' offenses.

What's really idiotic is that you took a tongue-in-cheek remark about the FBI having a file on me literally.

I meant to say everyone and their mamma called it the WCO after it was "coined" that. Who creates a negative user name about a 5-2 team anyway? Yeah we need to get better on offense especially in the passing game and that starts with the coaching, scheme, and of course all 11 players being able to execute it. If Singletary and Jimmy Raye were able to call effective plays in the redzone, I would certainly think that Harbaugh and Roman could improve on it. Instead it has gotten worse.
[ Edited by paperplanemedia on Oct 26, 2012 at 7:53 AM ]