What's the argument for going to the West Coast offense?

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Norv uses alot of WCO in his own system.

like what?

Quote:
Still, in a poll of coaches and personnel directors, Holmgren was frequently cited as one of the guys who adheres most closely to the West Coast primer as authored by Walsh and who best understands its principles. Norv Turner, Zampese, Brian Billick and Mike Martz were also named quite often.

http://assets.espn.go.com/nfl/s/westcoast/history.html

so? every team in the leagues uses at least some WCO: its a passing league now, and the WCO is all about using the pass instead of the run to establish the offense. All those guys' offenses look somewhat different from each others, and would all look different from Walsh's WCO.

Anyway, I'm not saying that Norv doesn't run the WCO or follow its principles or whatever. I'm just incredibly leery of the "Bring back the WCO" drumbeat and very skeptical of people who attribute the WCO to every successful offense in the league. Every offense utilizes some "aspects" of the WCO, I'm sure, because they've had 20 something years to copy and refine it and meld it to other successful philosophies. "WCO" is a meaningless term today, IMO.

You asked the question.. Now you answered it... Why ask me the question, if you didn't want an answer.

i wanted to know what YOUR answer was, because a lot of people just see a slant route and assume the team runs the WCO.

Originally posted by jimrat201:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Norv uses alot of WCO in his own system.

like what?

Quote:
Still, in a poll of coaches and personnel directors, Holmgren was frequently cited as one of the guys who adheres most closely to the West Coast primer as authored by Walsh and who best understands its principles. Norv Turner, Zampese, Brian Billick and Mike Martz were also named quite often.

http://assets.espn.go.com/nfl/s/westcoast/history.html

Two OC coordinators from the Cowboys Super Bowl era

Len Pasquarelli Talking out his ass when he said it incorporated other styles such as Coryell and Gillman Turner and Zampese. Turner and Zampese were not doing s**t when Walsh developed the system. Hell no one even knew who they where.

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Certainly, the better the coach the better the results, but the WCO is diverse enough to go any which way to take advantage of the player's skills and the defensive weaknesses. In my thinking, the WCO is not written in stone but is theory that includes inovation as part of the plan.

Edit--The WCO is about how to train/coach players to see the D and react to it. It goes way beyond drawing plays on the board.

Just about the entire league does this now.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Norv uses alot of WCO in his own system.

like what?

Like alot of screen passes to his RB's, he did it more when he had LT, alot of stuff to the TE, slants to WR's. shots down field, but it has alot of WCO in it. Watch the Chargers O, the resemble the 90's niners more than the 90's cowboys.

We are forgetting that these exact same things were being said at the end of the Erickson reign. Guess what Nolan, yes Nolan, did? He brought in a WCO offense pedigree OC in McCarthy who's now regarded as one of the better coaches in the league because he's had success. What happened with the WCO then? Shouldn't that have solved all of our problems? Too bad Norv Turner, a NON WCO guy, came in and had this team perform better than McCarthy.

Point is: how Steve Young talks is no different than how Mike Singletary talks. There's a whole lot of generalities but no substance: "punch em in the mouth" as opposed to "tradition" or "we want to be able to run the ball when we want" as opposed to "WC this or WC that"

What offense we use does not matter. What OC we have does.

Originally posted by Joecool:


What offense we use does not matter. What OC we have does.

this times infinity.

Originally posted by Joecool:

We are forgetting that these exact same things were being said at the end of the Erickson reign. Guess what Nolan, yes Nolan, did? He brought in a WCO offense pedigree OC in McCarthy who's now regarded as one of the better coaches in the league because he's had success. What happened with the WCO then? Shouldn't that have solved all of our problems? Too bad Norv Turner, a NON WCO guy, came in and had this team perform better than McCarthy.

Point is: how Steve Young talks is no different than how Mike Singletary talks. There's a whole lot of generalities but no substance: "punch em in the mouth" as opposed to "tradition" or "we want to be able to run the ball when we want" as opposed to "WC this or WC that"

What offense we use does not matter. What OC we have does.

You just gave an over simplified example to prove your point about something being over simplified.

That's kinda fun.

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Certainly, the better the coach the better the results, but the WCO is diverse enough to go any which way to take advantage of the player's skills and the defensive weaknesses. In my thinking, the WCO is not written in stone but is theory that includes inovation as part of the plan.

Edit--The WCO is about how to train/coach players to see the D and react to it. It goes way beyond drawing plays on the board.

Just about the entire league does this now.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Norv uses alot of WCO in his own system.

like what?

Like alot of screen passes to his RB's, he did it more when he had LT, alot of stuff to the TE, slants to WR's. shots down field, but it has alot of WCO in it. Watch the Chargers O, the resemble the 90's niners more than the 90's cowboys.

We are forgetting that these exact same things were being said at the end of the Erickson reign. Guess what Nolan, yes Nolan, did? He brought in a WCO offense pedigree OC in McCarthy who's now regarded as one of the better coaches in the league because he's had success. What happened with the WCO then? Shouldn't that have solved all of our problems? Too bad Norv Turner, a NON WCO guy, came in and had this team perform better than McCarthy.

Point is: how Steve Young talks is no different than how Mike Singletary talks. There's a whole lot of generalities but no substance: "punch em in the mouth" as opposed to "tradition" or "we want to be able to run the ball when we want" as opposed to "WC this or WC that"

What offense we use does not matter. What OC we have does.

Norve didn't do that great here. We were 26th in offense compared to 31 with McCarthy. Norv had a 2nd year QB, McCarthy had some Jorneymen and then a rookie QB. Norve had a better o line (we added Larry Allen that year), Norve had a full year of goar as a starter. Norve had Eric Johonson and Vernon Davis, in 2005 McCarthy didn't have them because Johonson was hurt the whole year. Norv had a better reciving core because we added Antonio Bryant that year, but he didn't have a top 20 offense or anything.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Joecool:

Originally posted by dtg_9er:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Certainly, the better the coach the better the results, but the WCO is diverse enough to go any which way to take advantage of the player's skills and the defensive weaknesses. In my thinking, the WCO is not written in stone but is theory that includes inovation as part of the plan.

Edit--The WCO is about how to train/coach players to see the D and react to it. It goes way beyond drawing plays on the board.

Just about the entire league does this now.

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by pd24:

Originally posted by Joecool:
It's all about the play caller during the game and how he practices the players during the week.

It's not about the WCO anymore. Watch the 92 cowboys in the second half versus us, Aikman was spreading the ball all over the field and Norv had them looking more balanced than us.

Get the right HC and an OC who knows how to set up the defense, use each and every play with a purpose even if the play doesn't bet gains and make not only halftime adjustments but in drive adjustments along with creating a new play on the fly.

You get this type of OC and it won't matter what offense we run. I don't think what Steve Yug said solves anything Bill Walsh was not about tradition. He was about innovation and outthinking opponents. If he was about tradition, Montana Craig and Lott would have ended their careers here.

Norv uses alot of WCO in his own system.

like what?

Like alot of screen passes to his RB's, he did it more when he had LT, alot of stuff to the TE, slants to WR's. shots down field, but it has alot of WCO in it. Watch the Chargers O, the resemble the 90's niners more than the 90's cowboys.

We are forgetting that these exact same things were being said at the end of the Erickson reign. Guess what Nolan, yes Nolan, did? He brought in a WCO offense pedigree OC in McCarthy who's now regarded as one of the better coaches in the league because he's had success. What happened with the WCO then? Shouldn't that have solved all of our problems? Too bad Norv Turner, a NON WCO guy, came in and had this team perform better than McCarthy.

Point is: how Steve Young talks is no different than how Mike Singletary talks. There's a whole lot of generalities but no substance: "punch em in the mouth" as opposed to "tradition" or "we want to be able to run the ball when we want" as opposed to "WC this or WC that"

What offense we use does not matter. What OC we have does.

Norve didn't do that great here. We were 26th in offense compared to 31 with McCarthy. Norv had a 2nd year QB, McCarthy had some Jorneymen and then a rookie QB. Norve had a better o line (we added Larry Allen that year), Norve had a full year of goar as a starter. Norve had Eric Johonson and Vernon Davis, in 2005 McCarthy didn't have them because Johonson was hurt the whole year. Norv had a better reciving core because we added Antonio Bryant that year, but he didn't have a top 20 offense or anything.

The difference in the actual ranking (31 tot 26) did not show the difference in actual production.

You bring up Gore. McCarthy had Gore for the entire year. It is HIS fault for not seeing his talents and using them more. McCarathy also had a better QB than Alex Smith in Tim Rattay. Dennis Erickson even got better production out of Rattay than did McCarthy with similar personnel. He could not put him in positions to succeed. He did not adjust his offense to the talent. Norv did this. Norv adjusted his offense to the talent of the personnel, which was Gore.

McCarthy wasn't very successful in most places until he went to GB, a team that has top level offensive weapons.

All-in-all, point is that bringing in the WCO didn't do crap for us because the OC did not orchestrate his offense around the players. He forced the players into his offense.

Well just consider we've had what could be 8 different oc's in 8 years depending on mike johnson keeping his job... I think we need stability! If it's west coast or the digit. We need to figure it out and stay the coarse, and get the players to work the system!

I am a fan of the WCO in that it was innovative at the time Walsh installed it and was our identity during our dynasty years. It is a tribute to Walsh that a lot of teams continue to use it successfully, in one form or another, thirty years later. I wouldn't be disappointed if we went back to it. However, I think more important is having a competent OC who game plans and schemes for specific teams, defenses, or even players, attacking a weakness and using the strengths of our personnel, putting them in the best situation to succeed, regardless of the offensive system we use. Isn't that the idea behind the WCO? You might not always have the best player at any one position, but the system is flexible enough to compensate for the lack of skill of your own offensive personnel; a quarterback who may not have the strongest arm, lineman who may not be the most dominating, slow receivers, or a running back that is not a breakaway threat.

Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
Plus, within the vaults at 4949 Centennial we have an enormous and exclusive video library showing years of WCO system and game plan installations starring Bill Walsh. I'm hoping Jim Harbaugh gets a woody thinking about having unrestricted access to that resource.

Great point Sonoco. I'm tired of our team conforming to what past coaches want to implement on offense. We need to start making coaches conform to what we want on offense. Our vision. That starts with the front office and GM.

How did Singletary's "hit em in the mouth" offensive philosphy work for us

Originally posted by ace49ers:

Originally posted by boriken_9er:
Not that I am against but everybody is talking about going back to the WCO because that is what we used to do. This team has become a perennial loser because of poor management, poor coaching and lack of talent (at least at certain points), not because they stopped using the WCO.
Again, if it works fine, but I am looking for valid football reasons, after all if I am not mistaken Tampa Bay was the last team to win it all with the WCO back in 2002.

Its the 49ers identity. Its the offense that gave us greatness. Its still used today. Steve Young mentioned in the MNF game just past (Falcons vs Saints), the winning touchdown thrown by Brees was WCO play. He knew the play because he and Montana ran the same exact play under Bill Walsh.

Steve also mentioned that other great teams when you look at them you know exactly what type of team they are. Steelers for instants. When you think Steeler football you think iron curtain defense, grind, smash mouth football. Its been like that for decades now, its who they are, its how they play. They've won super bowls on the back of it.

The 9ers had its identity, and Bill Walsh established that. And we won super bowls on the back of the WCO. We havent won anything since we drifted away from that system. And coaches we bring in either dont understand or dont identify with it.

10yrs have gone by and the 9ers have been in the playoffs once. When the WCO was ran in 49er teams, we were making playoff appearances on a regular bases.

We need to get back to the 9ers identity. WCO is our shadow and its about time we stop trying to run away from it.

We're talking play terminology and the west coast system is a lot more difficult to learn, but the digit system that the 49ers have been using is easier to learn and is more adaptable (instead of alpha-dog-seadoo-blitzup-mochamocha, it's 5687-left-dragon-19) with the routes being numbered and easier for wr's to pickup and o-coordinators to adjust on the fly (although there are always so many 'option routes' built into every play). Our players know this language (there are adaptions for coordinators), but system changes are basically like learning a new language - "hey talk french at your job from now on".
This whole 'Bill Walsh old video-tape archives' thing is hogwash by the way, everybody has studies this stuff and it's evolved big time.
It is easy to incorporate west coast timing based plays into the digit system. Our players know the digit system.
It is also notable that every coordinator has an angle on their plays that the players must all learn to better understand their responsibilities.

I am sick of this 'west-cpast-offense' would make us unstoppable nonsense, we need a good coordinator like others have noted and we need rational fans too that stop chasing ghosts. "Well my high-school girlfriend let me get to third base on the second date so... " In the last ten years how many teams have won the Superbowl using the WCO? ONE

49ers - the most fickle and spoiled fans in the league -- too bad I like the team so much!

LET'S JUST GET THE BEST COACH AND COORDINATOR POSSIBLE, NO-MATTER WHAT SYSTEM THEY USE PERIOD

Originally posted by kirkthejerk:
We're talking play terminology and the west coast system is a lot more difficult to learn, but the digit system that the 49ers have been using is easier to learn and is more adaptable (instead of alpha-dog-seadoo-blitzup-mochamocha, it's 5687-left-dragon-19) with the routes being numbered and easier for wr's to pickup and o-coordinators to adjust on the fly (although there are always so many 'option routes' built into every play). Our players know this language (there are adaptions for coordinators), but system changes are basically like learning a new language - "hey talk french at your job from now on".
This whole 'Bill Walsh old video-tape archives' thing is hogwash by the way, everybody has studies this stuff and it's evolved big time.
It is easy to incorporate west coast timing based plays into the digit system. Our players know the digit system.
It is also notable that every coordinator has an angle on their plays that the players must all learn to better understand their responsibilities.

I am sick of this 'west-cpast-offense' would make us unstoppable nonsense, we need a good coordinator like others have noted and we need rational fans too that stop chasing ghosts. "Well my high-school girlfriend let me get to third base on the second date so... " In the last ten years how many teams have won the Superbowl using the WCO? ONE

49ers - the most fickle and spoiled fans in the league -- too bad I like the team so much!

LET'S JUST GET THE BEST COACH AND COORDINATOR POSSIBLE, NO-MATTER WHAT SYSTEM THEY USE PERIOD

2 things.

The WCO is probably a lot more difficult to learn but that's the point and you have clearly missed it. The type of player that we had in the WCO previously was of a different caliber to our current type. Each player had a high football IQ and understood that its not about what is easy its about what works. Its about challenging players to think beyond their roles. You want the players to play easy systems then frankly I think you are asking them to do just enough to get by. I want them scratching their heads and studying the playbook. I want them watching WCO players to understand what is expected because only then will they know that its football........but on another level.

Of course anyone who believes that it will make us winners instantly has no idea. It takes time to implement and will cause us no end of hurt in the beginning. Yet WHAT HAVE WE DONE THAT WAS ANY BETTER? I'm not using capitals to shout I am making a point. We have done net fcuk all since some idiot felt we should turn our nose up to the past.

Why do I want the WCO? It is a system that works. It is a system that evolves. It is a system that we created. It wasn't broken so we didn't need to try and fix it. Yet in the prevailing years from our decision to turn our back on the WCO we have never clearly understood what we are. We run heavy....eh no we pass heavy....we are a shotgun team.....erm actually we are a power run side. Disgrace followed disgrace to a point that people laugh at us now as an offence.

There was a time that our football cast a shadow on this league. People get hard about hiring Patriots staff because of the coaching brilliance? I don't even think Bill would have had many of them on his staff. Bill understood that football games are won in the mind before even getting on a field. The scripted plays that is often heralded wasn't arrogance. It was a purpose built mechanism to test the strength of any defence. Once the weakness was found then the whole team knew what to do. How many of this current team have that sort of IQ?

But all of this is too logical to anyone who can see the problem with this team. So let me bring it back down to a sound byte.

We want the WCO because its our system. Its what Bill built, what George maintained and what Steve enforced. We want the WCO because it is ours. Go to Pittsburgh and ask them to play a prevent defence and see what reaction you get from them.

I'm not sure when it will happen but we will bring the WCO back and people will watch us with awe again.

Happy new year to you.

[ Edited by Envy on Jan 1, 2011 at 12:54:24 ]

The reason we should run the West Coast Offense because it is a great system that would benefit our personnel. We have the Te, the recievers, the multipurpose runningback, and our line sucks so the WCO takes pressure off of them because often the ball comes out very quick. Pretty much every offense in football has elements of the WCO. We just need the qb..

Originally posted by Envy:


We want the WCO because its our system. Its what Bill built, what George maintained and what Steve enforced. We want the WCO because it is ours.

This.