West Coast Offense

I hear a lot of you refer to it quite frequently as a pass only or pass first offense. I'm curious why most of you think that? The WCO has produced lots of great RB's. Is it the like's of the Montana's, Young's, and Favre's that make most people forget about the running game and how the WCO is predicated on the success of the running game?

 

Most WC teams today don't rely on the split back formation nearly as much as the 81 9ers. You see more power I formations, partiucaurly when teams like the current Pack and Broncs and Vicks play. Still, it sets up the same roll out concept off bootlegs that were a staple of the WCO back then.

The 81 9ers didn't have a great rushing attack, but they did run. They were 6th in rushing attempts. Now, a lot of that was late in games, closing them out, because they were ahead. They outscored their opponents by nearly 10 points per game average. In that case the pass sets up the run, instead of the other way around. They were adapt at running out of passing formations (see the drive vs the Cowboys in the 81 NFCCG, 6 plays were rushes vs 7 passes).

When Craig came in, it was basically the same concept, teams feared the pass, but they could run out of those formations, and now they had a better runner. They lead the league in rushing yardage in 87, was second in 88. And throughout the 80s, with Craig, they were usually in the top 5 of YPA in rushing.

You don't see too many teams do that anymore, most WCO teams now are passing out of running formations more, playing off the runs. But some teams do. Pats do some of that, we did a good bit of that vs Tampa last year. Atlanta does a good bit of that, they like to use the spread, and make you fear Vick's boot, and then gut you with Dunn or Duckett.

 

Usually the teams that run the WCO have rushers well over 1,000 yards. The list is a big one. Most people think the WCO is all about throwing the ball. A good running game is paramount for being successful in the WCO.

 

I really haven't seen anyone here say otherwise, so I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

 

First off, any offense is what you make of it. I've seen the WCO in almost every flavor. We ran it poorly in 2001, running more dumpoff stuff than should be allowed by law, but we ran it to perfection in 1999 with a short route, a run, and then a conversion on 3rd and short, followed typically by short route, play action pass for long gain.

It's all the same principle, but the way that the individual coach uses it is how it gets its flavors, going back to basic differences in what Walsh, Shanahan, Reid, Mariucci, and the others look to make happen. The WCO doesn't suggest inability to run the ball, and doesn't suggest a lack of downfield passing.

The split back deal was because the first Walsh Os came out with mostly a Wing-T discipline of running attack. If you take the wingback and split him out Pro, it's basically the same.
It's really no different than the scheme we use now. The difference was, back when Walsh was there (and to a point, Seifert with Floyd), the split back stuff was still working because teams still used the fullback and the tailback somewhat interchangeably, either could be a feature for a play or two and use the other with misdirection. Rathman and Craig worked because both were basically small fullbacks with different roles and skills. Same with Edgar Bennett, a former FB, and Dorsey Levens, who at the time was being somewhat misused as a FB.




I did have someone mention to me in argument that "well look at your precious WCO, some of those teams had the highest rushing attempts." It baffled me, because I hadn't mentioned the WCO in that argument at all and had no reason to suspect that WCO teams couldn't run. Some of them don't put as much emphasis in the run, and some get multipurpose backs whose job won't be 20 carries every game, but it's not only possible, it's actually quite easy to run in a WCO gameplan. It's just not your only option for moving the ball.

 

Many of those yards are against the nickle Ds. Its an effective strategy assuming you can use the pass to set up the run. The problem is that if you can't get anything going, or if its an obvious running play, many of those WCO teams can't run when they have to. In other words, its nice to have a run O that works when its not a surprise or change up play.

 

You have a statistic on that?
At any rate, a team that can set up a good 3rd down distance that can convert the run on 3rd/3, is a lot better than a team that sets up 3rd and 6 with the run, and runs a draw that's not likely to be converted.

 

I've always thought of it as a pass first offense, in that many WCO teams seem to use the pass to set up the run scenario. Not that there isn't still a balance for many teams, but they prioritize it differently.
Most WCO teams still run on first down frequently, it's more of a round about scheme for an entire drive. Where as the traditional style of offense tends to re-scheme with a new set of downs.