I've read a number of articles - Bill Walsh's series among them - that attempt to define the West Coast offense. It seems to me at this point that the term is meaningless in that it has come to describe almost anything you choose to do.

For instance I understood (happy to be corrected) that the WCO was flexible to a great degree but was largely defined by short precise passing game that in part replaces the run game and adds YAC by virtue of short quick-hitting patterns for the WRs. So you draft an accurate QB who's arm strength isn't necessarily a big deal (see Couch, Tim or Fry, Charlie or McCoy, Colt). Then you get receivers who are smart, accurate route runners but don't necessarily need a quick top end on the speedometer. Running backs are basically plug and play in the system and you look for the flexible guys at the position who can catch a quick out and throw a reasonably reliable block - handing them the ball is nice too but won't happen all that often.

Now it would appear that based on our draft and based on a number of comments from observers and even hints from the coaching staff, that we're going to do two things better this year than we have done in a number of years:

1. Pound the ball behind a stout offensive line and with a very strong / fast running back.
2. Throw the ball deep with a strong armed QB and a very fast wideout.

How are either of those seeming priorities for offensive focus in 2012 referred to as a WCO? Can someone here correct my admittedly limited understanding of what the WCO is?

Not sure where the "very fast wideout" is coming from unless you're projecting a late draft rookie to be a focal point of the passing game, which is optimistic.

The model appears to be the 2005 Seahawks.  Strong OL, overpowering run game, efficient passing to a bunch of no-name receivers.  Since their Super Bowl loss was pretty much a fraud it's not the worst model in the world I guess. 

Not sure where the "very fast wideout" is coming from unless you're projecting a late draft rookie to be a focal point of the passing game, which is optimistic.

I absolutely concur - it's unrealistic to expect a 4th rounder to be Desean Jackson redux. I'd be all down with that if it happens, but I'm not expecting it. Regardless of whether a 4th rounder surprises or not, the FO pretty clearly has gone heavy on the run and is looking to add a vertical threat via a strong arm pivot and a smurf-style wideout (even if they haven't gotten an uber-talent WR with this particular draft pick). So my real question is not whether a 4th rounder will pan out, but whether having what the FO seems to be pursuing aggressively - a power running game and a deep ball offense - qualifies in any way as the "WCO" I keep hearing about.

(ETA - Yeah I'd take Seattle circa 2005 results in a heartbeat if that's what comes from the Holmgren blueprint).

Sports Illustrated defined the WCO with a nice Title to an Article (which featured LDT and some other really good backs) called "Pass Short, Run Long".

It talked about precise, short passes in a quick hitting offense. It talked about running backs that could hit seams with a quick burst and go the distance (detailing the numerous TCU Touchdowns of LdT that were of 40+ Yards). It also brought mention of hows those running backs impacted the offense by catching the ball out of the backfield, not only on check downs, angels and flats... but also wheel routes where their speed could kill LBs and Safeties.

So I believe the basic idea of the WCO is to throw to short routes. You get the short routes open by running layers and flooding areas. So deep routes are needed, and you need to be able to hit them when they aren't respected... but really the deep route is just to draw the coverage. The idea of flooding is to find the weak cover guys. If you run a 5 yard out, 5 yard in and 5 yard curl... they are all short. Still, some one is bound to not keep up with their guy, and that is what the QB is looking for. Since they are all on the same side of the field "flooded" the QB is looking in a general area when the breaks occur and can see who slips up in coverage to know who to hit.

I think RB is vital though, unlike Rushmore was saying. Needs to pass block. This is huge, so progression reads and accurate throws can be made. Since you are throwing shorter you need to complete MORE passes to get that first down. Sure, the idea is for the WR to catch an accurate pass in stride and make a move, but we can't EXPECT that. The move portion is icing. So since we cut down the yardage at the spot of the catch, we have to increase the percentage of catches. This means better pass blocking. Now, you need RBs that can stay in and block effectively. Same for the TE.

HOWEVER, this means you also need TE and RB that can go out and CATCH the ball with sure hands. Being able to get that YAC helps too, so speed helps or at least some shiftiness to make people miss.

Now, Roger Criag was a beast... but in today's game that is what is expected. Sure, you have to pass block and catch... but you better be able to run the ball to. Now, WCO in OUR Division... you better be able to run with some Authority as well. This isn't a West Coast WCO... this is West Coast in the Snow with the Ravens and Steelers. It's a different breed.

Same principles, really. We want precise, short routes. We need guys to take the cover off... and we need to be able to hit them so that cover stays off. But what we want to hit CONSISTENTLY is that 4 yard slant and that 6 yard in and that 8 yard out and that 5 yard curl (Little and MoMass). We will gladly take the 65 Yard Fly Route for a TD, no doubt... but we don't plan the offense AROUND that. We move the chains with precise short passes that our WRs can break with their ability (Little was a RB for some of his College days, and he's got good size... he catches with some space he can be dangerous)but we need guys that can get deep or else the FS and SS will just sit on the short routes and kill our guys.

WCO is like saying Ball Control Passing... and I think that's what H&H want here. Funny that it takes a RB to do that... but it makes sense as well.

This is crazy but the more I see what we're doing on O, the more I like it.

We are a "WCO" team but what I'm seeing is actually an O that resembles the '86-87 Browns (the '85 and '88-89 Browns were run-heavy).

86 team
QB Kosar
FB Mack
RB1 Byner
RB2 Dickey
RB3 Fontenot
TE1 Newsome
TE2 Holt
WR1 Slaughter
WR2 Langhorne
WR3 Brennan
WR4 Weathers
WR5 McNeil

87 team similar except: FB2 Manoa and I think Dickey/Fontenot gone

The team often ran 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE and 3 WR, 1 RB, 1 TE.

I think we can do the same here.
QB Weeden
RB1 Richardson
RB2 Jackson
FB Marecic
TE1 Watson
TE2 Cameron
TE3 Moore?
WR1 Benjamin
WR2 Little
WR3 MoMass
WR4 Cribbs
WR5 UDFA (or Moore at WR).

Best overall lineup--Weeden/Richardson/Watson OR Cameron/Benjamin/Little/MoMass

I'm hoping Weeden is a strong-armed Kosar, Richardson catches like Byner and runs hard like Mack, Watson is reliable like Ozzie and Benjamin is fast as Webster Slaughter. IF Little can cure the dropsies he can be Langhorne, a solid #2. That leaves MoMass/Cribbs as our #3.

In theory, it could be the Lindy/Tom Moore-Marchibroda-Polian (Bills/Colts) offense.

I just see that more than a split back, 2 WR, 1 TE WCO from the '80s like Shurmur wanted last year.

It also brought mention of hows those running backs impacted the offense by catching the ball out of the backfield, not only on check downs, angels and flats... but also wheel routes where their speed could kill LBs and Safeties.

BB's Browns in the '90s were NOT WCO at all. But they used WCO principles with one player--#21.

Against the Oilers, even when they ran the 46 in '93, Metcalf killed them with 3 TDs in 2 games b/c he got behind Otis Wilson or Wilbur Marshall or some aging FA LB they had? One of the two...

Kosar threw the wheel route at him and he outraced the LB. I think either section 1 or 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wafxQ63iwMg 1 of 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...;feature=relmfu 2 of 4 Houston '93, Pittsburgh punt return
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AjdiqMDX9k 3 of 4 '89 season?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...;feature=relmfu 4 of 4 Atlanta



I think it's on one of these clips.

You can label an offense or defense whatever you want to but the reality is that you have to tailor it to the personnel you have. Its important to have a base for communication but after that it has to be what works or doesn't and what can we do to get better. I'm so sick of hearing about this it's redundant and pointless. How about the win now offense(WNO) and shut them down defense (STD). If you can't understand that you're a moron.

in the early '80s we did that with HB flat passes to Pruitt and Pruitt.
in the late '80s we did that with Byner before he was traded to DC. 576 yds rushing, 576 receiving in '88...like Craig and his 1k, 1k in '85.

Nice takes.

As I think about the WCO in its various incarnations under Walsh, Holmgren, et al, I'm reminded of an article that Walsh wrote a few years ago in which he states the importance of tight ends and how crucial they will be in the future. Then I see what NE did this last year with their battery of tight ends and think Belichick may be the best student still of Walsh's philosophy even though he comes from that Parcell line.

It really goes all the way back to Paul Brown and his use of a punishing runner combined with an active QB. I believe even the Kurt Warner years at the Rams were that same sort of offense just adding a few extra receivers in the rotation since Warner could look around so quickly.

When I look at what the Browns are doing with this year's draft in particular, I think about those long-ago Browns teams. A feature back, which I think Richardson will definitely become, a QB who can discern options with a minimum of time to look around, and a few receivers like we had in the Bernie years. I also remember Atlanta having a similar set of receivers in the Bartkowski years - a guy who stretches the field, a guy who makes all the clutch catches on 3rd down and a guy who can run after catch and never drops it. (I miss Langhorne)

Anyway - we've got a couple of unknowns at this point at all three of those positions. Should be an exciting season to watch them develop. Being Browns fans, we naturally expect a disappointment - but I think we're as close as we've been since the betrayal. I'm now and always have been, a believer that the front line sets the tone for the game, and we've got some good lads playing that front line. Should the new tackle work out as hoped, Weeden or McCoy should get an extra second. Add a potential weapon like Richardson and they may get another second or even two.

I'm also curious as to what offense Shurmer will run now that he has some assistance, a full season to prepare and a few new weapons, including Little, who I consider a decent rookie at this point.

Gonna be fun to see. WCO? I don't know - maybe they'll call this the "Cleveland Offense" one day. Shurmer's a HOF coach and Richardson breaks Jim Brown's records.

Sigh - I love these meds.

rushmore wrote:
1. Pound the ball behind a stout offensive line and with a very strong / fast running back.
2. Throw the ball deep with a strong armed QB and a very fast wideout.

How are either of those seeming priorities for offensive focus in 2012 referred to as a WCO? Can someone here correct my admittedly limited understanding of what the WCO is?

Well the arm strength of a QB doesn't have anything to do with it.  Brett Favre and Joe Montana are easily the two best WCO QBs and they are worlds apart.  It is about timing.  If someone has great timing and can read defenses then they can have a weaker arm (Montana) and still thrive.  If they have great timing but can't read defenses as well then they better be able to sling it in there before safeties/lbs can get in front of it (Favre) if they want to be successful. 

Also you have a misperception of the RB the Browns just drafted.  Yes he is a strong, hard running back.  But he was drafted because in addition to being a strong back he is also a very good receiver.  The latter is the reason why he is a great candidate to excel in a WCO while someone like Hillis was not.    Shaun Alexander was a strong runner but he was also a very good receiver and he's the closest you'll find to a model for what the Browns just got.   If you want a close model you're looking at Alexander/Hasslebeck combination at Seattle with guys like Walter Jones/Steve Hutchenson model of blockers. 

As for offensive linemen the WCO has worked with a few different blocking schemes.  Again it's a timing pass focused offense so it's not that important how the blocking is done so much as that it's done. 

Overall the WCO is so watered down that the term is fairly meaningless.  Like all generic schemes it's tailored to the talent of the coaching staff and the players.  Teams like the Steelers and Patriots use central aspects of it in their offensive schemes and even Mangini lifted a significant chunk of the WCO base playbook into his offenses in Cleveland.

I thought Mangi was a power-run East Coast bully ball coach?

a Bartkowski reference? who were the WRs in that era?

Browns:
Slaughter-X-speedy burner like an Oilers WR (which he did indeed become)
Langhorne-Y-YAC possession guy like 49ers John Taylor
Brennan-Z-Slot-little guy with clutch catches like Joe J

Jerry Rice was basically a bigger Slaughter--and more talented-- but he had a big body with the speed of Webstar.

Any short pass is WCO, so Mangini was all over it. (I'm joking).

Just to add to Otter's spot on take, one of the base ideas of the early WCO was to stretch the field horizontally rather than vertically. Lots of slants, crossing patterns, and short running back patterns designed to get the ball to a player that was moving.

Hillis had decent hands, but not a lot of escapability. Richardson should be 10x more dangerous on short passes.

"Gonna be fun to see. WCO? I don't know - maybe they'll call this the "Cleveland Offense" one day. Shurmer's a HOF coach and Richardson breaks Jim Brown's records.

Sigh - I love these meds."

-- First of all, meds can be good things. Of course, the better they are, the more careful you have to be. Unless you have money- and a body- like Randy Lerner. Then anything goes!

It will be interesting to see how the WCO develops in Cleveland. With the FO and the coaches in place all hands appear to be on deck, as they say. And with the players we have- and have just added- we may have some weapons.

One thing you didn't mention: Weeden will be a HOF QB as he leads the Browns to glory. Despite his incredibly old age. (Sigh. 28/29 doesn't seem so old anymore...)

"a Bartkowski reference? who were the WRs in that era?"

Wallace Francis.  Alfred Jenkins.  And some other guy. 

Kind of looked like Slaughter.  Langhorne.  And Brennan - respectively.

kosartoslaughter wrote: I thought Mangi was a power-run East Coast bully ball coach?

a Bartkowski reference? who were the WRs in that era?

Browns:
Slaughter-X-speedy burner like an Oilers WR (which he did indeed become)
Langhorne-Y-YAC possession guy like 49ers John Taylor
Brennan-Z-Slot-little guy with clutch catches like Joe J

Jerry Rice was basically a bigger Slaughter--and more talented-- but he had a big body with the speed of Webstar.

I do not believe anyone ever accurately recorded Jerry Rice's speed. He was always exactly as fast as he needed to be.

Mangini comes from the Belichick school of Pot Luck schemes.  You look at what you have in the fridge, who you have to prepare for, and then you make it.  That meant on some weeks he had a power offense.  On other weeks it was a finess offense.  Some days they'd gameplan a vertical offense and some days they'd never plan on looking 10 yards downfield or outside the hashmarks. 

It happens that in Cleveland the only time he had the personell matched with a scheme that worked was when Hillis and Colt were both in the lineup.  By that point he was scheming to keep his job rather than because he had any major over-arching philosophical scheme he was implementing so he didn't overthink it.  He knew he had to go with it regardless of what the other team was showing because he really didn't have any other options.  

When PB implemented his offense the dominant theme of the NFL was to send one or two guys vertically while you run the ball.  You occasionally threw to them when you were behind later in the game regardless of whether or not they were open.  PB added in the dimension of using those guys in patterns over the field wher you would go to them even on 2nd or 3rd down or even when you had the lead.   I'm sure it was inspiring at the time. 

Eventually Walsh tweaked the PB offense by going to more 1 back sets and removing the power runs from the scheme and instead using more 3WR sets along with single back sets.   Whereas PB's offense typically split the field in half (L/R) the WCO used the full field with more receivers and a focus on the RB as a receiver to allow as many possible short-yardage, high success percent plays as possible.  

Walsh's philosphy helped change the concept of running on first and second down, running at the start of the game , running with the lead, and only passing when down or in need of a big play to passing at any time.  While vertical passing is still important to provide a big play the offense is built to suprise teams with that deep ball - not to do it so routinely that they didn't pay off.  The reason Walsh was considered an offensive genius is because the blocking schems and routes that players had to learn was incredibly difficult because it was completely alien to what other teams, and particularly college teams, were teaching. 

Now almost every offense has the same level of compexity.  They just differ in emphasis.  I doubt there are many plays in the Browns book that aren't in the Jets or vice versa.  The ones emphasized and called are just going to be different.  According to just about every article written on the Browns scheme last year they had what was labeled WCO v1 in place.  In some reports it was considered so vanilla that it didn't even remotely compare to any other WCO in place in the league and was laughably referred to as being an exact version of Bill Walsh's WCO - which is frankly as effective in today's NFL as the wing.  Or less so if you remove the element of shock that the wing would bring on a week-to-week basis.

That was hopefully dictated by the short offseason and the lack of faith the coach had in the QB and not a sign of our HC's acumen in offensive scheming.  Regardless bringing in a second, experienced offensive mind to coach on the offensive side should allow the Browns to elevate their gameplans even if the QBs' experiences still aren't up to snuff.

Since it isn't the 1980s anymore the West Coast Offense doesn't really mean anything beyond the play-calling terminology used.  The Packers and Eagles use tons of vertical passing and the Texans power run like mad.  You can't pigeon-hole it like you used to. 

pablus wrote: "a Bartkowski reference? who were the WRs in that era?"

Wallace Francis.  Alfred Jenkins.  And some other guy. 

Kind of looked like Slaughter.  Langhorne.  And Brennan - respectively.

Thanks.
Herm mentioned on the other board that Joe Thomas could become like Mike Kenn. Ouch. But true, if the Browns suck for another decade.
Kenn was a LT at the time of Bartkowski, Jaworski, then Miller, Chandler...16 years and 250 consecutive starts.

The thing is what troubled a lot of us is that we were not seeing this. What we were seeing were tons of plays where everyone ran a  damn curl route. I remember being astounded at the rate at which those kinds of plays were called. The end result of this were three receivers standing motionless facing the QB.

This is the clearest presentation that I' ve read. Thank you. Really made sense to me.
---------------------------------------------
--- Brrexkl wrote:

Sports Illustrated defined the WCO with a nice Title to an Article (which featured LDT and some other really good backs) called "Pass Short, Run Long".

It talked about precise, short passes in a quick hitting offense. It talked about running backs that could hit seams with a quick burst and go the distance (detailing the numerous TCU Touchdowns of LdT that were of 40+ Yards). It also brought mention of hows those running backs impacted the offense by catching the ball out of the backfield, not only on check downs, angels and flats... but also wheel routes where their speed could kill LBs and Safeties.

So I believe the basic idea of the WCO is to throw to short routes. You get the short routes open by running layers and flooding areas. So deep routes are needed, and you need to be able to hit them when they aren't respected... but really the deep route is just to draw the coverage. The idea of flooding is to find the weak cover guys. If you run a 5 yard out, 5 yard in and 5 yard curl... they are all short. Still, some one is bound to not keep up with their guy, and that is what the QB is looking for. Since they are all on the same side of the field "flooded" the QB is looking in a general area when the breaks occur and can see who slips up in coverage to know who to hit.

I think RB is vital though, unlike Rushmore was saying. Needs to pass block. This is huge, so progression reads and accurate throws can be made. Since you are throwing shorter you need to complete MORE passes to get that first down. Sure, the idea is for the WR to catch an accurate pass in stride and make a move, but we can't EXPECT that. The move portion is icing. So since we cut down the yardage at the spot of the catch, we have to increase the percentage of catches. This means better pass blocking. Now, you need RBs that can stay in and block effectively. Same for the TE.

HOWEVER, this means you also need TE and RB that can go out and CATCH the ball with sure hands. Being able to get that YAC helps too, so speed helps or at least some shiftiness to make people miss.

Now, Roger Criag was a beast... but in today's game that is what is expected. Sure, you have to pass block and catch... but you better be able to run the ball to. Now, WCO in OUR Division... you better be able to run with some Authority as well. This isn't a West Coast WCO... this is West Coast in the Snow with the Ravens and Steelers. It's a different breed.

Same principles, really. We want precise, short routes. We need guys to take the cover off... and we need to be able to hit them so that cover stays off. But what we want to hit CONSISTENTLY is that 4 yard slant and that 6 yard in and that 8 yard out and that 5 yard curl (Little and MoMass). We will gladly take the 65 Yard Fly Route for a TD, no doubt... but we don't plan the offense AROUND that. We move the chains with precise short passes that our WRs can break with their ability (Little was a RB for some of his College days, and he's got good size... he catches with some space he can be dangerous)but we need guys that can get deep or else the FS and SS will just sit on the short routes and kill our guys.

WCO is like saying Ball Control Passing... and I think that's what H&H want here. Funny that it takes a RB to do that... but it makes sense as well.

---------------------------------------------

It was a really great article some 3 or 4 years back.    It talked about how the timing of the routes kept Linebackers in more zones to help the corners on those quick routes, and how respecting the deep route kept the Safeties back... and this lead to better seams for the Running Back (if he had burst and speed) to gash with.

So you'd hit a 4 yard slant.  4 yard slant.  Now it's 3rd and 2.  Hand off for 12.  If the Safeties came up, your Deep Route could burn them.  If the LBs came up and you called the right play, your 4 yard Slant turned into a 60 Yard TD when the CB got burnt with not help on the inside.  So when the QB saw everyone still back you hand it off and the RB is at the second level almost uncontested.

This puts a premium on outstanding DL, since they lose the support of the LB and SS coming up.  That's the idea behind it all.  It's such a quick timing route that if ran right the CB has no chance to stop it, but the gain in minimal.  So now you have to allot other resources to keep that from breaking big... which is your LBs patrolling the middle or your Safeties coming up.  This either opens up running lanes, or deep routes.  Pick your poison.

So sharp route running by the WRs, and precise passing/timing by the QB.  That's the hub you build around.

Quick decision making.  If you see the SS is jumping your slant, you can't throw it.  Where is your TE, your RB?  Now they need those hands.  That is why Brent Jones and Roger Craig were so effective.  They were in the right spot, they had the right hands, and the right QB(s) to find them.  John Taylor ran great routes, but he was really the 'Vertical' guy in the offense.  He had some size and 'go up and get it' to him.  This is why you could Drag Jerry all the way across the field.  They would Fly Taylor, so the CB would go... and the SS would follow.  Jerry would cut, so the CB is trailing.  The FS would jump thinking a Slant and now he's out of position as Jerry has gone from Left to Right, where the SS WOULD be, but now it open field.  Now it looks like two guys that can't run as fast as Jerry, when really the 1st can't keep up with a 4-Yard Slant (most CBs can't unless the guess it) and the 2nd jumped a Slant that didn't exist because it's 50% of the Offense.  He's got 2 defenders behind him and green grass for days.

You will RARELY see Jerry Rice catching a Fly Route TD.  He had the hops and hands, he didn't have the speed to leave you flat footed and get there.  He caught a ton of fly routes, don't get me wrong, he just didn't break them for TDs unless they were Jump Balls in the End Zone.  You will see a TON of Jerry crossing through different layers of the field where a defender just left to chase Taylor or Jones... and that is by design.

You will also see a good amount of a plain ol' 4 Yard Slant where he catches and the CB just falls off him and he takes it to the house.  THAT'S what we want Little to do.  Secure the ball, shiver the defender, and GO GO GO GO GO GO GO!!!!!  Last year, Little had no chance with that.  He had a Safety on the snap that instead of taking steps backwards into a deep zone would run up to be about 6 yards off the LOS... right where a Slant would go.

You HAVE to have the THREAT of a Down Field Pass to keep those guys honest and off your Short Routes.  I think Weeden (still not sold on him, but fits the bill in this regard) and Benjamin bring that to this team.

One point I'll make FOR HILLIS.  He was a great WCO Running Back IN THE PASSING GAME.  Soft hands, caught in space and would rumble.  Some of those Screens and Flares were things of beauty.  Problem was, he couldn't RUN in the WCO.  He had no burst to get to (and through) the LOS.  Maybe it was the injury, maybe it was mental, not sure.

Richardson has Hillis Power, better hands, and Sanders-like (similar, not the same... Sanders will NEVER be reproduced, not even by LaMichael James who just won't be strong enough) in agility and balance to be capable in every aspect of the running game in our Division.  He is the Proto-Type WCO Running Back.  Doug Martin would be a nice 2nd.  Slightly less burst and explosiveness, a tad less wiggle and giggle, not nearly as much strength and nasty.  Either would be fine in any WCO.  That Miller from Miami would be good in a WCO that didn't have Power Defenses like Baltimore and Pitt, some where where up the middle power was a luxury and not a need.