Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo

Existential Question: Why do we run the west coast offense?


Recommended Posts

I thought Williams and Saunders didn't get along? Lack of continuity in schemes since Norv Turner keeps the Skins from establishing any identity. I don't think the Skins have a smash mouth identify anymore because they can't run the ball. We are halfway between smash mouth and pass-happy. The Skins need to move toward pass happy IMO rather than back to smash mouth. The Skins don't have a run blocking line anymore and Portis/Betts aren't going to hold up in that type of offense. We are stuck with Portis for several more years anyway given his guaranteed contract.

The Skins OL is vastly improved in pass blocking. Instead of a run first offense they need to complete the transition to pass first (back to pre-Gibbs approach). Use the pass to set up the run (draw plays and screens) instead of play action off of a series of running plays. Use 2 TE sets instead of a fullback. Pass to the TEs and Randel El in the slot until the rookie WRs become a credible threat. Betts is very well suited to the WCO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the question -- I think the Skins FO wanted a more "explosive" offense rather than the slow-grinding, power-running game that Gibbs was developing.

That's why you saw Al Saunders brought in, and that's why we looked for a OC who could run a WCO.

High-scoring offenses make it easier to market the team, and bring in more of the fans into the stadium. It also is good for getting more toppings on your pizza!

Are those reasons good? That all sounds fine and dandy, but it's not the offense it's the personnel running it... as you can see... we only scored ONE offensive TD, and that was at the end of the game.

We'd probably score more points with Gibbs' offense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have a QB who is not suited for it.

He was actually pretty accurate on the mid ranged passes yesterday.

A running back who doesn't like catching passes.

What makes you think that? Didn't most people complain that we checked down to our RB's too much?

A full back who is in no way shape or form designed to play in WCO.

How is a WCO fullback designed?

A line that has always been at its best as a road-grading power running team.

Our run blocking was less than stellar yesterday. We actually looked better pass blocking in the spread imo.

Two decent receivers who are not exactly built to catch slants and break tackles.

Randel El in the slot was money on all of those routes.

I'm not saying the WCO is the best for our players I just thought some of the things you said weren't true to what we saw yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are we doing what we do?

We are running the WCO because that is the offense that Jim Zorn knows.

Sherman Smith the offensive coordinator has never been an OC before and is more famaliar with the running game then the passing game.

Therefore even if Zorn wanted to rely on Smith to install the offense he can't because Sherman Smith doesn't know the WCO and doesn't know the passing game.

Either Zorn or Sherman Smith' date=' neither of which have been an OC before, had to install the offensive scheme and call the plays because Sherman Smith isn't famaliar with the passing game the duty/onus is on Zorn.

*(Possibly by choice because Zorn wanted to call plays. If he hired an OC with experience then that OC would most likely want to call plays himself and would have every right to because he would automatically have more experience calling plays then Zorn)

Alot to handle for a position coach that has never been an OC and is now a 1st time Head Coach.

So...why are we still trying to pound this square peg of a team into this round hole of an offense -

I don't agree that the WCO is a bad fit for this team.

We have a QB who is not suited for it.

JC can run the WCO.

His progress is on target if not ahead then other WCO QBs in their 1st years like Matt Hesselbeck.

*(Although the college game is much different form the NFL' date=' he did run the WCO in an undefeated season at Auburn)

A running back who doesn't like catching passes.

I agree that Portis isn't the most graceful pass catcher but when asked to in the Saunders offensive he caught 40+.

And Betts is supposedly a good receiver.

A full back who is in no way shape or form designed to play in WCO.

Sellers will work in any system, you don't have to have a pass catching FB to make the WCO work look at the Eagles, Broncos, Packers, Seahawks and Texans.

A line that has always been at its best as a road-grading power running team.

Our OL would be a problem in whatever scheme we run, the WCO is one of the more OL friendly offenses because the reliance on quick passing takes reduces the amount of the times the OL is asked to protect for 3+ seconds.

Two decent receivers who are not exactly built to catch slants and break tackles.

I agree that Tana and ARE aren't built ideally suited to catching slants and 'breaking' tackles. But, either are Deion Branch, Bobby Engram, Darrel Jackson, DeSean Jackson, Kevin Curtis, Greg Lewis, etc...i think you see my point.

The WCO is so much more then WRs running slants and 'breaking' tackles.

My concern aren't about the WCO itself.

My concern is about the ability of the offensive staff, Zorn and Sherman Smith are capable of producing a more dynamic offense.

We've heard talk of:

o an 'explosive' offensive and 'aggresive' playcalling but haven't seen it

o double TEs sets and an effort to Fred Davis involved

o getting the backs especially Betts involved in the passing game

o an effort to get the ball downfield

Against the Giants i saw timid and predicatable playcalling and a lack of faith in the QB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my favorite exchanges from the radio broadcast (online stream since I actually live in DC - another story...) was Sam saying "why do they call it the West Coast Offense anyway - we're on the East Coast" and Sonny saying "stick to defense Sam, don't worry about it." Classic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh' date=' I think Ben would have aged Joe 50 years.

Can you imagine Joe Gibbs watching that 19-yard sack Ben took on Monday? Granted, there are the 18 fourth quarter comebacks that he has led, but Gibbs would have had a stroke the first time Ben took a big sack or made a dumb interception while trying to keep a play alive.[/quote']

Let's not forget it was Joe Gibbs who drafted Jason "loser" Campbell. And, inorder to get him, we gave up quite a bit.

Then Joe goes out and gets Marc "Boo"nell and we give him a ton of money -- not sure if we also gave up a draft choice.

Joe also got Carlos "Mr. Butterfinger" Rogers ...


We need a potent offense capable of quick strikes leveraging the TEs, and WRs. Call it what you may.

This freaking ding and dump crap is horrible. Frankly, it should be banned ... yes! It's that bad.:chair:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We hired a coach whose only experience is in that offense. So, the bigger question should be "Why did we hire Jim Zorn?"

It goes with my thoughts from last night and today...why don't we figure out what we want to be as an organization (at a level higher than head coach) and hire coaches and players who fit that mold. Then, even if you have to replace coaches and players periodically, you aren't constantly fitting square pegs into round holes.

We went from finesse to smash-mouth over and over under Snyder (Turner to Marty to Spurrier to Gibbs to Zorn). If we had an organizational identity, we'd be able to use holdover players and not always be looking for pieces that fit a new philosophy!

Great Point!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...