Basic tenets of the West Coast Offense

Charlie Every day Drills into the players Heads in Meetings and on the Field The basics of the New System .

He also has Add to it weekly
To Master this System takes Time.
But when you do Look it out CFL..
Cause the QB Reads the Defence
Finds the open guy
ball is gone.
It a Low Sack offence when Run Correctly.

The History of WCO winning is Very Impressive..

The west coast offence is a bunk system for the Canadian game. End of story. With 3 downs you need to go vertical, it's just stupid to ask your q.b to constantly convert 2nd and 5, 2nd and 6 7 times in a row to put t.d drives together. In order to score 30 points with this system in this league a q.b will have to complete like 90% of his passes.

The west coast offence is a bunk system for the Canadian game. End of story. With 3 downs you need to go vertical, it's just stupid to ask your q.b to constantly convert 2nd and 5, 2nd and 6 7 times in a row to put t.d drives together. In order to score 30 points with this system in this league a q.b will have to complete like 90% of his passes.
THANK YOU !!!!!!! thank you thank you, Canadian rules allows motion and no where in this design (american rules) is this considered. We have backs in full motion and flying across the line and thats the one reason we have three downs. Quick release or roll outs .. spread the "D" and use of the entire field is the key to success in the CFL. Motion and reads are everything .. the successful teams have QB's that are mobile with the exception of Danny Mac and his unbeliveable super quick release in his prime. PS thanks for all the info, great imformative reading.

All basic offensive packages will have flexibility to adapt. Passes of all ranges will be available. Coaches understand this --- one dimensional in any sense will not win anymore and I don't believe our offense is limited.
The key element is in the "reads". Maybe Maas is nervous or lacks confidence or is just plain hurt --- but he consistently threw short and quick. Sometimes other reads would have allowed him to do otherwise. One example would be the now infamous play where Holmes was open on the 5 yd line for an easy swing pass touchdown. Maas rushed his read and threw it too soon and to the wrong receiver.
Players, coaches, passing, running, blocking, reading and tackling......it comes down to those things in all systems.
Chang ran the same offense, albeit in a different situation, and made different throws due to different reads. The OC doesn't normally dictate that the QB throw to Receiver A at yardage X. The QB makes the decision with his arm according to his read and according to the defensive reactions.

This is a great breakdown of the W.C.o- But it really is a variation of the Run and Shoot - several points are 100% Canadian influence, ie; the Emphasis on outmanning the secondary with eligable recievers, and Utalizing the QB as an extra back (Run and Shoot)- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run_&_Shoot

The WCO is NOT a set of plays, it is a timing system linking QB footwork to pass route depth!!!

Taaffe Offenses in the CFL:

1997 (as Mtl OC): 509 points, 13-5, 2nd in the East

1998 (as Mtl OC): 470 points, 12-5-1, (tied for 1st in the East, awarded 2nd)

1999 (as Mtl HC/OC): 495 points, 12-6, 1st in the East

2000 (as Mtl HC/OC): 594 points, 12-6, 1st in the East

In 2000, Montreal led the league in passer rating with a 104.0 rating (compared to 62.8 for Hamilton -- thanks Dicken and Bankhead LMAO)

TD-INT ratio was 28 to 8.

Montreal was ranked second in points scored (594), third in total offensive yardage (6944), second in yards rushed per game (135.6) and most yards per pass (9.4).

The system works as an ensemble. The pass sets up the run. First down efficiency allows for more consistent ball control and LESS ERRORS by the QB if the system is operating properly.

You can run a WCO out of a five-receiver set in Canada if you wanted to. Put the QB in the shotgun, drop to a 7-step or even 9-step equivalent depth in the pocket. There is zero in the timing issue to keep the QB from going deep in Canadian ball. It depends on the extent to which deep zones are covered and what the designed area(s) of attack on the D is.

Think Air Coryell of the San Diego Chargers in the Dan Fouts era...a WCO as well:

"Original West Coast Offense: Air Coryell

Kosar used the term to describe the offense formalized by Sid Gillman with the AFL Chargers in the 1960s and later by Don Coryell's St. Louis Cardinals and Chargers in the 1970s and 1980s. Al Davis, an assistant under Gillman, also carried his version to the Oakland Raiders, where his successors John Rauch, John Madden, and Tom Flores continued to employ and expand upon its basic principles. This is the "West Coast Offense" as Kosar originally used the term. However, it is now commonly referred to as the "Air Coryell" timed system, and the term West Coast Offense is usually instead used to describe Bill Walsh's system.

The offense uses a specific naming system, with the routes for wideouts and tight ends receiving three digit numbers, and routes for backs having unique names. For example, a pass play in 3 digit form might be "Split Right 787 check swing, check V". (see Offensive Nomenclature). This provides an efficient way to communicate many different plays with minimal memorization."

"The original West Coast Offense of Sid Gillman uses some of the same principles (pass to establish the run, quarterback throws to timed spots), but offensive formations are generally less complicated with more wideouts and motion. The timed spots are often farther downfield than in the Walsh-style offense, and the system requires a greater reliance on traditional pocket passing."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Coast_offense

That's the flavour Charlie is trying to install here, IMO. The Canadian rules allow for advantages in getting slots in motion, but the receivers have to get open in the intermediate and deep zones. Otherwise, it's dink-and-dunk city like we saw on Saturday.

For it to work correctly, the deep passing game has to be a factor to stretch the D.

Spread offenses utilize four and five receiver sets de rigeur, but the routes are NOT tied to the QB's footwork.

It is not slavishly trying to apply Bill Walsh's WCO circa 1980 to a Canadian context. Chang's drive last Saturday demonstrated what can happen if the intermediate and deep zones are attackable with an umbrella-style prevent coverage and a QB who can gun it into those areas.

Getting the defensive backfield to have to cheat on the run allows you to take shots deep. You also want to spread the D out so there are more opportunites for big YAC yards from missed tackles when defenders are isolated by the horizontal stretching effect of the attack.

Oski Wee Wee,

go dig up Toni's numbers after Charlie left. His t.d's went up 40% and his yards went up by almost 2000 yards a year once Don came in and brought a real CFL style offence in. The west coast o is all about short routes and dump passes to the backs.

The "East Coast Offence" is what Steve Spurrier called his offence when he went to coach in Washington. And we all know how well that went...

Also, I remember the Doug Flutie days back in Calgary and it always seemed like his receivers were running 10, 15, or 20 yard routes, so when they caught the ball, they got a first down. So to them, a poor gain on first down didn't stop them from moving the ball. I was a big fan of that type of system and I'd like to see something like that come to Hamilton. (I wouldn't mind having some of those Calgary players either!)

Ask A.C. about the impact of Taaffe's work with him and how it SALVAGED his career.

Here again, the performance of the QB as regards to his capacity to make reads and distribute the ball based on his footwork operates irrespective of what plays are run.

A Coryell 4 or 5 receiver offense (the 3 and 4-receiver sets being the staple of the great Chargers offenses of the 1980s) is easily adaptable to the CFL. Easily.

The Dallas dynasty of the 1990s is directly linked to the Gillman-Coryell-Zampese line of the WCO. Norv Turner's attack was as vertical as one would ask -- shotgun, 3 and 4-receivers -- bombs away to Michael Irvin...a timing offense!

You want to equate the WCO with just Walsh and his coaching tree, but that isn't how the pioneers of the system would look at it. WCO approaches are as diverse as one can get these days.

We need receivers who can get open deep and we need to see whether Maas has the elan to get the ball there. I know Chang has the gun and the attitude to sure as hell try.

Oski Wee Wee,

and the problem is we don't have the receivers to make any system work.

Well, it was more often referred to as the "Fun 'N' Gun" offense under Spurrier. Not much fun, pretty bad gun.

A bad spread offense to be sure.

Oski Wee Wee,