What is the West Coast Offense?

[hollywood_texan]

I want to start off with that I am not a fan of the West Coast Offense.

Having said that, I think that 3-2 play to seal the game was a typical West Coast Offense play in that situation. Which means, if you don't like the call, you don't like the offense.

The point of the West Coast Offense is that the defense never knows if you are going to run or pass. Essentially, many of the pass plays are running plays in disguise.

In order to run the West Coast Offense, you need the right personnel and execution.

As much I don't like the West Coast Offense, I don't think it was bad call considering the philosophy of the offensive style (no pun intended) and Kubiak believed in the personnel on the field could get it done. Maybe that was Kubiak's mistake, believing Carr and Johnson could hook up on such an easy play for such an important play.

So, if you have an issue with that play, I say you have an issue with either the philosophy, player personnel, or execution. But, the philosophy is what it is, and you have to take the good with the bad.

 

[Double Barrel]

I don't have a problem with the WC offense. My concern is clock management and the fact that you want your opponent to burn their last timeout. Getting a 1st down would've been nice, but you know an incomplete pass would stop the clock (thus saving the Bills' final timeout), so a running play guarantees that either they get the ball without the benefit of being able to stop the clock, or you run another 35 seconds off the clock (bringing the clock to just over a minute left).

In addition, if Kubiak didn't have the confidence in this offense to run a two minute drill in the end of the first half a couple of weeks ago, it seems like a big gamble to put the ball in the air in this situation.

 

[Texan_Bill]

http://www.westcoastoffense.com/

 

[hollywood_texan]

I don't have a problem with the WC offense. My concern is clock management and the fact that you want your opponent to burn their last timeout. Getting a 1st down would've been nice, but you know an incomplete pass would stop the clock (thus saving the Bills' final timeout), so a running play guarantees that either they get the ball without the benefit of being able to stop the clock, or you run another 35 seconds off the clock (bringing the clock to just over a minute left).

In addition, if Kubiak didn't have the confidence in this offense to run a two minute drill in the end of the first half a couple of weeks ago, it seems like a big gamble to put the ball in the air in this situation.

DB, totally and hear what your are saying. Honestly, I would have ran the ball for the reasons you described.

But, the West Coast Offense is a balanced attack and you have to stay true to the style.

You make excellent points, but I am more or less pointing out the philosophy and that play is a serious option in that situation. If not, you are not running the West Coast Offense.

 

[Sarg01]

It's not so much the call, as the setup. If you're going for the 1st and trying to fool the defense, go for the first all three downs.

Don't be conservative on downs one and two and then when down 2 actually gives you a shot to get the first by being conservative, switch to aggressive just to be weird.

If you're going to pass on 3rd-and-2 in a clock management situation, then screen it and let Andre YAC across the marker or go to the TE. You don't toss in the direction of a Top 5 corner (Clements). Hell, take a sack. It would have been better to lose yardage and keep the clock running than to toss an incomplete. It's arguable that even if we lost 5 on the play that we would have won the game if we got that final timeout (or 40 seconds) off them.

 

[hollywood_texan]

http://www.westcoastoffense.com/

It was really a rhetorical question.

But, it looks like a good site.

Thanks!

 

[Texan_Bill]

It was really a rhetorical question.

But, it looks like a good site.

Thanks!

LOL, I knew that... I had found that site before and thought it was funny that there was west coast offense dot com...

 

[Texan_Bill]

West Coast Offense, East Coast Offense, Run and Shoot, The Offense God Himself Designed, I don't give two $%@*s what it's called!!!! The point of the matter is that as an NFL HEAD COACH you know what play to call to put your team in the best position to win the game!!!

Kubiak did not do that yesterday...BOTTOM LINE!!He put the other team in the best possible position to make a last minute comeback drive. He basically said,
"Here, if you stop this one play you'll get 2mln still, plus I'll let you keep your last timeout." Jauron" DEAL!!! "....... Kubes"Deal."

And then they stopped us and we lost.He put the ball in their court, essentially based on his "philosphy"and it cost us a win. So I REALLY hope he looks at himself as a coach as much as his players today and realizes that sometimes you have to STOP thinking out of the box and just stick to the FUNDAMENTALS of the Head Coaching position!!

AND RUN DOWN THE CLOCK!!!!

On to next week regardless....Go Texans!!

Even as a Kubes fan, I would have to agree with that point.

 

[Double Barrel]

DB, totally and hear what your are saying. Honestly, I would have ran the ball for the reasons you described.

But, the West Coast Offense is a balanced attack and you have to stay true to the style.

You make excellent points, but I am more or less pointing out the philosophy and that play is a serious option in that situation. If not, you are not running the West Coast Offense.

Good point, HT. I'd speculate that Kubiak thought the call was a high percentage completion play, especially considering Carr's percentage for the day.

 

[hollywood_texan]

West Coast Offense, East Coast Offense, Run and Shoot, The Offense God Himself Designed, I don't give two $%@*s what it's called!!!! The point of the matter is that as an NFL HEAD COACH you know what play to call to put your team in the best position to win the game!!!

Kubiak did not do that yesterday...BOTTOM LINE!!He put the other team in the best possible position to make a last minute comeback drive. He basically said,
"Here, if you stop this one play you'll get 2mln still, plus I'll let you keep your last timeout." Jauron" DEAL!!! "....... Kubes"Deal."

And then they stopped us and we lost.He put the ball in their court, essentially based on his "philosphy"and it cost us a win. So I REALLY hope he looks at himself as a coach as much as his players today and realizes that sometimes you have to STOP thinking out of the box and just stick to the FUNDAMENTALS of the Head Coaching position!!

AND RUN DOWN THE CLOCK!!!!

On to next week regardless....Go Texans!!

I don't disagree with anything you said.

But, considering the philosophy, you have Carr and Johnson on a high percentage play that they probably have been running since day one since Kubiak came in (it was probably one of the first things they learned). You have to stay true to the philosophy of a balanced attack. With this type of offense and the personnel, that should be an automatic play!

Even though it cost us the game, it was an opportunity for Kubiak to see where the progress is and can he rely on the personnel to execute the philosophy that he thinks is critical to being a success beyond just one football game in what everyone expected would be losing season anyway.

Perspective is key in analyzing this decision, and I think that has been lost a little even though you guys have valid points, and even more of a reason to be very UPSET!!!!!

 

[Texan_Bill]

I see you working there and I don't disagree. With that said, I still think you need to run the ball in that particular situation. Its a clock management deal with me. If the situation (time / timeout) were different then perhaps, try the throw.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

DB , HT I have to think Kubiak went over these situations with Carr ... I'm talking about the bomb and the 3rd and two . He had to tell him to look but if its not there don't force it , that ball does'nt hit the ground .

On the play thats known as The Catch ... Walsh told Montana to look if its not there simply throw it away , its about bigtime players making game winning plays .

 

[hollywood_texan]

Why do you have to stay true to the style? So he doesn't hurt the inventor of the West Coast Offenses feelings? You run the ball in that situation every time.The only way you don't is if you're in field goal range and we were not even close!You win games at the end by pounding the ball and running down the clock..it's basic football knowledge.He screwed up and we lost.

I still think he is a great coach too, don't get me wrong. I think sometimes we forget he is a rookie himself!

I don't like the West Coast Offense, but the purpose is a balanced attack to make it tougher for the defense to figure out tendacies.

If you always run in that situation, you are no longer the West Coast Offense in that type of situation. This team doesn't have the personnel to run it up the gut.

If it would have been successful, it would have been great for the future because a defense would not know if a run or pass would happen in that situation. Which is the point of the West Coast Offense.

No risk, no reward. We took the risk, and it didn't come through.

The purpose of that play was a lot more than making one 1st down or winning one game. It was to prove the personnel is there for this type of offense.

Also, that was not a difficult play and it should have been automatic. It was a baby step for Carr and Johnson and they failed.

 

[Double Barrel]

Even though it cost us the game, it was an opportunity for Kubiak to see where the progress is and can he rely on the personnel to execute the philosophy that he thinks is critical to being a success beyond just one football game in what everyone expected would be losing season anyway.

Pure speculation here, but you have to wonder if Kubiak put the play in the game to see how Carr (and Johnson) responded to the pressure of the situation. Complete the pass and we pretty much win the game. From the replays, it looked like the ball was thrown too high and too hard. So if it was a test of sorts, Carr failed to make the grade. Now Kubiak knows he can't put games on the line for his QB to win. [/speculation]

DB , HT I have to think Kubiak went over these situations with Carr ... I'm talking about the bomb and the 3rd and two . He had to tell him to look but if its not there don't force it , that ball does'nt hit the ground .

On the play thats known as The Catch ... Walsh told Montana to look if its not there simply throw it away , its about bigtime players making game winning plays .

Bingo. Adding to my above statement, it appears that the difference between "good" and "great" is making a two yard pass work to win the game.

While I completely disagree with the play call, I think it reveals more about our QB than it does our HC. But this is just in my mind, so it's not something I'm putting here to argue. Just food for thought in that regard.

The purpose of that play was a lot more than making one 1st down or winning one game. It was to prove the personnel is there for this type of offense.

Also, that was not a difficult play and it should have been automatic. It was a baby step for Carr and Johnson and they failed.

Exactly. The pieces will fall where they may now, but the coach has to know if players can gut check in these tense situations.

 

[hollywood_texan]

Pure speculation here, but you have to wonder if Kubiak put the play in the game to see how Carr (and Johnson) responded to the pressure of the situation. Complete the pass and we pretty much win the game. From the replays, it looked like the ball was thrown too high and too hard. So if it was a test of sorts, Carr failed to make the grade. Now Kubiak knows he can't put games on the line for his QB to win. [/speculation]

I am speculating, but it is a very good educated guess.

That was a bread and butter play...

You guys can take it from there considering everything I stated earlier...

Thanks for hanging in there with me to see my point...

 

[Wolf]

I don't have a problem with the WC offense. My concern is clock management and the fact that you want your opponent to burn their last timeout. Getting a 1st down would've been nice, but you know an incomplete pass would stop the clock (thus saving the Bills' final timeout), so a running play guarantees that either they get the ball without the benefit of being able to stop the clock, or you run another 35 seconds off the clock (bringing the clock to just over a minute left).

In addition, if Kubiak didn't have the confidence in this offense to run a two minute drill in the end of the first half a couple of weeks ago, it seems like a big gamble to put the ball in the air in this situation.

not sure DB.. AJ had a post this morning talking about the timeout wouldnt' have even mattered, they never used one.

First (and this has nothing to do with what I'm quoting above), I'm for whatever works. Yeah, the Texans were gashing them in the running game all day and that's probably why the Bills brought nearly everyone up on that play. Kubiak explained why he thought the inside slant to AJ would have worked. Carr was having a pretty good percentage day but this ball was delivered high and Clements was all over the route. They blew it. It would have been a 'great call' if it had worked. Because it didn't, what were they thinking?

Furthermore, if the Texans would have run the ball on 3rd and 2 and failed, people would be screaming bloody murder for being too conservative, not passing the ball, not being creative, not going for the win, not having balls, blah blah freakity blah....

As far as the clock management facts (relating to what I quoted), the 3rd and 2 snap occurred at 2:00. If the Texans were stopped short of the first down, 10 seconds (at most) would have run off on the play, forcing the Bills to take their last timeout at 1:50.

Texans punt at 1:50 and (again) making a very conservative estimate of the time runoff during the return, the Bills would have had the ball at about the same spot on the field with 1:40 remaining and 0 timeouts instead of 1. (they actually started at their own 45 with 1:44 remaining with 1 timeout). So the net difference was a timeout that it turned out they didn't even need.

The Bills ran five quick pass plays gaining 40 yards in 1:29 before spiking it on the 0:15 snap. When Losman threw the TD pass to Price, they still had that timeout on the board.

It's plain and simple that 'poor clock management' was irrelevant in that last sequence. Not converting the 3rd and 2 was most relevant, but that was only one of many reasons the Texans lost this game - along with 83 turning 38 inside out twice, Cook's fumble, the INT on the first drive, allowing those five quick pass plays gaining 40 yards on the last drive, no pressure on Losman all day, and probably a few other things I'm missing at the moment.

http://forums.houstontexans.com/showthread.php?t=31188

 

[thunderkyss]

It's not so much the call, as the setup. If you're going for the 1st and trying to fool the defense, go for the first all three downs.

Don't be conservative on downs one and two and then when down 2 actually gives you a shot to get the first by being conservative, switch to aggressive just to be weird.

If you're going to pass on 3rd-and-2 in a clock management situation, then screen it and let Andre YAC across the marker or go to the TE. You don't toss in the direction of a Top 5 corner (Clements). Hell, take a sack. It would have been better to lose yardage and keep the clock running than to toss an incomplete. It's arguable that even if we lost 5 on the play that we would have won the game if we got that final timeout (or 40 seconds) off them.

First of all, just because you run the ball, doesn't mean you are being conservative. As you pointed out, a conservative 2 yard crossing route would have been great.

West Coast Offense, East Coast Offense, Run and Shoot, The Offense God Himself Designed, I don't give two $%@*s what it's called!!!! The point of the matter is that as an NFL HEAD COACH you know what play to call to put your team in the best position to win the game!!!

Kubiak did not do that yesterday...BOTTOM LINE!!He put the other team in the best possible position to make a last minute comeback drive.

AND RUN DOWN THE CLOCK!!!!

On to next week regardless....Go Texans!!

Our Defense was playing better than our offense in the second half(our only points in the second half came on defense.) Trusting the defense wasn't really a bad decision.


at that time.

You must have been the one guy cheering Kubiak's decision to run out the clock before the half of the Miami game............. kudos.

not sure DB.. AJ had a post this morning talking about the timeout wouldnt' have even mattered, they never used one.



http://forums.houstontexans.com/showthread.php?t=31188

Wow....... now that's how you end a thread.

 

[Double Barrel]

not sure DB.. AJ had a post this morning talking about the timeout wouldnt' have even mattered, they never used one.

http://forums.houstontexans.com/showthread.php?t=31188

yeah, hindsight is always 20/20, and aj. has excellent points. I guess it comes down to blown plays earlier in the game that put this team in a position to lose the game at the end. It was definitely a team loss, which I've maintained all along.

But I still would've run on 3rd and 2 without the benefit of hindsight. I rarely openly disagree with a HC decision, but airing the ball at that point and putting that much confidence in Carr is something I would've been more conservative about. And just because it's something Capers would've done doesn't automatically make it a bad decision.

Thanks for the heads up, though...aj always has a way of putting these things in perspective, and for that I always appreciate his takes.

I hate to say it, because he is our QB, but I don't have confidence in Carr at the end of games at this point. He just doesn't have the killer instinct that always makes plays in the clutch. I'm not calling him out, but the fact of the matter is that the play called required him to step up, and he did not get the job done. That's just simple analysis, and I'm not hatin' on the guy in any way (so nobody expect me to argue about this...disagree away, just don't flame me or I'll respond accordingly).

 

[Wolf]

I hear you DB.. I wonder about certain things with Carr too.

maybe the homer in me, but I wonder about what I heard this week

"in order for us to win us games, he has to learn not to lose them for us first" I am hoping he can still step up.. of course I was estatic in 2004 when he played and how he progressed, i was expecting this season for him to be equal to that if not better.