|

4malamute.com
Articles
Archives
Season 2000
Season 2001
Season 2002
Season 2003
History Articles
Spoofs
Editorials
Dawg Food
Schedule
Links Page
Statistics
Site Development
About This Site
Cast
Contact Us

|
Has Washington joined the WCO?
Gilby needs to answer that question, but I'll give it a
shot.
By: Malamute, Posted 11 March 2003
The Pac-10 is known for its whacko, wide-open passing
attacks, and many of its teams employ a variation of the West Coast Offense
in their offensive cookbooks. Breaking with its long tradition of power running, this last season’s version of the
Washington Huskies was as zany and pass-happy as any of its conference
cohorts--its offense being called one-dimensional by some experts.
The Huskies’ passing attack ranked fourth in the NCAA,
and its QB, Cody Pickett, led the conference in passing (yards/game) and in
total offense.
Have the Huskies joined conference members Cal, USC and Stanford, et al, for
its implementation of what some might call a West Coast Offense? Or have the
Huskies implemented a short-passing game that has little or no resemblance
to the WCO as it was designed by Don Coryell and Sid Gillman and refined by
Bill Walsh? You decide.
The bulleted items below list the tenets/criteria of the West Coast Offense,
followed by a description of how the Huskies' offense did-or-did not
meet them for the 2002 season.
- According to Bill Walsh, in the ideal setup, the wide receivers would
catch 15 passes a game, the running backs would catch 10 and the tight
ends would catch five. A team is looking for 25 first downs a game.
For the most part, Washington's attack met this tenet of the WCO, i.e.,
Walsh's numbers.
Leading the league in first downs,
Washington averaged 24.9 first downs per game. During the course of the
season, on average per game, the Huskies completed 19.8 passes to its WRs, 3.5 passes to its
tight ends, and 5.3 passes to its RBs. In 2003, look for the Huskies to
throw more to its fullback and tailbacks. Shown by the data in Table 1
below, the Huskies almost perfectly met Walsh's numbers in their game
against Idaho, a game in which they won, 41-27. The Dawgs fell far short
of those numbers in blowout losses to USC and Arizona State. Because the
UW could not run the ball against USC, it threw the ball 16 times to its
running backs.
Next season look for incoming Juco Jon Lyon (TE), Ty
Eriks (backup FB), and for speedsters Nate Robinson (CB) and Isaiah
Stanback (backup QB), all to be tried in pass-catching rolls. Nowadays, it
is more important for the Huskies to have the soft hands of a Jerramy
Stevens at tight end rather than the blocking skills of a Kevin Ware. For
the coaches in the Pac-10, it's a matter of getting the right personnel on the field to
fashion their version of the WCO.
-
Short-to-medium-range passing attack. Receivers are expected to
"Run After Catch."
Washington's passing
attack met this tenet of the WCO. The Huskies averaged
12.1 yards per pass completion. During the season, WR Reggie Williams had an 88-yard pass
reception, WR Charles Frederick a 74-yard pass reception, and Paul Arnold a
66-yard pass reception, all of which qualify as Runs After Catch.
-
Players must have more discipline; they have little opportunity
for freelancing.
In the Pac-10, the Huskies were penalized the least amount of yards
per game, leading the conference in penalties incurred. The WCO is
designed to cut down on penalties and turnovers.
-
Use the pass to set up the run. The most successful WCO
teams run the ball well.
The Huskies set up the run with the pass and averaged 47.7 passes per
game last season; they averaged 33 rushes per game. However, the lack of a
successful running game put too much pressure on the passing attack, leaving
it vulnerable to blitzes and bumping/holding tactics.
-
If a team gains 7-8 yards per run, it can run as little
as one out of four plays; otherwise, the WCO calls for an equal number of
running and passing plays.
Washington did not meet these criteria, averaging 74 yards per game
on the ground. The Huskies averaged 47.7 passes per game and ran the ball on
the average 33 times per game. QB Cody Pickett was credited with 6.4 runs per
game, with an average loss of 11 yards per game.
-
The quarterback must be mobile, be able to throw a
touch pass with accuracy, and be intelligent.
QB Cody Pickett
more than meets
these criteria.
-
In the 2-WR, 2-RB, 1-TE base
set, any of these five players can be the primary receiver at any given
time.
The UW meets this criteria.
-
Defenses are given a variety of looks, with an offense
attacking a defense with more receivers than it can cover. Mismatches and
confusion are created on defense by using 2 TE sets, 4 WR sets, and 3 WR
sets, etc.
The Huskies give the opposition a variety of looks.
-
Using motion forces a defense to cover players with
inappropriate players for coverage, i.e., it creates mismatches.
Washington meets this tenet of the WCO.
-
Throw the football on any down or distance.
The Huskies are
not reluctant to throw the ball on fourth down and were second in the
conference in fourth down conversions (58.3%). However, in the game against
Texas in the 2001 Holiday Bowl, the offense demurred from passing in the
fourth quarter when it had poor field position. Not being able to control
the clock at that point in the game proved costly.
-
To maintain ball control, short passes to the tight end
and swing passes to running backs are key. Use tight ends who can catch
better than block if there is a question of personnel. Tight ends are key to a red zone attack.
Washington was second in the Pac-10 in Time of
Possession, averaging 32:25 (minutes/seconds) per game. The Dawgs maintained
ball control in almost every game they played; however, QB Cody Pickett
could have completed more passes to TEs Kevin Ware, known for his blocking
ability, and to Joe Toledo, who says he's working on emulating former TE Jerramy Stevens'
pass-catching techniques. At least, he told me that at Picture Day 2002. Not
enough passes were thrown to the fullback, Zach Tuiasosopo (photo above), who excels at
blocking rather than at catching passes.
-
The quarterback must be able to release the ball
quickly and accurately on timing after a 3-step drop. Receivers run
precision routes. The offense is designed to keep the quarterback healthy.
QB
Cody Pickett has a quick release, sets up well and has receivers that run
precision routes. Pickett, who is also mobile and intelligent, is an
excellent pro-prospect because he fits nicely within a WCO implementation. He was not injured during the 2002 season and played in
every game. To be more effective, he needs to run the ball more, like Rich
Gannon of the Oakland Raiders.
-
After the QB drops 3-steps back, one of the receivers
should be open to catch a pass if necessary. Ron Jenkins calls him the HOT
receiver.
Washington meets this criteria. At times Pickett,
will take a step-back from the center and whip the ball to a wide-out, who
will run for 5 or 6 yards.
-
Power running behind zone blocking to minimize negative
yardage plays. This is a departure from the 49ers version of the WCO that
used man-blocking and cut blocks and misdirection.
Washington employs
zone-blocking techniques. It lacked a power running attack.
Table 1. Washington
versus its opponents in the 2002 season. The nomenclature and data, which
apply to solely Washington, are as follow: Number of catches by the wide
receivers (WR), number of catches by tight ends (TE), number of catches by
fullback (FB), and number of catches by the tailback (TB). Pass=number of
passes thrown in the game; Run=number of running plays in the game. QB=number
of runs by the quarterback; YG=yards gained by the quarterback. Red numbers
indicate minus yardage. * Walsh's number includes the fullback.
| Team |
WR |
TE |
FB |
TB |
Pass |
Run |
QB |
YG |
| Michigan |
19 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
45 |
34 |
4 |
10 |
| SJS |
17 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
35 |
35 |
4 |
0 |
| Wyoming |
26 |
4 |
0 |
7 |
48 |
36 |
5 |
13 |
| Idaho |
19 |
6 |
1 |
6 |
45 |
43 |
7 |
8 |
| Cal |
25 |
3 |
0 |
12 |
59 |
26 |
12 |
3 |
| Arizona |
17 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
35 |
32 |
6 |
4 |
| USC |
14 |
7 |
1 |
15 |
65 |
19 |
4 |
23 |
| ASU |
14 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
37 |
40 |
11 |
45 |
| UCLA |
21 |
5 |
0 |
3 |
60 |
42 |
7 |
30 |
| OSU |
15 |
4 |
0 |
3 |
43 |
36 |
3 |
1 |
| Oregon |
24 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
37 |
28 |
4 |
10 |
| WSU |
26 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
57 |
34 |
8 |
52 |
| Purdue |
19 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
54 |
24 |
8 |
8 |
| Average |
19.8 |
3.5 |
.5 |
4.8 |
47.7 |
33 |
6.4 |
11 |
| Walsh's |
15 |
5 |
|
10* |
|
|
|
|
Reference this article in the series:
The Pac-10 and the West Coast Offense
References:
Jenkins, Ron,
“Coaching the Multiple West Coast Offense,” Coaches Choice, 2001.
Walsh, Bill with
Glenn Dickey, “Building a Champion: On Football and the Making of the
49ers,” Saint Martins Press, 1990.
|