belachick as good as guy lombardo (60's packers coach) ?

[Montalban]

This is impossible. You must be trolling

Back at ya. This insistence that Wash didn't develop and implement the WCO is absurd. You must be being purposely obtuse. Its mildly amusing but might be worrisome if you were actually trying to present coherent arguments

 

[Montalban]

However, following a journalistic error, it now more commonly refers to the offensive system devised by Bill Walsh

"Following a journalistic error..."

Oh... my... god

This is very embarrassing for you. lol

The harder you fight the further you sink. As they say

Only a fool would not equate the Coryell offense with the Walsh one.

Why, though? They're clearly polar opposite in philosophy. Lol

Your best case for a comparison is that they were both formed on the same coast and fought over claim to a title.

Please. Explain to me how an offensive system based on 7 step drops and vertical deep routes - attempting to strike a big play. Is in anyway similar to an offense which utilizes ABSOLUTELY ZERO 7 step drops and revolves around short/quick passes.

LOL! Both depend on pass first to set up the run later in the game. They are almost exactly the same philosophy, the difference stems from the players each team had involved.

 

[richig07]

Back at ya. This insistence that Wash didn't develop and implement the WCO is absurd. You must be being purposely obtuse. Its mildly amusing but might be worrisome if you were actually trying to present coherent arguments

So, you concede that Air Coryell and the classic WCO have virtually nothing in common?

We must establish this - stop avoiding it.

 

[richig07]

LOL! Both depend on pass first to set up the run later in the game.

Lol... that does not mean that they're similar systems. That would be like saying that Black Sabbath and The Beatles had a similar sound because they both used electric guitars and had rock influences.

You are doing 500 back flips to try and find common ground here. You're clearly just googling as you go along to try and scrap together anything you can.

Yes, you can find similarities between most any offensive system if you look.

How is an offense ENTIRELY based on 7 step drops and deep/vertical big plays - similar to an offense ENTIRELY based on 3-5 step drops, ZERO 7 steps and short/quick passes? This is the question you cannot answer.

 

[Montalban]

However, following a journalistic error, it now more commonly refers to the offensive system devised by Bill Walsh

"Following a journalistic error..."

Oh... my... god

Also, nobody is here discussing which offense deserves any title. It's entirely irrelevant to the conversation. I don't give a shit which one you call the WCO. Saying they're comparable systems is what is utterly astonishing.

This is very embarrassing for you. lol

The harder you fight the further you sink. As they say

Only a fool would not equate the Coryell offense with the Walsh one.

Why, though? They're clearly polar opposite in philosophy. Lol

Your best case for a comparison is that they were both formed on the same coast and fought over claim to a title.

Please. Explain to me how an offensive system based on 7 step drops and vertical deep routes - attempting to strike a big play. Is in anyway similar to an offense which utilizes ABSOLUTELY ZERO 7 step drops and revolves around short/quick passes.

LOL! Are you telling me you never heard of Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Freddie Solomon or Dwight Clark? Are you saying they nevr ran deep routes? Good lord! Hell, even Brent Jones and Roger Craig caught long passes.

 

[Montalban]

So, you concede that Air Coryell and the classic WCO have virtually nothing in common?

We must establish this - stop avoiding it.

Again, reading comprehension is fundamental. If you can't get past that step then this conversation is pointless. Sounds like you only see what you want to see when attempting to decipher the written word in your mind.

 

[richig07]

LOL! Are you telling me you never heard of Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Freddie Solomon or Dwight Clark? Are you saying they nevr ran deep routes? Good lord! Hell, even Brent Jones and Roger Craig caught long passes.

Where did I say that no one ever ran deep routes in Walsh's offense?

Is this real life? You are trying so, sooo very hard to avoid the obvious, glaring difference

This is actually addressed in the part you conveniently left out of your Wiki copy/past. lol... Hmm... I wonder why you did that.

However, following a journalistic error, it now more commonly refers to the offensive system devised by Bill Walsh while he was the offensive coordinator of the Cincinnati Bengals, characterized by short, horizontal passing routes in lieu of running plays to "stretch out" defenses, opening up the potential for long runs or long passes. It was popularized when Walsh was the head coach of the San Francisco 49ers.

 

[richig07]

Again, reading comprehension is fundamental. If you can't get past that step then this conversation is pointless. Sounds like you only see what you want to see when attempting to decipher the written word in your mind.

Okay, you're trolling.

Address the following.

How is an offense ENTIRELY based on 7 step drops and deep/vertical big plays - similar to an offense ENTIRELY based on 3-5 step drops, ZERO 7 steps and short/quick passes? This is the question you cannot answer.

 

[richig07]

@Montalban

The Air Coryell Offense:



The entire philosophy is designed to attack the defense deep with long and time consuming route running. Long pass attempts north and south to dictate the safety’s to play deep and end the drive on one fiery play. Quarterbacks will often take 5-7 step drops and hold onto the ball while receivers clear on long north and south routes. This decreases the quarterback’s completion rate due to the volume of contested passes and possible turnovers. Offensive linemen are forced to hold onto blocks for extended periods of time so the play can develop downfield. The offense uses motion to isolate mismatches and confuse the defense with the objective of matching speed players against slower players. The offense is designed to dictate what the defense will give, attempting to strike fear of going for it all on every play.




The West Coast Offense:



The entire philosophy is designed to attack east and west instead of north and south. Quarterbacks will often take quick 3 steps drops to get the ball out quickly. Throws will come out quickly so the linemen need to make quality blocks, but will not be forced to stay on the blocks. Routes are designed to run within 10-15 yards from the line of scrimmage, utilizing 50 yards from east to west. Running backs will be available for check down passes creating a higher quarterback completion rate. This allows a few yards to be gained instead of a throw away or forced throw into tight coverage on well defended plays. The offense is designed to take what the defense gives, whether it be 3 yards or 15 yards.

 

[Montalban]

Where did I say that no one ever ran deep routes in Walsh's offense?

Is this real life? You are trying so, sooo very hard to avoid the obvious, glaring difference

This is actually addressed in the part you conveniently left out of your Wiki copy/past. lol... Hmm... I wonder why you did that.

However, following a journalistic error, it now more commonly refers to the offensive system devised by Bill Walsh while he was the offensive coordinator of the Cincinnati Bengals, characterized by short, horizontal passing routes in lieu of running plays to "stretch out" defenses, opening up the potential for long runs or long passes. It was popularized when Walsh was the head coach of the San Francisco 49ers.

Right here with this ludicrous statement you made in post 144:
How is an offense ENTIRELY based on 7 step drops and deep/vertical big plays - similar to an offense ENTIRELY based on 3-5 step drops, ZERO 7 steps and short/quick passes?

 

[Montalban]

Okay, you're trolling.

Address the following.

How is an offense ENTIRELY based on 7 step drops and deep/vertical big plays - similar to an offense ENTIRELY based on 3-5 step drops, ZERO 7 steps and short/quick passes? This is the question you cannot answer.

As simple as I can make it for you is both are Pass-First offenses designed to open up the running game later once the lead has been established. Additionally, both claim to be the WCO. 7 step drops vs 5 step drops is just some nonsense that you read that you think makes a difference.

 

[Montalban]

@Montalban

The Air Coryell Offense:



The entire philosophy is designed to attack the defense deep with long and time consuming route running. Long pass attempts north and south to dictate the safety’s to play deep and end the drive on one fiery play. Quarterbacks will often take 5-7 step drops and hold onto the ball while receivers clear on long north and south routes. This decreases the quarterback’s completion rate due to the volume of contested passes and possible turnovers. Offensive linemen are forced to hold onto blocks for extended periods of time so the play can develop downfield. The offense uses motion to isolate mismatches and confuse the defense with the objective of matching speed players against slower players. The offense is designed to dictate what the defense will give, attempting to strike fear of going for it all on every play.




The West Coast Offense:



The entire philosophy is designed to attack east and west instead of north and south. Quarterbacks will often take quick 3 steps drops to get the ball out quickly. Throws will come out quickly so the linemen need to make quality blocks, but will not be forced to stay on the blocks. Routes are designed to run within 10-15 yards from the line of scrimmage, utilizing 50 yards from east to west. Running backs will be available for check down passes creating a higher quarterback completion rate. This allows a few yards to be gained instead of a throw away or forced throw into tight coverage on well defended plays. The offense is designed to take what the defense gives, whether it be 3 yards or 15 yards.

LOL! And you tried to tell me the Coryell offense didn't use 5 step drops and the Walsh offense used them exclusively. I don't even need to answer your argument. You are killing it yourself.

 

[richig07]

Right here with this ludicrous statement you made in post 144:
How is an offense ENTIRELY based on 7 step drops and deep/vertical big plays - similar to an offense ENTIRELY based on 3-5 step drops, ZERO 7 steps and short/quick passes?

Yes, that's the base of the offensive philosophy. 100% true. And MY reading comprehension is supposedly bad? Lol

Stating the base philosophy of an offense is that they throw short/horizontal/quick passes does not = They NEVER, EVER take a deep shot. Clearly, there are still west coast offenses today... and every team takes deep shots.

For instance, the Chicago Bears BASE defense is a 3-4 alignment with a cover 2 zone. However, they run all kinds of other personnel packages, 5 man front, 4 man front and will deploy Cover 0, 1 or 3 if the situation dictates it.

I take it that you are actually stating the basic philosophy of the WCO is not short/quick/horizontal passes?

 

[richig07]

As simple as I can make it for you is both are Pass-First offenses designed to open up the running game later once the lead has been established. Additionally, both claim to be the WCO. 7 step drops vs 5 step drops is just some nonsense that you read that you think makes a difference.

Both claim to be the WCO offense over the title - since they're both from the west coast... Lol. The name has nothing to do with the system philosophies. It's irrelevant.


7 step drops vs 5 step drops is just some nonsense that you read that you think makes a difference.

Funny how you gloss over the fact that the entire point of 3-5 step drops is to get the ball out quicker. 7 steps is to hold longer and wait for a big play to develop downfield. lol

As simple as I can make it for you is both are Pass-First offenses designed to open up the running game later

There's a huge variety of systems that do this in multiple levels of football. This is an aspect of a system. Not it's philosophy.

Are you... or are you not stating that the WCO passing offense is built around short/quick/horizontal passes? Yes or no?

 

[richig07]

LOL! And you tried to tell me the Coryell offense didn't use 5 step drops and the Walsh offense used them exclusively. I don't even need to answer your argument. You are killing it yourself.

Stop creating strawmans.

I never said that. lol... This is becoming absurd.

I never said Walsh's system didn't use 5 step drops. In fact, I CLEARLY did. I said it's based around 3-5 step drops. Check above. Notice... I said 3 to 5. Why are you trying so hard to shift around my words in place of arguing the actual subject matter?

Funny how you once again only bolded the tiny portion in order to strawman me and misrepresent the post... but left what comes immediately after. Which proves my point beyond a reasonable doubt. lol

Walsh: Quarterbacks will often take quick 3 steps drops to get the ball out quickly.

Coryell: Quarterbacks will often take 5-7 step drops and hold onto the ball while receivers clear on long north and south routes.

Walsh takes short drops... Coryell takes long drops.

Keep ignoring that the entire philosophy is different... as is stated.

WCO: The offense is designed to take what the defense gives, whether it be 3 yards or 15 yards.

Air Coryell: The offense is designed to dictate what the defense will give, attempting to strike fear of going for it all on every play.

 

[Montalban]

Yes, that's the base of the offensive philosophy. 100% true. And MY reading comprehension is supposedly bad? Lol

Stating the base philosophy of an offense is that they throw short/horizontal/quick passes does not = They NEVER, EVER take a deep shot. Clearly, there are still west coast offenses today... and every team takes deep shots.

For instance, the Chicago Bears BASE defense is a 3-4 alignment with a cover 2 zone. However, they run all kinds of other personnel packages, 5 man front, 4 man front and will deploy Cover 0, 1 or 3 if the situation dictates it.

I take it that you are actually stating the basic philosophy of the WCO is not short/quick/horizontal passes?

I'm sorry, its obvious you are trolling now.

 

[Montalban]

Stop creating strawmans.

I never said that. lol... This is becoming absurd.

I never said Walsh's system didn't use 5 step drops. In fact, I CLEARLY did. I said it's based around 3-5 step drops. Check above. Notice... I said 3 to 5. Why are you trying so hard to shift around my words in place of arguing the actual subject matter?

Funny how you once again only bolded the tiny portion in order to strawman me and misrepresent the post... but left what comes immediately after. Which proves my point beyond a reasonable doubt. lol

Walsh: Quarterbacks will often take quick 3 steps drops to get the ball out quickly.

Coryell: Quarterbacks will often take 5-7 step drops and hold onto the ball while receivers clear on long north and south routes.

Walsh takes short drops... Coryell takes long drops.

Keep ignoring that the entire philosophy is different... as is stated.

WCO: The offense is designed to take what the defense gives, whether it be 3 yards or 15 yards.

Air Coryell: The offense is designed to dictate what the defense will give, attempting to strike fear of going for it all on every play.

My goodness you've got learn to read. You said Coryell's offense didn't use 5 step drops then you posted a link showing that the QB uses 5 or 7 step drops in the Coryell offense. Can't have it both ways. I think you've lost track of your own argument.

 

[richig07]

My goodness you've got learn to read. You said Coryell's offense didn't use 5 step drops then you posted a link showing that the QB uses 5 or 7 step drops in the Coryell offense. Can't have it both ways. I think you've lost track of your own argument.

Could you point to where I said Coryell's offense didn't utilize 5 step drops? Mhm... thanks

Lol. I said it was based around 7 step drops, yes. I never said they didn't utilize 5.

I never said that. You are lying, again. You keep deflecting the point and creating a different dishonest strawman.

You cannot possibly even begin to answer for the fact that these two offense's are polar opposite in approach and philosophy. If you could address the differences - you would have.

Why haven't you?

One last time... are you insinuating that the WCO passing offense was not based on short/quick horizontal passes?

Are you insinuating that the Air Coryell offense is not based on deep vertical passing?

Those are the two questions here. The philosophy and principles of the offense.

You deflecting the actual subject matter here says it all. It's a discussion on the difference between the two offense's and you cannot address it. Because they are glaring - as is described.

Or... would you actually try to say those two offense's described are similar? lol

 

[richig07]

I'm sorry, its obvious you are trolling now.

I was very clear and precise in that post. You deflected... AGAIN. This non-response tells me all I need to know.

 

[Montalban]

Could you point to where I said Coryell's offense didn't utilize 5 step drops? Mhm... thanks

Lol. I said it was based around 7 step drops, yes. I never said they didn't utilize 5.

I never said that. You are lying, again. You keep deflecting the point and creating a different dishonest strawman.

Or... would you actually try to say those two offense's described are similar? lol

Certainly. Post #148. You even capitalized and italicized the word "entirely" Argument over yet? I'll be interested to see how you refute this. Its easy to point out things you said in these threads so be careful about calling people liars. makes you look like a fool.