clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

KD's "Complicated" WCO

One of the litany of excuses we have been hearing from blindos during last two years is about how complicated Dorrell's West Coast Offense (WCO) really is.  It takes time for college kids to learn that pro-set WCO.  Dorrell did not have his OC of choice when he took over at UCLA (which begs the question - then why did he hire someone whose philosophy he never really agreed with). So that's why it hasn't panned out really so far.  But it will certainly break out this year ... on and on and on.

Yet one question UCLA fans perhaps should ask - why the hell are we running a WCO in the first place? Why are we running a WCO, when we seemed to be doing fine without it during the McNowne era?  Why can't we just run an offense that still uses a lot of spread formations, balances the running and passing games, but simplifies it - using everyone's skills - from TBs, FBs to all receivers. Heismanpundit has a really interesting observation on this, while he wrote about 6 most explosive offenses in the college game ("Gang of Six"), none of whom BTW are using KD's WCO:

The Gang of Five does not run the traditional West Coast Offense, which is a very complicated system that has rarely worked in college (see Paul Hackett, Bill Callahan and soon to be Charlie Weis). The WCO as we know it comes primarily from Bill Walsh and the 49ers (though some would argue with that, and I wouldn't necessarily object). The styles exhibited by the Gang of Five--all different from each other in a few ways, but all related by philosophy--come from the lineage of Don Coryell and Norm Chow--the two wide-open offense gurus of the early 1980s. Whereas in the WCO, the quarterback and the receiver must both make reads and adjustments from a playbook the size of a phone book--a dicey proposition for most 19-year-old college players--most of the adjustments in the Gang of Five offenses are made by either the quarterback alone or the receiver alone from a few basic formations. In other words, the implementation is simple. Hence, the execution bears more fruit.
So ... why again are we pushing to implement this WCO?  If it really takes a college kid like Drew Olson three years to get completely comfortable in this "complicated" WCO, are we going to go through the same learning curve nonsense with Ben Olson, when he takes over next year, while having getting comfortable with whole new set of cast of receivers, who will also be learning this offense?

Of course you will have some idiots trying to argue how KD's WCO offense showed a lot of promise in his second season, when he finally got to work with an OC like Tom Cable he is totally in sync with.  But then again if you look closely into our last year's offensive statistics, you will find how inflated those so called improvements really were in Dorrell's second season. Back in January, I did the analysis of the so called improvement in KD's WCO in his second season.  Moreover, lot of our rushing stats was totally inflated in the first half of the season because of the monster game Drew enjoyed against the Hapless Huskies up in Seattle.  So really there wasn't much to write home about KD's WCO in his less than average 6-7 second season

So again, why the hell are we trying out this offense which really hasn't been successful at the college level?  If this offense is so freaking complicated, why not simplify it? It seems like all the other explosive college offenses are sophisticated, but there is noting complicated about them unlike KD's quantum physics based WCO. Anyone have any answers?