The West Coast offense and the vertical passing game

[Feel Real Good]

As the Bucs were floundering to their 0-3 start, people everywhere were saying how Simms doesn't fit Gruden's offense. That he's not a dink-and-dunker and better with the deep ball. Needless to say Gruden is nearly synonymous with the modern West Coast offense. That all sounds well and good, but then watching the Monday night game between the Packers and Eagles, two West Coast offense teams, and Favre and McNabb were chucking the ball all over the place.

So the question is what gives? Why are these West Coast offense coaches doing things different than Gruden, and hitting more big plays and scoring more? Neither have hands-down better receivers and only Philly can be considered as having a better offenseive line. Why don't the Bucs go downfield more and why is Simms' strength supposedly not kosher with the WCO?

[Pick6]

those guyse were able to hit the deep passes BECAUSE they were hitting the shorter....i tuned out after halftime, but for the first quarter, favre was Mr. dink-and-dunk, hitting 0-10 yard passes all over the place...once a team respects your intermediate game, it's easier to go deep.  when your DL is doing most of the pass defense for short routes (a la simms), the deep ball also disappears because you've basically got 7 guys in coverage.

late in the game, green bay had no choice but to go deep

[caradoc]

Maybe the passing game looked better because those 2 are actually pretty good QBs?  And look how well going "all over"  served Favre...he was lucky to not have 3 more picks before the end of the third quarter.  Anyway, while I wouldn't call favre a "mobile" QB, he doesn't stand back there like father time right at the LOS like some QB's I could mention.
Besides, Gru runs his own version of the O, and it looks pretty damn good when it's running.  Problem is we haven't found the keys yet.

[bradentonian]

You'll also notice both use the shotgun, which you won't see here

[DanTurksGhost]

Scoring more? GB logged three FG's.

They looked better throwing the ball because they have QB's who are quicker thinking and better decision-makers than Simms. While he's big and can chuck the ball, he's not what the Bucs need back there.

I think one main difference is that you are looking at two HOF-caliber QBs in Favre and McNabb...we don't have one here.

[Pick6]

I think one main difference is that you are looking at two HOF-caliber QBs in Favre and McNabb...we don't have one here.

i guess now would be as good a time as any to mention how awful mcnabb looked around the time he was making his 14th or 15th start (not 1 TD 7 INTs in 3 games awful, but pretty bad) vs what he looks like now.

both QBs were touted as having great tools, questionable decision making (esp under pressure), and having a game more suited for a non-WCO system (mcnabb was a scrambler, simms is a deep-ball guy); if gruden hasn't given up on simms like everyone assumes he has, i think we'd do well to have him in the mix next year and see if he can earn the right to start again.

[mjs020294]

You'll also notice both use the shotgun, which you won't see here

Grads played shotgun in college......Gruden needs to get his head out of his ass.  [banghead]

i guess now would be as good a time as any to mention how awful mcnabb looked around the time he was making his 14th or 15th start (not 1 TD 7 INTs in 3 games awful, but pretty bad) vs what he looks like now.

both QBs were touted as having great tools, questionable decision making (esp under pressure), and having a game more suited for a non-WCO system (mcnabb was a scrambler, simms is a deep-ball guy); if gruden hasn't given up on simms like everyone assumes he has, i think we'd do well to have him in the mix next year and see if he can earn the right to start again.

You're preaching to the choir over here.  I agree.  I'm just not sure if it's in the cards for Simms to return here.  I think he will be a great player, though.  Somewhere.  I hope he returns.  We do, at the very least, have an intriguing group of young QBs.

[caradoc]

Simms' future is in Grad's hands now.  All Grads has to do is play better than the bar which Simms set VERY low this year, and he is the starter next year.  Simms would have to be crazy to come back here if he's not guaranteed the starting job, none of this competing for it crap.  Oakland or Washington look like his best choices.  Vertical games, star recievers, that's what he needs.

[DanTurksGhost]

both QBs were touted as having great tools, questionable decision making (esp under pressure), and having a game more suited for a non-WCO system (mcnabb was a scrambler, simms is a deep-ball guy); if gruden hasn't given up on simms like everyone assumes he has, i think we'd do well to have him in the mix next year and see if he can earn the right to start again.

I think you'll find that Gruden wasn't enamored of Simms, but Andy Reid drafted McNabb based on Gruden's recommendation.

I think you'll find that Gruden wasn't enamored of Simms, but Andy Reid drafted McNabb based on Gruden's recommendation.

Interesting point.  We all remember what an unpopular pick McNabb was at the beginning.

[Larry Brackins]

Yeah the Bucs never threw the ball deap.

:rollseyes:

The difference is Favre and McNabb have the ability to make the 3 step drops and short passes int he West Coast offense, somthing Simms couldn't do.

[DanTurksGhost]

i guess now would be as good a time as any to mention how awful mcnabb looked around the time he was making his 14th or 15th start (not 1 TD 7 INTs in 3 games awful, but pretty bad) vs what he looks like now.

In his 10th start he was 20-of-32 for 222 yards, 2 TD's in a 21-7 win over NO.
- Passer rating was 103.9

In his 11th start he was 30-of-44 for 311 yards, 2 TD's and 1 INT in a 38-10 win over Atlanta.
- Passer rating was 94.0

In his 12th start he was 17-of-34 for 186 yards, 2 TD's and 2 INT in a loss, 17-14 to WAS.
- Rating 67.6

In his 13th start he was 24-of-34 for 226 yards and a TD, leading to a 33-14 victory.
- Rating 98.4

In his 14th start he was 22-of-35 for 207 yards, one INT and the game winning (13-9 over Chicago) TD.
- Rating 76.7

In his 15th start he played quite poorly, 10-of-31 for 129, 1 TD and 1 INT in the loss to NYG.
- Rating 43.6

A few games later he went 23-of-36 with 4 TD's and 0 INT's and racked up a passer rating of 137.5.

He finished off the Buccaneers that year, too, beating them 21-3 in the NFC Wildcard game (completing almost 73% of his passes at 24-of-33 for 161 yards and two TD's).

[BucFan9720]

As the Bucs were floundering to their 0-3 start, people everywhere were saying how Simms doesn't fit Gruden's offense. That he's not a dink-and-dunker and better with the deep ball. Needless to say Gruden is nearly synonymous with the modern West Coast offense. That all sounds well and good, but then watching the Monday night game between the Packers and Eagles, two West Coast offense teams, and Favre and McNabb were chucking the ball all over the place.

So the question is what gives? Why are these West Coast offense coaches doing things different than Gruden, and hitting more big plays and scoring more? Neither have hands-down better receivers and only Philly can be considered as having a better offenseive line. Why don't the Bucs go downfield more and why is Simms' strength supposedly not kosher with the WCO?

Because those guys are veterans in the system, and Simms is not.