Iraq War

[FThompson08]

True, west coast offense also sucks.

Several NFL teams run a variation of this offense. All it is is a number of short cross routes, slants and curls and the QB hitting a receiver fast. Its all about timing and it completely erases the Ds ability to blitz. I dont see how that sucks.

I overstated when I said it sucks, but it is a scheme just like the spread offense. Only a true balanced attack can give you a long lasting "dynasty". The original west coast offense helped the 49ers win but then others teams caught on. There is no defense for having a balanced passing and run game

[nighthawk101]

The West Coast offense is just a offensive design for your passing game and when run effectively you cant "figure it out". You cant stop a team that effectively runs 7 yard slants and 5 yard curls all day long even if they cant run the ball all that well...because its all about timing. The receiver runs, turns around and the ball is there. Which brings me to my next point. Its not like the West Coast offense hinders you from running the ball effectively. Between 1985-1995 when SF won 4 superbowls, they had these runners

1985 - Roger Craig - 1050 yards, 9 TDs
Wendell Tyler - 867 yards, 6 TDs

1989 - Roger Craig - 1054 yards, 6 TDs in addition to Montana completeing 70% of his passes that year

1990 - 3 RBs and no one received over 150 carries
Dexter Carter - 460 yards
Roger Craig - 439 yards
Tom Rathman - 318 yards, 7TDs

1995 - Derek Loville - 723 yards, 10 TDs

[LORD MANN]

i hate football

[l33tn3kk3dskillz]

i thin i perfer herpes but then again i did create stdmatch

[FThompson08]

I mean the West Coast Offense hasn't been able to stand up in the modern NFL. There are some variations floating out there but not on championship teams. Linebackers are to quick now to be beat on too many short passes in a game.