Think of the Zampese style scheme like a basketball offense that doesn't quite run actual diagrammed plays (bare with me for a moment) and relies on being able to read the defense and understand the principles and adjustments that you need to make mid-play against the defense. The WCO is more like Bobby Knight. You go and run your part of the play and you don't deviate from that. And if you move the ball around enough you will finally get somebody with an open jumper.
There is more actual designed routes in a Zampese scheme than say watching a coach like Jim Boeheim who basically allows the players to just kinda run the offense and understand the principles of where they should be, how to create a shot, etc. So a lot of the Garrett scheme is based on making sight adjustments. Lots of option routes, etc. So the play call may call for a go route, but the defense may be designed as such where the WR and QB are supposed to know that they are supposed to throw a deep post.
This is perfectly fine.
What I have a problem with Garrett's scheme is many of his plays call for curls and hitches. And he loves to try and throw the fade route to Dez in the red zone which is a low percentage throw regardless of the receiver. The hitches and curls don't fool defenses, they don't provide for much YAC and they have a higher chance of being picked off or worse yet...a pick 6. Oh, and your WR gets to have the cornerback stick his foot in the ground and hit you in the back going full speed.
The bigger issues I have is more with the amount of plays we run thru for a year. We simply do not change up our plays and our personnel looks. We'll run the jet sweep and everybody knows it's either a jet sweep or a run with Elliott. It's never a pass. Last week we ran the 22 personnel with Dez as the WR and you pretty much knew they were going to use play action and throw to Dez. On 2nd down we'll go empty backfield and we know that will mean basically curls, hitches, outs and drags because the QB has to get the ball out quickly. We'll line up Dez in the slot on 3rd down and you know he's going to run a dig route over the middle.
If I have another problem with the scheme it's that we have basically made T-Will an H-Back and on so many downs we are essentially playing either 12 or 22 personnel since T-Will is there for blocking and to find the soft spot in the short zone.
So there are some things I really dislike about the scheme, but I also hate the limited amount of plays we run and how that limits what we can do with our playcalls.
YR