joer1212, there are many competing perspectives on this. If you go to Bogleheads.org, there is at least one thread a week on the merits of Total Stock Market (TSM) investing versus "tilters" which are people who might hold a core of TSM but then tilt (also described as "overweight") toward value, or small cap, or REIT, etc. (do a search on "SCV" and you'll find oodles of threads).
The fact that there have been so many heated debates over this, for so many years, leads me to believe that neither strategy is a slam dunk, or else people would no longer need to argue :-)
An index can be on any asset class/sector, not just on TSM. In fact, the first index fund was not TSM but the S&P 500-stock index by Vanguard (VFINX). Were people who invested in VFINX not "indexers" because their index fund was not TSM? Passive investing is simply investing in funds that track an index, which is typically less expensive because it doesn't need expensive management teams of analysts and experts (and therefore will typically have higher returns) than an actively-managed fund which has higher built-in expenses (which means that most, in the long run, will trail index funds).
I think someone who does the Coffeehouse portfolio could still be described as a passive index investor, but with tilts toward certain asset classes (value and small) and sectors (REIT).
If you think the Coffeehouse portfolio has too many of these "bets", then just go with TSM for your US Stock portion.