Darrell Bevell OTA Press Conference 6/2/15

[Largent80]

Bevell is the OC and that's it. For some fans it ain't cool. I'm on the fence as I've seen him call masterful games. A few plays notwithstanding, he is like all our other coaches, he tries to get the best out of what we have..

 

[Fade]

If your a supporter of settling for 3 versus 7 then I want to play your team, I think there is a time and place for taking points, inside the 10 you should be scoring a lot more then 30 percent of the time with touchdowns, outside the 20 yes take the field goal, in the 4th quarter take the field goal to add pressure if your ahead.

We have a habit of driving to the 15 or 10 and then go into stupid mode with penalties and then long down and distance, we also have a habit of getting to the 5 and getting cute a lot of the time and then being forced to take a field goal.

Penalties are Bevell's fault?

I can actually point to a play that Bevell essentially caused a penalty and kept Seattle out of the endzone.

Against the Giants last year (you know the game where Seattle set a franchise record for rushing.)

Marshawn takes the ball all the way down to the 1/2 yard line. So it is 1st and goal from the 1/2 yard line.

The next play instead of just running their base stuff that had been working all game for an easy score. He gets into a formation they had not shown the whole season, with multiple shifts and what not. Of course an OLinenman false starts and the Seahawks inexplicable kick a field goal. After being 1st and Goal from the 1/2 yard line. :roll:

In other words Bevell got too cute.

*edit* Now I am going to have to watch the game again to give the specific details.* LOL

Seattle's 1st possession they had a 1st and Goal from just inside the 1 yard line. Seattle runs one of their most oft used plays. Shotgun Single Back Trips Zone Read, (but it's really just an inside zone to Marshawn play). Marshawn scores easily.

2:00 2nd Quarter: 3rd and Goal from the 2 same play as the last TD (inside zone) just from an Ace formation instead of Trips with Gary Gilliam in as a blocking TE. Touchdown. This is classic WCO philosophy where you run the same play, just with different formations and substitutions. The Giants don't have an answer to this play. LOL.

Okay finally we get to it. I got the details a little wrong, here is what happened.

6:19 3rd Quarter: 1st and Goal from the 6. Same play again, but out of 11 personnel. Inside Zone handoff Marshawn bounces it outside and takes it down to the 1/2 yardline.

2nd and Goal from the 1/2 yardline. Seattle gets in I formation with Gilliam in as a Blocking TE and motion him right, with Tukuafu as the FB. And run Iso Right for no gain.

3rd and Goal from the 1/2 yardline: PASS PLAY: Weak Left Slot: ( A formation they use just not a lot around the goaline.) Doug Baldwin motions from the Z to show end around action, The receivers on the left run a pick, and Marshawn Runs an out? The play never really got going due to the false start caused from all the motioning, and was frankly baffling. Why not keep milking that inside zone? The Giants had no answer to it. --> Bevell got cute. <--

*EDIT* (this was my opinion before watching the rest of the game. Now having watched the rest of the game I'm even more stunned.)

Further Commentary

Early 4th Quarter. The game tied 17 to 17. 2nd and Goal from the 3. Trips Right Inside Zone. TD. They can't stop that play. lolz

Mid 4th Quarter. 3rd and 3 from the 17. 2x2 wide stack formation. Inside Zone. Touchdown. Welp at least Bevell figured it out by the 4th quarter that they couldn't stop that play. LOL

After the Giants turn the ball over on downs at their 46. Seattle run an inside zone read to C-Mike out of 11 personnel for a huge gain down inside the 5.

5:25 4th Quarter. 1st and Goal from just outside the 1. Shotgun Single Back Trips Zone Read this time Russell Keeps for the TD.

Marshawn had 4 Touchdowns, all on inside zone read runs. Russell Wilson had 1 rushing TD keeping after the Giants desperately sold out to stop the RB on that play.

It turned into a laugher, but it was a 17 to 17 ball game in the 4th quarter. When Bevell finally adjusted and just ran Inside Zone Read almost exclusively in the 4th Quarter.

 

[Siouxhawk]

If your a supporter of settling for 3 versus 7 then I want to play your team, I think there is a time and place for taking points, inside the 10 you should be scoring a lot more then 30 percent of the time with touchdowns, outside the 20 yes take the field goal, in the 4th quarter take the field goal to add pressure if your ahead.

We have a habit of driving to the 15 or 10 and then go into stupid mode with penalties and then long down and distance, we also have a habit of getting to the 5 and getting cute a lot of the time and then being forced to take a field goal.

Penalties are Bevell's fault?

I can actually point to a play that Bevell essentially caused a penalty and kept Seattle out of the endzone.

Against the Giants last year (you know the game where Seattle set a franchise record for rushing.)

Marshawn takes the ball all the way down to the 1/2 yard line. So it is 1st and goal from the 1/2 yard line.

The next play instead of just running their base stuff that had been working all game for an easy score. He gets into a formation they had not shown the whole season, with multiple shifts and what not. Of course an OLinenman false starts and the Seahawks inexplicable kick a field goal. After being 1st and Goal from the 1/2 yard line. :roll:

In other words Bevell got too cute.

*edit* Now I am going to have to watch the game again to give the specific details.* LOL

Wasn't that the game where Marshawn rushed for 4 touchdowns and the Hawks won 38-17? Hmmmm, yep, I'm sure Bevell had nothing to do with us putting a whooping on the ol' Giants in that one.

 

[hawknation2015]

The best characteristic an OC can have, IMO, is not the ability to surprise an opponent, rather it is the ability to appreciate game flow and to make adjustments that fully exploit every advantage at our disposal. Bevell has too often failed at this, sacrificing true advantages for the novelty of surprise.

This is not about one criticism of one play . . . it is about a consistent and systematic failure in abandoning the running game at inopportune moments and simply failing to put the dagger into the heart of our opponents in the red zone, time and time again.

My excitement about the addition of Graham, for example, is tempered by my concern that Bevell has no idea how to fully exploit the advantages this player brings to the field.

 

[Fade]

If your a supporter of settling for 3 versus 7 then I want to play your team, I think there is a time and place for taking points, inside the 10 you should be scoring a lot more then 30 percent of the time with touchdowns, outside the 20 yes take the field goal, in the 4th quarter take the field goal to add pressure if your ahead.

We have a habit of driving to the 15 or 10 and then go into stupid mode with penalties and then long down and distance, we also have a habit of getting to the 5 and getting cute a lot of the time and then being forced to take a field goal.

Penalties are Bevell's fault?

I can actually point to a play that Bevell essentially caused a penalty and kept Seattle out of the endzone.

Against the Giants last year (you know the game where Seattle set a franchise record for rushing.)

Marshawn takes the ball all the way down to the 1/2 yard line. So it is 1st and goal from the 1/2 yard line.

The next play instead of just running their base stuff that had been working all game for an easy score. He gets into a formation they had not shown the whole season, with multiple shifts and what not. Of course an OLinenman false starts and the Seahawks inexplicable kick a field goal. After being 1st and Goal from the 1/2 yard line. :roll:

In other words Bevell got too cute.

*edit* Now I am going to have to watch the game again to give the specific details.* LOL

Seattle's 1st possession they had a 1st and Goal from just inside the 1 yard line. Seattle runs one of their most oft used plays. Shotgun Single Back Trips Zone Read, (but it's really just an inside zone to Marshawn play). Marshawn scores easily.

2:00 2nd Quarter: 3rd and Goal from the 2 same play as the last TD (inside zone) just from an Ace formation instead of Trips with Gary Gilliam in as a blocking TE. Touchdown. This is classic WCO philosophy where you run the same play, just with different formations and substitutions. The Giants don't have an answer to this play. LOL.

Okay finally we get to it. I got the details a little wrong, here is what happened.

6:19 3rd Quarter: 1st and Goal from the 6. Same play again, but out of 11 personnel. Inside Zone handoff Marshawn bounces it outside and takes it down to the 1/2 yardline.

2nd and Goal from the 1/2 yardline. Seattle gets in I formation with Gilliam in as a Blocking TE and motion him right, with Tukuafu as the FB. And run Iso Right for no gain.

3rd and Goal from the 1/2 yardline: PASS PLAY: Weak Left Slot: ( A formation they use just not a lot around the goaline.) Doug Baldwin motions from the Z to show end around action, The receivers on the left run a pick, and Marshawn Runs an out? The play never really got going due to the false start caused from all the motioning, and was frankly baffling. Why not keep milking that inside zone? The Giants had no answer to it. Bevell got cute.

AT Siouxhawk you're missing the forest for the trees.

its about Bevell's pattern of getting cute around the end zone, sure it didn't cost the Seahawks the game against the Giants, but it reared its ugly head in the Superbowl.

And you can't just say it's 1 play here and 1 play there. It has been a repeated pattern. The stats back up what my, and many other fans eyes are seeing.

The 2014 Seattle Seahawks were 29th in the redzone, and 31st in goal to goal situations. I think you would agree a team with Russell Wilson and Marshawn Lynch should not be ranked that low, something is wrong.

 

[Fade]

The best characteristic an OC can have, IMO, is not the ability to surprise an opponent, rather it is the ability to appreciate game flow and to make adjustments that fully exploit every advantage at our disposal. Bevell has too often failed at this, sacrificing true advantages for the novelty of surprise.

This is not about one criticism of one play . . . it is about a consistent and systematic failure in abandoning the running game at inopportune moments and simply failing to put the dagger into the heart of our opponents in the red zone, time and time again.

My excitement about the addition of Graham, for example, is tempered by my concern that Bevell has no idea how to fully exploit the advantages this player brings to the field.

 

[Siouxhawk]

As I said before, by arguing about red-zone efficiency, you are actually complaining about something that runs counter to the philosophy of Pete Carroll, who has a plan wherein we pound the snot out of the ball through three quarters and then generally have our way in the fourth. Meanwhile, we're kept in the game the entire time by our defensive prowess.
It's a proven method of success the last two years that has netted two Super Bowl appearances and a world championship.
Why you sit and complain is beyond me, unless you really don't like success, which is something Seahawks fans have thoroughly enjoyed the past two seasons and likely are in store for again in the upcoming year.

 

[PackerNation]

AT Siouxhawk you're missing the forest for the trees.

No, he gets it. You are missing the point entirely. Bevell called a game in which his offense put up 38 points on the Giants despite the fact that his players turned the ball over 3 times. You are crying over a mistake he supposedly made and ignoring all of the other mistakes the Seahawks players made that day.

These guys are not perfect and you act as if they should be. Bevells play calling against the Giants had nothing to do with the SB loss to the Patriots. Bevell has gotten you into Super Bowls in Back to Back years. He is a big part of why you have a trophy in your case right now.

Can you come up with something a little better than this?

 

[Fade]

AT Siouxhawk you're missing the forest for the trees.

No, he gets it. You are missing the point entirely. Bevell called a game in which his offense put up 38 points on the Giants despite the fact that his players turned the ball over 3 times. You are crying over a mistake he supposedly made and ignoring all of the other mistakes the Seahawks players made that day.

These guys are not perfect and you act as if they should be. Bevells play calling against the Giants had nothing to do with the SB loss to the Patriots. Bevell has gotten you into Super Bowls in Back to Back years. He is a big part of why you have a trophy in your case right now.

Can you come up with something a little better than this?

Why were the Seahawks in 2014 ranked 29th in the NFL in the redzone? When you have Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson.

I don't need perfection, but I would at least expect. 17th-22nd ish. Not bottom 4 in the league.

And if you weren't aware this deficiency came back to bite the Hawks harshly in the Superbowl.

 

[PackerNation]

Why were the Seahawks ranked 29th in the NFL in the redzone? When you have Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson.

I don't need perfection, but I would at least expect. 17th-22nd ish.

What rank was the offense overall? Besides Wilson and Lynch, what other outstanding offensive players does Seattle have?

Your offensive line is below average, your WR's are "alright." Still, I see your team as 10th overall in Red Zone scores per game (TD's only) according to Teamrankings.com with 1.9 average.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/r ... s-per-game

 

[hawknation2015]

Why were the Seahawks ranked 29th in the NFL in the redzone? When you have Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson.

I don't need perfection, but I would at least expect. 17th-22nd ish.

What rank was the offense overall? Besides Wilson and Lynch, what other outstanding offensive players does Seattle have?

Your offensive line is below average, your WR's are "alright." Still, I see your team as 10th overall in Red Zone scores per game (TD's only) according to Teamrankings.com with 1.9 average.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/r ... s-per-game

That same site shows that we were 20th in red zone TD percentage. That's not getting it done, IMO.

I will give you an example that I know you actually watched, since I assume you have not seen every Seahawks game:

In the opener against your Packers, we intercepted Rodgers and took it down to the eight-yard line. Rather than run the ball in, Bevell decides to throw on first down, and the pass is incomplete to Kearse, who had no chance at it whatsoever. This was the perfect opportunity to exert our will on you guys and pound the ball in, but instead Bevell decides to get cutesy by trying to outsmart a defense that is anticipating a Lynch run. Mercifully, we hand the hand the ball to Lynch on 2nd down, and he slices through your defense all the way down to the three-yard line. We had already gashed your defense for over 150 yards on the ground. So what do we do now, in the red zone, less than three yards away from pay dirt? We throw a freaking screen pass to Harvin that goes absolutely nowhere. That sequence pretty much epitomized the agony that was Bevell's play calling in the red zone last season.

 

[Fade]

If your a supporter of settling for 3 versus 7 then I want to play your team, I think there is a time and place for taking points, inside the 10 you should be scoring a lot more then 30 percent of the time with touchdowns, outside the 20 yes take the field goal, in the 4th quarter take the field goal to add pressure if your ahead.

We have a habit of driving to the 15 or 10 and then go into stupid mode with penalties and then long down and distance, we also have a habit of getting to the 5 and getting cute a lot of the time and then being forced to take a field goal.

Penalties are Bevell's fault?

I can actually point to a play that Bevell essentially caused a penalty and kept Seattle out of the endzone.

Against the Giants last year (you know the game where Seattle set a franchise record for rushing.)

Marshawn takes the ball all the way down to the 1/2 yard line. So it is 1st and goal from the 1/2 yard line.

The next play instead of just running their base stuff that had been working all game for an easy score. He gets into a formation they had not shown the whole season, with multiple shifts and what not. Of course an OLinenman false starts and the Seahawks inexplicable kick a field goal. After being 1st and Goal from the 1/2 yard line. :roll:

In other words Bevell got too cute.

*edit* Now I am going to have to watch the game again to give the specific details.* LOL

Seattle's 1st possession they had a 1st and Goal from just inside the 1 yard line. Seattle runs one of their most oft used plays. Shotgun Single Back Trips Zone Read, (but it's really just an inside zone to Marshawn play). Marshawn scores easily.

2:00 2nd Quarter: 3rd and Goal from the 2 same play as the last TD (inside zone) just from an Ace formation instead of Trips with Gary Gilliam in as a blocking TE. Touchdown. This is classic WCO philosophy where you run the same play, just with different formations and substitutions. The Giants don't have an answer to this play. LOL.

Okay finally we get to it. I got the details a little wrong, here is what happened.

6:19 3rd Quarter: 1st and Goal from the 6. Same play again, but out of 11 personnel. Inside Zone handoff Marshawn bounces it outside and takes it down to the 1/2 yardline.

2nd and Goal from the 1/2 yardline. Seattle gets in I formation with Gilliam in as a Blocking TE and motion him right, with Tukuafu as the FB. And run Iso Right for no gain.

3rd and Goal from the 1/2 yardline: PASS PLAY: Weak Left Slot: ( A formation they use just not a lot around the goaline.) Doug Baldwin motions from the Z to show end around action, The receivers on the left run a pick, and Marshawn Runs an out? The play never really got going due to the false start caused from all the motioning, and was frankly baffling. Why not keep milking that inside zone? The Giants had no answer to it. --> Bevell got cute. <--

*EDIT* (this was my opinion before watching the rest of the game. Now having watched the rest of the game I'm even more stunned.)

Further Commentary

Early 4th Quarter. The game tied 17 to 17. 2nd and Goal from the 3. Trips Right Inside Zone. TD. They can't stop that play. lolz

Mid 4th Quarter. 3rd and 3 from the 17. 2x2 wide stack formation. Inside Zone. Touchdown. Welp at least Bevell figured it out by the 4th quarter that they couldn't stop that play. LOL

After the Giants turn the ball over on downs at their 46. Seattle run an inside zone read to C-Mike out of 11 personnel for a huge gain down inside the 5.

5:25 4th Quarter. 1st and Goal from just outside the 1. Shotgun Single Back Trips Zone Read this time Russell Keeps for the TD.

Marshawn had 4 Touchdowns, all on inside zone read runs. Russell Wilson had 1 rushing TD keeping after the Giants desperately sold out to stop the RB on that play.

It turned into a laugher, but it was a 17 to 17 ball game in the 4th quarter. When Bevell finally adjusted and just ran Inside Zone Read almost exclusively in the 4th Quarter.

After watching the game again in its entirety.

In a vacuum it was a well called game by Bevell, given the personnel, and the opponent. He had 3 issues that showed up in this game, and have repeatedly showed up in other games.

01 Calling repeated bubble screens even though they are not having any effect.

02 A mind numbing decision from the 1/2 yard line that makes you question if Darrell Bevell is paying attention to the game or is he using a slot machine to decide what plays to call.

03 Slow to adjust. It took until the 4th Quarter for him to figure out the NYG couldn't stop the inside zone/read. Actually I don't know if Bevell actually adjusted it could have been an accident, because the inside zone/read is 1 of Seattle's bread and butter plays.

FOR THOSE THAT DON'T KNOW
I think Bevell is a solid to at times good OC. I can live with his flaws, except his fatal one --> REDZONE <--.

I'm not asking for the #1 RZ Offense in the NFL. With RW & BeastMode last year I would have taken 17-22 ish. (more towards the middle of the pack.)
25th is unacceptable.

http://rotoviz.com/2015/02/nfl-teams-need-get-better-red-zone-offenses/

Now with
RW one of the top Duel threat QBs in the league.
Beast Mode (Top Rushing TD scorer of the last 4 years.)
JImmy Graham (Top Receiving TD scorer of the last 4 years.)

Is it so much to ask for the 11-15ish Redzone Offense. Even though given that personnel how are you not top 10.

If you disagree with me at this point you ignore facts and have to be trollin'.

 

[Fade]

Why were the Seahawks ranked 29th in the NFL in the redzone? When you have Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson.

I don't need perfection, but I would at least expect. 17th-22nd ish.

What rank was the offense overall? Besides Wilson and Lynch, what other outstanding offensive players does Seattle have?

Your offensive line is below average, your WR's are "alright." Still, I see your team as 10th overall in Red Zone scores per game (TD's only) according to Teamrankings.com with 1.9 average.

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/r ... s-per-game

I mistyped not 29th --> 25th in RZ. This article breaks down my thoughts succinctly.

http://rotoviz.com/2015/02/nfl-teams-need-get-better-red-zone-offenses/

An Excerpt
"This may be pouring salt in the wound, but Seattle’s red zone impotence on their final offensive play during the Super Bowl actually reflected a broad trend for their team. They were great at getting the ball into the red zone during the 2014 season.They were bottom third of the league in converting those possessions into touchdowns."

 

[Siouxhawk]

Bring your red-zone efficiency examples to Pete and he'd laugh in your face.
I believe our offense as a whole was in the top 10 in the league. We've scored more points than the opponent about 85 percent more times in games the last two years. We own the takeway battle by a whopping margin.
Those are really the only figures that matter, unless you loaded up on Seahawks on your fantasy football team.
**edit** haha, just looked and the website Fade attributes his numbers to is in fact a fantasy football site. You can't make this stuff up.

 

[Fade]

Bring your red-zone efficiency examples to Pete and he'd laugh in your face.
I believe our offense as a whole was in the top 10 in the league. We've scored more points than the opponent about 85 percent more times in games the last two years. We own the takeway battle by a whopping margin.
Those are really the only figures that matter, unless you loaded up on Seahawks on your fantasy football team.
**edit** haha, just looked and the website Fade attributes his numbers to is in fact a fantasy football site. You can't make this stuff up.

He laughed in my face by specifically pointing out that the RZ threat of Jimmy Graham was one of the key factors in acquiring him.

*EDIT Let me find a link*

http://www.seahawks.com/news/2015/0...y-graham-seahawks-coach-pete-carroll-710-espn

Pete Carroll radio interview

Here's an excerpt
1. What Graham Will Bring

Carroll called out Graham's red-zone and third-down production as key areas he expects the 6-foot-7, 265-pound tight end to contribute. He said Graham's work in the red zone has been "consistent" and "ridiculous," sharing an impressive statistic Graham has tallied over the last three years, when 35 of his 50 red-zone catches have gone for touchdowns.

"That's legit," said Carroll. "You go to him because he has such a great presence. That factor alone will add to it."


A little further down the page.
Carroll said the Seahawks plan to involve Graham in the normal course of the throwing game. The one thing that will change is they now have "a real positive target" in the red zone.





If you disagree with me at this point you ignore facts, Pete Carroll, and have to be trollin'.

 

[hawknation2015]

Bring your red-zone efficiency examples to Pete and he'd laugh in your face.
I believe our offense as a whole was in the top 10 in the league. We've scored more points than the opponent about 85 percent more times in games the last two years. We own the takeway battle by a whopping margin.
Those are really the only figures that matter, unless you loaded up on Seahawks on your fantasy football team.
**edit** haha, just looked and the website Fade attributes his numbers to is in fact a fantasy football site. You can't make this stuff up.

Carroll has a great offensive philosophy tailored around taking care of the football and maintaining 50-50 balance between the passing and running attacks. But, since pushing out Norm Chow at SC, he has kind of a poor track record of standing by mediocre OCs: Lane Kiffin, Steve Sarkisian, and then taking Jeremy Bates with him to Seattle after his struggles at SC. And now he is sticking with Bevell.

It's not as though he is blind to the problems with the offensive play calling. He publicly addressed the problems several times last season in saying we needed to do a better job sticking with the running game. It's just unfortunate that, even though competition and striving for the best is the mantra of his coaching philosophy, he's unwilling to look for competition at play caller.

 

[Ad Hawk]

It's not as though he is blind to the problems with the offensive play calling. He publicly addressed the problems several times last season in saying we needed to do a better job sticking with the running game. It's just unfortunate that, even though competition and striving for the best is the mantra of his coaching philosophy, he's unwilling to look for competition at play caller.

Serious question now, not rhetorical, or intended as snippy: who would you (or anyone on this board with the knowledge) propose take Bevell's place? Is there anyone out there who would fit Pete's O-scheme? Others have asked, and so far, nobody is giving any real answers to this.

Is it possible that Bevell is still a Hawk because even PC can't come up with anyone better? Which is not arguing Bevell is a great OC, for those prone to over-react. I'm just ignorant of those out there who might take his place and find as much success or more.

I'm open to being educated on this.

 

[Fade]

It's not as though he is blind to the problems with the offensive play calling. He publicly addressed the problems several times last season in saying we needed to do a better job sticking with the running game. It's just unfortunate that, even though competition and striving for the best is the mantra of his coaching philosophy, he's unwilling to look for competition at play caller.

Serious question now, not rhetorical, or intended as snippy: who would you (or anyone on this board with the knowledge) propose take Bevell's place? Is there anyone out there who would fit Pete's O-scheme? Others have asked, and so far, nobody is giving any real answers to this.

Is it possible that Bevell is still a Hawk because even PC can't come up with anyone better? Which is not arguing Bevell is a great OC, for those prone to over-react. I'm just ignorant of those out there who might take his place and find as much success or more.

I'm open to being educated on this.

*edit* Let me preface this with Pete likes the situation the way it is so it won't happen. He likes Bevell.

Mike Shanahan.

Pete Carroll's offense is derived from ol'Shanny which he learned when they were coordinators in SF.

Throw all the money you want at him. There is no salary cap for coaches.

The way you would sell it to Shanny is that he would be an OC for 1 maybe 2 years. Then he could get back to being an HC after the success I'm sure he would have plenty of suitors. The Seahawks coaches are the hot commodity after all, except nobody wants Bevell of course.

I would've liked Kyle Shanahan, but Dan Quinn got him first.

cherry pick Gary Kubiak if he flops in Denver.

I think the next step is try to hire a failed HC who no longer has a shot at being a HC again, but is known for brilliant play design, he just isn't a HC. The Ravens got that his year in Marc Trestman.

At hawknation2015 - Tom Cable - good call. Another Shanahan/Alex Gibbs disciple.

 

[hawknation2015]

It's not as though he is blind to the problems with the offensive play calling. He publicly addressed the problems several times last season in saying we needed to do a better job sticking with the running game. It's just unfortunate that, even though competition and striving for the best is the mantra of his coaching philosophy, he's unwilling to look for competition at play caller.

Serious question now, not rhetorical, or intended as snippy: who would you (or anyone on this board with the knowledge) propose take Bevell's place? Is there anyone out there who would fit Pete's O-scheme? Others have asked, and so far, nobody is giving any real answers to this.

Is it possible that Bevell is still a Hawk because even PC can't come up with anyone better? Which is not arguing Bevell is a great OC, for those prone to over-react. I'm just ignorant of those out there who might take his place and find as much success or more.

I'm open to being educated on this.

After a number of failures in the red zone and attempts by Bevell to stray from the game plan by abandoning the running game last season, I began to advocate for Tom Cable to take over as play caller and for Bevell to remain on the staff for game planning purposes.

That would be the obvious fix. Cable has shown to be a very strong play caller in the past, most notably at UCLA in 2004 and 2005 and at times with the Raiders. He has shown a good sense of game flow and a fondness for the obvious, which I like. I would prefer to have a game plan that is centered around the blocking scheme, running game, and play action passing.

Contemporaneously, it would be nice to bring in a young play calling specialist to mentor under Cable and eventually replace him. It's hard for me to imagine that there is not an up and coming coach out there somewhere who would want to call plays for Russell Wilson, Marshawn Lynch, Jimmy Graham, and Co.

 

[LymonHawk]

Deleted