Looks like we'll have Bevell next year

[RolandDeschain]

So....you want a guy with a HoF QB and one of the best coaches in the history of the game. Real outside the box thinking there.

Now you're evading the meat of the discussion by assuming and/or implying I want him because you think he looks good due to his coach and QB?

Excellent work! God knows his randomly unpredictable offensive formations prior to the snap aren't a big reason why I like McDaniels, or anything. :roll:

You've never asked me why I like McDaniels. Stop making assumptions. Man up.

And the guy who got fired for not running the ball enough and causing in-fighting? Good one.

Yeah, because it's impossible for someone to be a good coordinator and bad coach, or vice-versa; and it's also impossible for anybody to fail and then succeed later on.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Sarlacc83]

I know exactly why you want McDaniels. He has some good features. But then, so did Charlie Weiss before he went to ND. It can be nearly impossible to separate OC from HC - a point I continue to make.

Your problem is ultimately Carroll's philosophy. Beat them physically, straight up.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I've said before that I wish Carroll wouldn't be so conservative on offense. He's not without blame in regards to my dislike for Bevell and our offensive tendencies. That being said, I do not have a problem with Carroll's philosophy, because his philosophy could be implemented much more effectively than how Bevell typically does it. His lack of adjustment to things that aren't working is far and away the biggest problem I have with him, and I'm pretty sure that's NOT Carroll enforcing it.

 

[DavidSeven]

Bevell vs. Pep vs. McDaniels

Yards Per Drive:

Seattle - #7
Indianapolis - #8
New England - #10

Turnovers Per Drive (Fewest):

Seattle - #1
New England - #3
Indianapolis - #27

Time of Possession Per Drive:

Seattle - #3
New England - #16
Indianapolis - #25

Big Plays:

Seattle - #1
Indianapolis - #12
New England - #25

 

[RolandDeschain]

Is that even a serious response, David?

 

[Sarlacc83]

I don't see that lack of adaptation on at all. Every year with Wilson, he's adjusted to something. In 2012, a read-option/pistol he had never run; last year, offensive tackle injuries, this year, the Harvin departure. It takes time to get massive changes to click when you don't have training camp to work on them. If someone changed your IT responsibilities in the middle of a project, you would experience an immediate dip in production, too.

As for in-game, he has his annoying tendencies. Totally fair to get mad at his pet peeves. But they have to have perspective. Often times it takes until halftime until there are noticeable changes for a reason. Carroll has a gameplan he wants to see implemented, and, like it or not, they want more than 15 plays to know for sure if they are on the right track. Aggravating, but effective so far.

 

[DavidSeven]

Is that even a serious response, David?

Huh? Why wouldn't it be?

I am giving you metrics that show why Football Outsiders consider this a Top-5 offense. Both Pep and Josh have noted weaknesses in their game-calling, which shows up in the advanced stats. Notably for Pep, he has given up on run game, which shows up in the TO and TOP statistics. This has had adverse consequences on Indy's defense, which is actually full of good players in the secondary. For Josh, he is completely reliant on Brady's ability to surgically move down the field on short and intermediate throws. His ability to scheme big plays for New England is lacking.

Not to say either of those guys are bad play-callers, but OCs are judged on their resume. Tell me what they have accomplished.

 

[Scottemojo]

Once you went TOP, you lost Roland.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Once you went TOP, you lost Roland.

No, no, no. We're the best because we win ToP. For realsies.

Edit: believe it or not, I was actually thinking that overall, his list of choices there seem largely irrelevant to judge an offensive coordinator on. Not just ToP.

 

[DavidSeven]

Yardage, turnovers, and big plays are irrelevant to offense?

K.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Yardage, turnovers, and big plays are irrelevant to offense?

K.

Congratulations on purposely misquoting me. I said they're poor criteria to judge an offensive coordinator on. You know, the offensive coordinator staff position that teams have? Not the entire offense comprised of players itself? Two different things?

*taps mic*

Is this thing on?

 

[Sports Hernia]

Rats! :x

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

So....you want a guy with a HoF QB and one of the best coaches in the history of the game.

Isn't that what we have already with Wilson and Carroll? Potentially, anyway?

On topic: I think keeping Bevell may not be such a bad idea. As already pointed out, our offense has actually been better than it's been perceived to be over the past couple of years. And continuity adds a lot to a team.

There's something to be said with not messing up a good thing going.

 

[RolandDeschain]

The NFL is totally not, in my opinion, a league where "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" leads to sustained success. More like you have to run as fast as you can just to stay in place.

 

[BirdsCommaAngry]

It's an endless debate. If you're for Bevell, you'll basically say our successes are in part because of him. If you're against Bevell, you'll basically say our successes are despite him. There's no statistic, metaphor, or insult that can override either of these assumptions. And yet, we still try.

 

[Hawks46]

I've said my fair share of "Fire Bevell"s in the past, but this year I can't complain too much (well, I can but really have no basis).

My issues with Bevell are that he usually has a few "derp" calls a game, but if I looked at all the OC's out there, I'm sure I'd find that same fault with all of them.

My biggest issue with Bevell is that he seems to not be able to make in game adjustments very well. It's like something doesn't work, but we keep going back to it (bubble screens, argh). No, I'm not talking about pounding the run, which many times will have minimal gains in yardage. Guys like Bowles were eating his lunch at times.

Our route trees are also too simplistic IMO. I don't know if we need more option routes or what, and if that would work with Wilson and his current WR corps or not. I don't know enough of the specifics, but in pretty much every measurable that counts, we have had a top 10 offense the last two years, lead the league in limiting mistakes on offense, and some of our more intelligent players (like Baldwin) have come out and said that Bevell manages to mask a lot of deficiencies in our offensive personnel.

That's got to be good enough for me. Strangely, I'd be a little more worried about OC turn over than DC turn over.

 

[DavidSeven]

My thought is that Bevell is an adaptable OC who is willing and able to make workable adjustments based on his QB's maturation and changes in personnel. I also think he is a good chess player -- i.e. putting things on tape or showing plays early and then anticipating the defense's reaction. I don't judge him on a play-to-play basis because any single play can live on die on execution and most early plays are just as useful for gathering information. This shows up in the second half of games where this team has clearly been more explosive than its opponent.

Philosophically and schematically, I think there is generally a reason for everything we do. Simple route concepts are not on the play-caller. This coaching staff, in particular, understands every route concept in the book. That's why we're so good at defending them. If there's something we're not doing or not allowed to call, there's a reason for it.

By DVOA, our offense improved from #27 (2010) to #19 (2011) when Bevell took over for Bates. He accomplished this with 1-pec TJ and Clipboard Jesus as his QBs. His offense has improved as his QB situation has gotten better. That is the natural course of things in the NFL. What is unexpected is his ability to continually improve this offense as the skill talent has dropped off considerably.

Not to say he is the perfect play-caller. I don't believe those exist in the NFL. And more and more, NFL defenses are making scheme-based passing offenses irrelevant. The Holmgrens, Reids and Sean Paytons no longer rule the day. If you want to score points in this league, you better either have a top-5 QB who can make the plays happen for you or know how to develop a run-blocking scheme.

 

[Scottemojo]

My thought is that Bevell is an adaptable OC who is willing and able to make workable adjustments based on his QB's maturation and changes in personnel. I also think he is a good chess player -- i.e. putting things on tape or showing plays early and then anticipating the defense's reaction. I don't judge him on a play-to-play basis because any single play can live on die on execution and most early plays are just as useful for gathering information. This shows up in the second half of games where this team has clearly been more explosive than its opponent.

Philosophically and schematically, I think there is generally a reason for everything we do. Simple route concepts are not on the play-caller. This coaching staff, in particular, understands every route concept in the book. That's why we're so good at defending them. If there's something we're not doing or not allowed to call, there's a reason for it.

By DVOA, our offense improved from #27 (2010) to #19 (2011) when Bevell took over for Bates. He accomplished this with 1-pec TJ and Clipboard Jesus as his QBs. His offense has improved as his QB situation has gotten better. That is the natural course of things in the NFL. What is unexpected is his ability to continually improve this offense as the skill talent has dropped off considerably.

Not to say he is the perfect play-caller. I don't believe those exist in the NFL. And more and more, NFL defenses are making scheme-based passing offenses irrelevant. The Holmgrens, Reids and Sean Paytons no longer rule the day. If you want to score points in this league, you better either have a top-5 QB who can make the plays happen for you or know how to develop a run-blocking scheme.

That seems like a pretty logical view point. I still hate play action in clear passing situations, but your post has many good points.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

You know who called a hell of a game this past weekend? Kubiak. Same birthday as me too.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

The playbook has been pretty narrow with so many young players on offense and Wilson still growing as a QB. It'll widen up as time goes on.

And once we finally find a big target, we'll be a lot happier with the execution.