Next week the what ifs...are over.

[Siouxhawk]

Continuing to use red-zone TD statistics to prove a point about the Seahawks' offense is conceding defeat as it doesn't really reflect Pete's philosophy as has been explained over and over again.
But if it's your last straw to try to explain the absurd, I understand why a desperate poster would turn to it.

The abandoning of the running game in the red zone has NOTHING to do with Carroll's philosophy -- which calls for balance. I have no idea what you are babbling about here.

Abandoning the run game? I think you're exaggerating that point a bit, as over the course of the year we implemented the run game more than the pass. Successfully, I might add.

 

[hawknation2015]

Continuing to use red-zone TD statistics to prove a point about the Seahawks' offense is conceding defeat as it doesn't really reflect Pete's philosophy as has been explained over and over again.
But if it's your last straw to try to explain the absurd, I understand why a desperate poster would turn to it.

The abandoning of the running game in the red zone has NOTHING to do with Carroll's philosophy -- which calls for balance. I have no idea what you are babbling about here.

Abandoning the run game? I think you're exaggerating that point a bit, as over the course of the year we implemented the run game more than the pass. Successfully, I might add.

There were several instances in which our dominant running game was needlessly abandoned, and Carroll expressed the need to "get back on track" with our philosophy by running the ball more.

What happened in the Super Bowl was just one of many instances of it.

 

[DavidSeven]

It's weird that people think play-calling is this magical thing where the balance of life literally hangs on every single play called. That's not reality. In the NFL, the outcome of 9 out of 10 plays depend on one guy beating another guy. Maybe that's a receiver breaking open on his routes. Maybe that's the QB making a line adjustment and getting the ball out before a rusher gets there. No one wins a play on paper.

The playcaller's job is to ensure balance and put together an overall system that his players can succeed. That's it. Can anyone say that Bevell hasn't done those two things? If so, you're lying or delusional. The success/failure of each individual play comes down to each player on the field. It shouldn't matter what's called -- you do your job correctly, the play is successful. That's all there is to it. If Kearse screens Butler (his assignment), Seahawks are Super Bowl champions.

If you're obsessing over play calls, you're really missing the forrest for the trees. It's not what matters. It's not what makes a team successful. Culture, system, and great athletes. That's how you win in the NFL. Focus on that stuff instead of nitpicking freakin' playcalls.

 

[hawknation2015]

It's weird that people think play-calling is this magical thing where the balance of life literally hangs on every single play called. That's not reality. In the NFL, the outcome of 9 out of 10 plays depend on one guy beating another guy. Maybe that's a receiver breaking open on his routes. Maybe that's the QB making a line adjustment and getting the ball out before a rusher gets there.

The playcaller's job is to ensure balance and put together an overall system that his players can succeed. That's it. Can anyone say that Bevell hasn't done those two things? If so, you're lying or delusional. The success/failure of each individual play comes down to each player on the field. It shouldn't matter what's called -- you do your correctly, the play is successful. That's all there is to it. If Kearse screens Butler (his assignment), Seahawks are Super Bowl champions.

If you're obsessing over play calls, you're really missing the forrest for the trees. It's not what matters. It's not what makes a team successful. Culture, system, and great athletes. That's how you win in the NFL. Focus on that stuff instead of nitpicking freakin' playcalls.

I'm going to focus on everything, because I want to see us improve in every phase of the game. That's what competition is about.

Do you think Bevell is an above average play caller?

 

[LymonHawk]

Saying you don't like Bevell's play calling is a far cry from complaining about a particular play. Did you, or did you not, specifically complain about the call during/after the Arizona game?

And what about RW? Is he a liar or not?

Those are two very different issues.

I don't write about every single play call I disagree with. Which play call in particular against Arizona are you talking about? The same play as was called in the SB. IMHO: If you don't complain when the play works, then you shouldn't complain about when it doesn't. Same guy called the play!

In general, Bevell showed a clear tendency to abandon the running game in two instances: (1) in the red zone, where the Seahawks were ranked 20th in red zone scoring, despite having Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson, and (2) in the first half of games, after he runs through the initial script and before half time when Carroll can encourage him to run the ball more. So you can't read RWs mind, but you can read PC's? Interesting.

Did Wilson "lie" about hearing God, after the play, tell him that he was using him to show the world how he responds to adversity? I have no idea, because I can't see into Wilson's mind. He was speaking at a Church, and maybe he was playing to the crowd. A lie, is a lie, is lie. I tend to think he was being sincere. Aha! A sincere lie? Many people, for various reasons, have experienced auditory hallucinations Are you now claiming RW hallucinates?in which they believe God has spoken directly to them. Lack of sleep, excessive praying, trauma, concussion, etc. all increase the liklihood of having an auditory hallucination.

I have NO IDEA what this second question has to do with whether Bevell is an above average play caller or whether that was the best play call for that situation. Did you complain about his pass call to Matthews before the half, a player who had never before caught a pass in the NFL? You want to show me the post where you complained about that call? Of course if the play had failed, you'd still be bitchin'...wouldn'tcha?

We were on the one-yard line. We had enough time to run the ball once, call a timeout if the run wasn't successful, throw the ball to stop the clock, and then run again one last time on 4th down. We were the 2nd best power running team in the league (81% success rate) going against the worst power running team in the league (81% failure rate). The probability of a turnover was at least four times more likely by throwing the ball. All this leads me to believe they should have run the ball in that situation. It was the safest play with the highest probability of success.

Leads you to believe? How much are you making as an NFL OC? It was a situational call. It didn't work, deal with it and stop with all this 'someone's gotta to blamed' rubbish...please.

 

[DavidSeven]

Do you think Bevell is an above average play caller?

What is an above-average play-caller? What is the criteria for that? If it's a guy who designs a system to match his players' strengths/weaknesses and calls enough runs, then hell yes, Bevell is an "above average" playcaller.

Tell me which of these mystical "playcallers" are creating amazing offenses without an amazing QB? There are none. Tell me about these super awesome OCs who are calling crazy-ass plays and tricking teams into giving up 40 points a game. There are none, because the play calls barely freakin' matter at this level. Either you got the horses or you don't.

People might throw out "Chip Kelly" as an example but that dude just calls the same six plays all the time and does it fast. It's the most simplistic offense in the NFL, and it was way less efficient than Bevell's last year. The dude just plays fast, burns out his D, and gets points off special teams. There is no magic to it, and Chip will even tell you the play calls don't matter. Culture, system, players. That's what wins, not a micro-analysis of every play call.

 

[hawknation2015]

Saying you don't like Bevell's play calling is a far cry from complaining about a particular play. Did you, or did you not, specifically complain about the call during/after the Arizona game?

And what about RW? Is he a liar or not?

Those are two very different issues.

I don't write about every single play call I disagree with. Which play call in particular against Arizona are you talking about? The same play as was called in the SB. IMHO: If you don't complain when the play works, then you shouldn't complain about when it doesn't. Same guy called the play!

In general, Bevell showed a clear tendency to abandon the running game in two instances: (1) in the red zone, where the Seahawks were ranked 20th in red zone scoring, despite having Marshawn Lynch and Russell Wilson, and (2) in the first half of games, after he runs through the initial script and before half time when Carroll can encourage him to run the ball more. So you can't read RWs mind, but you can read PC's? Interesting.

Did Wilson "lie" about hearing God, after the play, tell him that he was using him to show the world how he responds to adversity? I have no idea, because I can't see into Wilson's mind. He was speaking at a Church, and maybe he was playing to the crowd. A lie, is a lie, is lie. I tend to think he was being sincere. Aha! A sincere lie? Many people, for various reasons, have experienced auditory hallucinations Are you now claiming RW hallucinates?in which they believe God has spoken directly to them. Lack of sleep, excessive praying, trauma, concussion, etc. all increase the liklihood of having an auditory hallucination.

I have NO IDEA what this second question has to do with whether Bevell is an above average play caller or whether that was the best play call for that situation. Did you complain about his pass call to Matthews before the half, a player who had never before caught a pass in the NFL? You want to show me the post where you complained about that call? Of course if the play had failed, you'd still be bitchin'...wouldn'tcha?

We were on the one-yard line. We had enough time to run the ball once, call a timeout if the run wasn't successful, throw the ball to stop the clock, and then run again one last time on 4th down. We were the 2nd best power running team in the league (81% success rate) going against the worst power running team in the league (81% failure rate). The probability of a turnover was at least four times more likely by throwing the ball. All this leads me to believe they should have run the ball in that situation. It was the safest play with the highest probability of success.

Leads you to believe? How much are you making as an NFL OC? It was a situational call. It didn't work, deal with it and stop with all this 'someone's gotta to blamed' rubbish...please.

I usually enjoy your takes, but this is a whole lot of nonsense.

You don't have to be an NFL OC to criticize a play call. By Bevell's own admission, he was worried about running enough time off the clock -- in case we did score on the first play, to prevent New England from having enough time for their own score -- and preserving enough time so that we could run two more plays. Those are contradictory goals that led to the poor decision to run time off the clock and then have a quick throw to stop the clock.

IMO, his primary consideration on that play call should have been SCORING with the most effective and least risky play call. If he had done so, I think there is a greater than 80% chance we would have been back-to-back champions.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Continuing to use red-zone TD statistics to prove a point about the Seahawks' offense is conceding defeat as it doesn't really reflect Pete's philosophy as has been explained over and over again.
But if it's your last straw to try to explain the absurd, I understand why a desperate poster would turn to it.

The abandoning of the running game in the red zone has NOTHING to do with Carroll's philosophy -- which calls for balance. I have no idea what you are babbling about here.

Abandoning the run game? I think you're exaggerating that point a bit, as over the course of the year we implemented the run game more than the pass. Successfully, I might add.

There were several instances in which our dominant running game was needlessly abandoned, and Carroll expressed the need to "get back on track" with our philosophy by running the ball more.

What happened in the Super Bowl was just one of many instances of it.

Another exaggeration. Way to take Pete's words and bend them to your liking.

 

[hawknation2015]

Do you think Bevell is an above average play caller?

What is an above-average play-caller? What is the criteria for that? If it's a guy who designs a system to match his players' strengths/weaknesses and calls enough runs, then hell yes, Bevell is an "above average" playcaller.

I'm asking you for your own definition. Is Bevell an above average play caller, in your opinion?

It could also be that he is below average, but the best available right now.

 

[scifly]

 

[DavidSeven]

Do you think Bevell is an above average play caller?

What is an above-average play-caller? What is the criteria for that? If it's a guy who designs a system to match his players' strengths/weaknesses and calls enough runs, then hell yes, Bevell is an "above average" playcaller.

I'm asking you for your own definition. Is Bevell an above average play caller, in your opinion?

It could also be that he is below average, but the best available right now.

I'm saying the literal calling of individual plays is almost insignificant in the grand scheme of things, especially in the system Carroll and Cable have set up.

I define a good OC as someone who creates an overall system his players can succeed in and also carries out the vision o the head coach. Bevell has done that and done that with good results. He's done that with pretty mediocre talent at almost level of his offense. He's done that with a QB who can't stand in the pocket and who can't complete passes over the middle. He's done that with literally zero redzone/3rd down talent over the last two years.

So, yeah. I think he's good. I think his system works. I couldn't care less about nitpicking individual calls.

 

[hawknation2015]

Do you think Bevell is an above average play caller?

What is an above-average play-caller? What is the criteria for that? If it's a guy who designs a system to match his players' strengths/weaknesses and calls enough runs, then hell yes, Bevell is an "above average" playcaller.

I'm asking you for your own definition. Is Bevell an above average play caller, in your opinion?

It could also be that he is below average, but the best available right now.

I'm saying the literal calling of individual plays is almost insignificant in the grand scheme of things, especially in the system Carroll and Cable have set up.

I define a good OC as someone who creates an overall system his players can succeed in and also carries out the vision o the head coach. Bevell has done that and done that with good results. He's done that with pretty mediocre talent at almost level of his offense. He's done that with a QB who can't stand in the pocket and who can't complete passes over the middle. He's done that with literally zero redzone/3rd down talent over the last two years.

So, yeah. I think he's good. I think his system works. I couldn't care less about nitpicking individual calls.

First, you correctly attribute the system to Carroll and Cable, but then say Bevell deserves credit for "creating the overall system." That is contradictory.

If we have an OC who continually abandons the running game, then we will not be true to our philosophy of offensive balance. In that way, play calling is absolutely critical to properly executing the philosophy.

 

[DavidSeven]

All three coaches deserve credit for the system. To the extent you think the system sucks, all three coaches should share the blame in that as well.

Abandon the run? We run more than any team besides Houston who basically played without a QB last year. Bevell calls more than enough runs.

 

[Tical21]

David, you know I love ya, but I can't get on board with the playcalls don't matter thing. A system is no more than a collection of plays. If you've got a team that blitzes a lot, you'd better call plays to counter this. Guessing what a defense is going to based on what they expect you to do is far more important than you're giving it credit for. How do you know that the playcaller doesn't make the quarterback? We've seen tons of examples of guys that were very good with one playcaller and not so good with others. Alex Smith went from really bad to decent overnight from playcalling. Brad Johnson was made to look like a great quarterback. As was Rich Gannon. Same for RB's. Calling a play or a route that the defense is not planning for on a particular play versus one that they are expecting is one of the best ways to create big plays.

If a defense is calling a cover-3, and you've got a man-beater called, you've made it infinitely more difficult on yourself. It matters.

Bevell has the easiest job of any playcaller in the league. He faces a crapload of man defense. Often times, man-1, and the defense is even kind enough to use a guy as a spy, taking him out of coverage. LB's first have responsibility to the read-option. DE's have to worry about contain. But it matters.

 

[DavidSeven]

Fair points, all of them. I do think coaching does matter in QB development, but I'd contend that a lot of that work is done in practice and the film room and not as dependent on OC calls. If the OC calls power and the defense drops both safeties into the box, it's on the QB to make the check. In your example, if the defense shows cover-3 late, then the QB needs to recognize that and check out of pass or call timeout to change personnel. The OC guesses, and we hope he guesses right, but the best offenses usually also have a QB with the wherewithal to put his offense in the best position to be successful.

I agree that Alex Smith got better with better coaching. But was that because Greg Roman called brilliant plays for him or was it because Jim Harbaugh actually taught him how to play quarterback and made his life easier by emphasizing Gore? In my opinion, it was probably more of the latter.