Only 8 offensive coordinators have had their job +2 years

[HawkGA]

Or maybe we're all just baffled that one of the longest tenured OC's has to basically start over every year before figuring out how to call plays and coordinate the offense. I mean, what good is it to have stability if every year it seems like you start back to where you started the previous year?

What are new Skill players and O-line, every year, for 1000 Alex?

Get us a stable line for a few years and I think the offense comes out swinging a little harder. Learn new players speeds and abilities during gametime and adjust accordingly throughout the year. Sounds like good coaching to me.

The Oline was definitely a problem, no doubt. But shouldn't that factor into the play calling? Maybe empty sets when you line consists of turnstyles isn't such a good idea. We don't want to re-litigate the whole Bevell thing. Lord knows that's been done to death on this board. But this notion that now that the Oline is blocking, he's a genius and the problems the Seahawks experienced before weren't his fault . . . well, that's just silly.

 

[Cartire]

Or maybe we're all just baffled that one of the longest tenured OC's has to basically start over every year before figuring out how to call plays and coordinate the offense. I mean, what good is it to have stability if every year it seems like you start back to where you started the previous year?

What are new Skill players and O-line, every year, for 1000 Alex?

Get us a stable line for a few years and I think the offense comes out swinging a little harder. Learn new players speeds and abilities during gametime and adjust accordingly throughout the year. Sounds like good coaching to me.

The Oline was definitely a problem, no doubt. But shouldn't that factor into the play calling? Maybe empty sets when you line consists of turnstyles isn't such a good idea. We don't want to re-litigate the whole Bevell thing. Lord knows that's been done to death on this board. But this notion that now that the Oline is blocking, he's a genius and the problems the Seahawks experienced before weren't his fault . . . well, that's just silly.

You realize an OC is only a play-caller and not a magician. Theres not some guaranteed play that will work, no matter who your personal are, on every down. If your players are getting there asses handed to them and cant execute worth a damn, a magic play isnt going to fix that. Its easy to say, "oh, Wilson should get rid of the ball faster on quick slants because his O-line is collapsing" and not take into account that the WR's arent winning on the line and have no chance for those anyway.

I know what we all want. We all WANT our team to be perfect. Its been pretty damn amazing for a while now. To nitpick because its not a blow out every week and you lose some CLOSE games is just getting frustrating. Its never been a better time to be a 12.

 

[Erebus]

It seems to me like a long-tenured OC would be uncommon, simply for the fact that most either get fired or hired as a head coach somewhere else. You have to be good but not great to stay in that position for a long time. So the fact that only 8 have 2+ years tenure on their team makes sense to me.

 

[HawkGA]

You realize an OC is only a play-caller and not a magician. Theres not some guaranteed play that will work, no matter who your personal are, on every down. If your players are getting there asses handed to them and cant execute worth a damn, a magic play isnt going to fix that. Its easy to say, "oh, Wilson should get rid of the ball faster on quick slants because his O-line is collapsing" and not take into account that the WR's arent winning on the line and have no chance for those anyway.

I know what we all want. We all WANT our team to be perfect. Its been pretty damn amazing for a while now. To nitpick because its not a blow out every week and you lose some CLOSE games is just getting frustrating. Its never been a better time to be a 12.

But doesn't a coach bear some responsibility for calling plays that will work with his players? You play to your strengths not to what you want to do. You don't "play big" in basketball when you've got 5 guards on the court. You don't run a bubble screen to Jimmy Graham. You don't go empty-set and no tight end when your 5 linemen can't block.

I think we see this around a league a lot, though not necessarily in-season. We see all the time whether coaches stick to their system regardless of their system or whether they adapt their system match their players. The first one is fine if you're cleaning house and bringing in players that fit your system. If you're not doing that (or don't have the power to do that, as I assume Bevell doesn't) then you have to adapt your system to your players.

 

[Seymour]

Putting Russell in there only also helps support the apologists side since he can improvise poor play calling with his legs.

Right, because the offensive coordinator doesn't deserve any credit for the almost immediate and prolific success of a rookie QB. Not to mention the sustained and excellent success the offense has had since.

Let's instead focus on the year he was given Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback during the second year of a major franchise rebuild.

Seems to me the "apologists" are using statistical facts to enhance their argument... and what they're getting in response are angry villagers putting down their pitchforks and burning torches to cover their ears.

LOL. Sure! Russell was getting destroyed his rookie year and only after Darrell went back and viewed RG3 tape and decided to implement the zone read that Russell finally started to succeed. Compare that to this season, almost a dead parallel just like the above graph shows, and takes 8+ friggen weeks and almost a destroyed QB to finally figure out that shorter routes, combo routes, and hot routes possibly may help a team with a crappy oline? Wow Darrell....ya think??

 

[marko358]

Make sure you guys listen to Pete's Wednesday presser this week if you haven't yet. He really dives into the play calling discussion and provides plenty of food for thought.

He certainly does.

And here's what Doug Baldwin said this week:

"Yeah, that would be...it'd be a big hole to fill, if Darrell left. So whatever the perception is on the outside he has given us opportunities to be successful, whether that's at the quarterback position, the offensive line, the receivers, the running backs. If we lost him it would be a great impact."

But what do they know, eh?

How common is it for a head coach and the team's best WR to throw their OC under the bus?

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

How common is it for a head coach and the team's best WR to throw their OC under the bus?

I was waiting for this reply.

Nobody prompted Baldwin to make those remarks, or for that matter to make this impassioned defense of Bevell to the critics: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... ll-bevell/

Baldwin then was asked to elaborate on his reaction to the criticism of Bevell.

“Because obviously people who are saying that aren’t looking at the game,” Baldwin said. “You know, they’re not watching the films. I don’t know what film they’re watching if they’re saying that Darrell Bevell’s the problem because, like I said, there’s plays out there and we just have to get to them. And we consistently have been inconsistent in getting to them. And on top of that, there’s penalties. . . . We shoot ourselves in the foot. There’s not much more that Darell Bevell can do. He’s calling good plays.”

And Carroll was clearly speaking with absolute sincerity in that press conference. Nobody can argue to the contrary.

It might just be that, you know, they were speaking honestly?

 

[Siouxhawk]

What a refreshing thread. Thanks guys.

It was almost embarrassing to come onto this site and see some of the Bevell toxic garbage being written. The only solace is that most of it was written regularly by about only 6 or 7 posters. By the same token, you had maybe 4 or 5 of us that had the calm confidence that Bevell had helped our team to 2 straight Super Bowls and there was a good chance he was going to do it again. Most fell into the silent majority.

But I always found it a little odd that here I was a Seahawks fan, and I was having to defend our offensive coordinator from the slings and arrows of these few on a Hawks website. It's as though I had stumbled upon a Niners or Eagles site. So that's why I find a thread like this so inspiring and refreshing.

Hey, Bevell isn't perfect. Nobody is. But he's had a propensity to get our offense hitting on all cylinders at the end of the season and build a head of steam entering the playoffs. Kind of reminds me of a certain hockey coach that was tied to my moniker that is now calling the shots in the land of Cheesesteaks.

In the last few days, Bevell has gotten the documented endorsement of Pete and Douggy, so I'm sure there's many more on the offensive side of the ball and in the locker room who give him complete respect and are glad that he's a member of our team.

For those lurking with angst and are ready to spring on any offensive hiccup, take Scotte's lead and admit that your were wrong (to yourself is just fine), forget all that garbage about situational playcalling, bubble screens, open backfields and predictable route trees (always chuckled at that last one) and join the rest of us on another sweet ride through the playoffs. If you still need to vent, you can always direct it toward those trying to get in our way.

 

[Cartire]

You realize an OC is only a play-caller and not a magician. Theres not some guaranteed play that will work, no matter who your personal are, on every down. If your players are getting there asses handed to them and cant execute worth a damn, a magic play isnt going to fix that. Its easy to say, "oh, Wilson should get rid of the ball faster on quick slants because his O-line is collapsing" and not take into account that the WR's arent winning on the line and have no chance for those anyway.

I know what we all want. We all WANT our team to be perfect. Its been pretty damn amazing for a while now. To nitpick because its not a blow out every week and you lose some CLOSE games is just getting frustrating. Its never been a better time to be a 12.

But doesn't a coach bear some responsibility for calling plays that will work with his players? You play to your strengths not to what you want to do. You don't "play big" in basketball when you've got 5 guards on the court. You don't run a bubble screen to Jimmy Graham. You don't go empty-set and no tight end when your 5 linemen can't block.

I think we see this around a league a lot, though not necessarily in-season. We see all the time whether coaches stick to their system regardless of their system or whether they adapt their system match their players. The first one is fine if you're cleaning house and bringing in players that fit your system. If you're not doing that (or don't have the power to do that, as I assume Bevell doesn't) then you have to adapt your system to your players.

What strengths did we really have in the beginning of the season that were consistent? What do you think Bevell should have schemed more towards? The running game? It was hit or miss for awhile there. Short game was a mess due to some inaccuracy by Wilson and WR's getting dominated. Mid game had open WR's a lot that were either not seen or overthrown. Execution was our weakness. We had a slow starting Defense that couldnt turn over the ball AT ALL making that much harder for our Offense. Our starting field position the first half the season was abysmal.

Once again though, im not saying he cant shoulder some of the blame. But you can find some plays in every game, from every OC, that were not good ideas when hindsight is thrown in. Our 4 year trends and rankings have shown a pretty great offense. I am scared to think what COULD happen if someone came in and screwed it all up.

 

[hawks85]

I think some struggle to appreciate how Seahawk play starts over every year to evolve and improve over the course of each season. Perhaps a few DVOA graphs would help. It takes a collaboration of hard working coaches and players to get that kind of repetitive performance improvement every year.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/674420524345196545[/tweet]

they get stronger as the season goes on which is good.

 

[Hawks46]

Putting Russell in there only also helps support the apologists side since he can improvise poor play calling with his legs.

Right, because the offensive coordinator doesn't deserve any credit for the almost immediate and prolific success of a rookie QB. Not to mention the sustained and excellent success the offense has had since.

Let's instead focus on the year he was given Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback during the second year of a major franchise rebuild.

Seems to me the "apologists" are using statistical facts to enhance their argument... and what they're getting in response are angry villagers putting down their pitchforks and burning torches to cover their ears.

Well we all know it's Bevell's fault.

Unless it's Wilson's fault.

Wait, I forgot who's fault is it again ?

 

[DavidSeven]

Putting Russell in there only also helps support the apologists side since he can improvise poor play calling with his legs.

And I'm sure you've studied the All-22 and know what went wrong on each of those plays and how it was Bevell's fault every single time.

Danny O'Neil:

This is my 11th season of covering the Seahawks on a daily basis, and I am simply not capable nor qualified to give you a definitive explanation for why a specific play failed. Not only that, I'm suspicious of anyone else who claims expertise in that regard.

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/seah ... g-byu-job/

 

[bjornanderson21]

Bevell isnt still here because he is competent, he is here because Pete overly values continuity and we have had more DC/coach losses so that has meant sticking with failures (Cable and Bevell) on offense.

Bevell leaving for BYU would be a blessing for the Hawks. Our offense needs to be shaken up

 

[scutterhawk]

How many of those O-coordinators had the luxury of a top 5 defense every year? Just one I'm aware of, and a HUGE advantage.

How many of those O-coordinators take the blame for the TOP 5 Defenses blowing 1/4 Quarter leads and wins in 2015.
How many O-coordinators have a Top five Defense that let's someone like Tommy Brady chew up a 17 point lead in a Super Bowl appearance.
They're not just responsible for the Wins, they have their share of blame for the loses too.

 

[hawkfan68]

Between the two - Bevell or Cable, IMO Cable's the bigger problem. His OL has stunk each year he's been here. That influx hasn't really helped the offense. Never liked the Cable hiring. The run game is successful because of Lynch, Rawls, and Wilson. It says more about their abilities than Cable's coaching of the OL. I hope they tell Cable to take a hike and bring someone in who isn't so keen on DL projects for OL.

 

[themunn]

If the Saints clean house as expected this offseason, it would make Bevell the longest tenured OC in the NFL alongside Carolina's OC.

The insane turnover at OC isn't really an endorsement of Bevell's performance since almost any coach other than Pete would have fired Bevell after the SB, but I think it's interesting to put into context just how hard it is to hold an OC job in this league.

No team in the league is firing an OC because of one play. In fact, if anything, they're looking back and saying "well done integrating that UDFA who has never caught a pass before into the offense to the tune of 100+ yards"

 

[Scottemojo]

What a refreshing thread. Thanks guys.

It was almost embarrassing to come onto this site and see some of the Bevell toxic garbage being written. The only solace is that most of it was written regularly by about only 6 or 7 posters. By the same token, you had maybe 4 or 5 of us that had the calm confidence that Bevell had helped our team to 2 straight Super Bowls and there was a good chance he was going to do it again. Most fell into the silent majority.

But I always found it a little odd that here I was a Seahawks fan, and I was having to defend our offensive coordinator from the slings and arrows of these few on a Hawks website. It's as though I had stumbled upon a Niners or Eagles site. So that's why I find a thread like this so inspiring and refreshing.

Hey, Bevell isn't perfect. Nobody is. But he's had a propensity to get our offense hitting on all cylinders at the end of the season and build a head of steam entering the playoffs. Kind of reminds me of a certain hockey coach that was tied to my moniker that is now calling the shots in the land of Cheesesteaks.

In the last few days, Bevell has gotten the documented endorsement of Pete and Douggy, so I'm sure there's many more on the offensive side of the ball and in the locker room who give him complete respect and are glad that he's a member of our team.

For those lurking with angst and are ready to spring on any offensive hiccup, take Scotte's lead and admit that your were wrong (to yourself is just fine), forget all that garbage about situational playcalling, bubble screens, open backfields and predictable route trees (always chuckled at that last one) and join the rest of us on another sweet ride through the playoffs. If you still need to vent, you can always direct it toward those trying to get in our way.

I was wrong to lay Pete's philosophy on Darell. I still think he called an offense ill suited to a shaky line for half of this year, and I think that a shift in offensive philosophy took place over the bye week. And I give Darrell and Pete and Tom full credit for being flexible in approach. I was wrong about some things, but a lot of the bad situational football calls did happen. I have always said that getting Bevell fired was not my agenda, I want him to just call good situational ball. He is now.

 

[Zorn76]

To each their own.
I'd still like to see Bevell replaced next offseason.
And Cable, too.

 

[JSeahawks]

Good enough not to be fired.
Not good enough to get hired away.

Not sure if that's a good thing or bad thing. I'm content with bevell but also believe there are a ton of guys who could do just as well. Russell Wilson is way more important to the offense then bevell is (or his replacement would be.)

 

[Cartire]

Good enough not to be fired.
Not good enough to get hired away.

Not sure if that's a good thing or bad thing. I'm content with bevell but also believe there are a ton of guys who could do just as well. Russell Wilson is way more important to the offense then bevell is (or his replacement would be.)

This is such an odd thing to say when someone just posted about 24 teams changing coordinators (some more then once) within the last 2 years. I can think of some, but they are already either on successful programs or retired.