Pete visibly irritated during Monday Press Conference

Status
Not open for further replies.

Seymour

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
7,459
Reaction score
22
chris98251":35qu65ya said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
 

Siouxhawk

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
3,776
Reaction score
0
Seymour":331byyou said:
chris98251":331byyou said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.
 

2_0_6

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
3,540
Reaction score
0
Location
South Seattle
Siouxhawk":3ow1hmi9 said:
Seymour":3ow1hmi9 said:
chris98251":3ow1hmi9 said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

Bevell was a good coordinator back in 2013, but his play calling has gone stale. Either adapt the embrace to change train or get run over by it.
 

mistaowen

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,335
Reaction score
612
Siouxhawk":3tcslidl said:
Seymour":3tcslidl said:
chris98251":3tcslidl said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

You lack serious objectivity in your view of the offense, stop using the crutch of winningest era of Seahawk history. The offense hasn't scored a TD in the first half of 7/8 games this year. If this defense was anything but great and almost always kept it close for the offense to sputter along, the record would be significantly different. A below average defense with no TDs in the first half is recipe for many blowouts.
 

Siouxhawk

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
3,776
Reaction score
0
Hawk_Nation":2q5yijqd said:
Siouxhawk":2q5yijqd said:
Seymour":2q5yijqd said:
chris98251":2q5yijqd said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

Bevell was a good coordinator back in 2013, but his play calling has gone stale. Either adapt the embrace to change train or get run over by it.
I disagree with the going stale part. We've proven we can play any type of game. Of course we're going to stick with our control, low-risk offense, which is ordered from above and proven successful. But if we need to change it up, we'll be ready. Second half of the season will be interesting.
 

Seymour

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
7,459
Reaction score
22
Siouxhawk":36do3uy6 said:
Seymour":36do3uy6 said:
chris98251":36do3uy6 said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

Maybe.
If so, this would be "his harmony".

[youtube]Wn_iz8z2AGw[/youtube]
 

Scorpion05

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2016
Messages
1,722
Reaction score
10
mistaowen":2qpvyoqj said:
Siouxhawk":2qpvyoqj said:
Seymour":2qpvyoqj said:
chris98251":2qpvyoqj said:
Find Norm Chow and let him run the offense his way like in USC before Pete wanted to change it and he left.

Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

You lack serious objectivity in your view of the offense, stop using the crutch of winningest era of Seahawk history. The offense hasn't scored a TD in the first half of 7/8 games this year. If this defense was anything but great and almost always kept it close for the offense to sputter along, the record would be significantly different. A below average defense with no TDs in the first half is recipe for many blowouts.


But this point of view also doesn't make sense. We expect the defense to keep it close because most of our salary cap goes toward defense. This is not a case of equality here. We invest primarily in defense while praying for the low paid offense to gel. If you want a better offense, put more money on that side of the ball. Otherwise, the defense is EXPECTED to hold teams to low scoring
 

mistaowen

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2010
Messages
6,335
Reaction score
612
Scorpion05":3dlud7lu said:
mistaowen":3dlud7lu said:
Siouxhawk":3dlud7lu said:
Seymour":3dlud7lu said:
Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

You lack serious objectivity in your view of the offense, stop using the crutch of winningest era of Seahawk history. The offense hasn't scored a TD in the first half of 7/8 games this year. If this defense was anything but great and almost always kept it close for the offense to sputter along, the record would be significantly different. A below average defense with no TDs in the first half is recipe for many blowouts.


But this point of view also doesn't make sense. We expect the defense to keep it close because most of our salary cap goes toward defense. This is not a case of equality here. We invest primarily in defense while praying for the low paid offense to gel. If you want a better offense, put more money on that side of the ball. Otherwise, the defense is EXPECTED to hold teams to low scoring

And they do hold them to low scoring. The offense has proven they have the ability to move the ball well but stubbornly revert of thinking they have Marshawn to rely on churning out 100 yard games. Was Marshawn the most essential piece to offensive success? Seems likely, at least in the vision Pete/Bevell want for the offense. The offense has better talent than a lot of teams in the NFL regardless of salary breakdown and those teams can score touchdowns in the first half.
 

Seymour

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
7,459
Reaction score
22
Scorpion05":36kdh35n said:
mistaowen":36kdh35n said:
Siouxhawk":36kdh35n said:
Seymour":36kdh35n said:
Which is just another reason Pete is still riding the Bevell train. Pete needs a yes man as an OC that doesn't lash out with all the insanity and Bevell is happy to deliver plenty of yes bosses. How many good to great coordinators are going to put up with that? So on we live with table scraps.
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

You lack serious objectivity in your view of the offense, stop using the crutch of winningest era of Seahawk history. The offense hasn't scored a TD in the first half of 7/8 games this year. If this defense was anything but great and almost always kept it close for the offense to sputter along, the record would be significantly different. A below average defense with no TDs in the first half is recipe for many blowouts.


But this point of view also doesn't make sense. We expect the defense to keep it close because most of our salary cap goes toward defense. This is not a case of equality here. We invest primarily in defense while praying for the low paid offense to gel. If you want a better offense, put more money on that side of the ball. Otherwise, the defense is EXPECTED to hold teams to low scoring

And to that point. In 2013 when we won it all, we spent far more on OFFENSE than defense.

2013 Offense spending #4 in league $60,255,000
2013 Defense spending #13 in league $50,445,000

In other words, we had to pay considerably more on offense to accomplish our goals.

Our new tilt toward spending way more on D has yet to be proven or pan out.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/2013/offense/active-cap/
 

Siouxhawk

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2015
Messages
3,776
Reaction score
0
mistaowen":3m7czqsf said:
Scorpion05":3m7czqsf said:
mistaowen":3m7czqsf said:
Siouxhawk":3m7czqsf said:
Or maybe Pete has found a harmony with Bev's gameplanning and play designs that has helped produce the winningest era in Seahawk history.

You lack serious objectivity in your view of the offense, stop using the crutch of winningest era of Seahawk history. The offense hasn't scored a TD in the first half of 7/8 games this year. If this defense was anything but great and almost always kept it close for the offense to sputter along, the record would be significantly different. A below average defense with no TDs in the first half is recipe for many blowouts.


But this point of view also doesn't make sense. We expect the defense to keep it close because most of our salary cap goes toward defense. This is not a case of equality here. We invest primarily in defense while praying for the low paid offense to gel. If you want a better offense, put more money on that side of the ball. Otherwise, the defense is EXPECTED to hold teams to low scoring

And they do hold them to low scoring. The offense has proven they have the ability to move the ball well but stubbornly revert of thinking they have Marshawn to rely on churning out 100 yard games. Was Marshawn the most essential piece to offensive success? Seems likely, at least in the vision Pete/Bevell want for the offense. The offense has better talent than a lot of teams in the NFL regardless of salary breakdown and those teams can score touchdowns in the first half.
The offense put the go-ahead touchdown on the board with 90 seconds left. Most of us thought the game was over, and for good reason. Giving up a long drive like that won't be a pattern for our defense. We're too good. Our rookie corner will learn from that.
 

Boycie

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
597
Location
Florida and loving GOP country!
Anthony!":3hdm0h9g said:
Josea16":3hdm0h9g said:
massari":3hdm0h9g said:
Does anyone know if Hue Jackson would be a good fit with this offense? He'll likely be fired by the Browns.
Interesting possibility but actually Bevell is better if Pete would just stop with his you must run bullshit against 8 man fronts for 3 quarters. Anybody could be successful if Pete leaves the offense alone. I mean from the start. Seriously last week he wants Lacy as the focal point of the offense? Wilson needs to grow a set and stand up to Pete already.

Yeah right, how many QB's do you know for a fact stand up to their coaches to that magnitude? Answer none.

Do you ever get off of the RW is blameless in all situations soapbox?

I love the guy, but he has made his share of mistakes too, and he needs to correct them.

The fact that Pete had said that RW bailed out of the pocket too early is correct, but earlier you run to his rescue to say if he doesn't, he would get killed?

Take off the blinders, and be a little more objective.
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
29,850
Reaction score
10,297
Location
Sammamish, WA
He definitely was off on Sunday. Of course, he did take the team to what looked to be the game winning drive. As a whole, not a game that's up to par at all for him. Way too many jump balls too.
 

hawkfan68

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
1,698
Location
Sammamish, WA
Spin Doctor":3izktm8o said:
Sports Hernia":3izktm8o said:
TheLegendOfBoom":3izktm8o said:
IrishNW":3izktm8o said:
I would love to get an offense coordinator that would tailor this offense around Wilson's strengths. This offense could be so much better.
There's only a select offensive coordinators I feel can take Wilson to the next level.

Andy Reid: Not a coordinator but a good offensive mind.
Todd Haley: Haley is a good coordinator.
Josh McDaniels: Also good.
Kyle Shanahan: good offensive play caller even though he's a coach now.
Disagree. Russ just needs an OC that won’t neuter his natural ability, the way our current OC does. Just get out of the way.
There are three issues with our offense, these problems are named Cable, Bevell, and most of all Pete.

Quite frankly, I don't think Pete understands very much about offensive strategy. He knows what he wants from offense, that being an offense that controls the clock and limits turnovers. Unfortunately, Pete does not know how to achieve this. He wants a ball control offense, but also has a fascination with the deep ball and big plays. You cannot expect to control the clock very well if you keep calling low percentage plays. It's great when they work, but more often than not it doesn't. What keeps the clock moving the most is establishing the run game, and going with a methodical approach to the passing game. Not only can still have your big plays with that approach, but you can also dictate what the opponent does to you if you're successful.

Our offense runs contrary to that. We are, and always have been even under Jermey Bates, an offense that looks for that big knockout punch. Even with Hasselbeck, and Bates we still had the same approach to the game. In this sense Pete is a big problem when it comes to our current offensive woes.

Bevell and Cable are not innocent either. The situational playcalls, and awareness of Bevell continues to baffle me. The deep routes on third and one might be good to catch people off guard every now and then. When it continues to be a major aspect of an offensive scheme than it no longer catches people off guard and it becomes expected. Most of the time these low percentage plays lead to a three and out. Yesterday it was even more pronounced, an empty set on third and short, all of the routes were long developing, and deep. These were the kinds of plays we were calling.

The infamous super bowl play was called several times, each time it was a failure. Billicheck himself said, that is one of the only plays we run from that formation. He knew it was coming, and just like in the Superbowl, the opposing defense knew EXACTLY what play was being called. Moreover the DB's were playing far off of our receivers, and we refused to deviate from our deep routes. The Redskins defensive coordinator was essentially disrespecting our offense by sending five men on almost every play, and having his DB's play far off the LOS. He gambled on the fact that we would not deviate from our approach, and guess what? He won that gamble. The approach the Redskins was exploitable, but we still continued to bang our heads against the wall.

Cable's blocking scheme looks to be overly complex for a lot of our players. Our young players look lost most of the time. I see our line being confused as to which blocker they need to engage. The result is players get through our line untouched at times. To make things worse, Cable believes he can turn guys who have never played offensive line in their life into competent lineman. Our moneyball approach to the line, and Cables overall blocking scheme is hurting us. We've invested a lot of picks into the line thus far, and most of them have not even been NFL third string caliber. The Redskins fielded a bunch of guys off the street and they played at our lines level, a line that has a perennial probowler, and a damn good center. This is unacceptable --- Cable needs to be held accountable.

Gibbs zone blocking scheme was remarkable because it was easy to pick up. All he required was an athletic player, and he could have said player be productive as a lineman. It didn't take years for this to happen, it was plug and play. Even our successful lineman have taken years to pick up our scheme, and even after years of play they still looked confused at times.

Great assessment and I agree with your points.
 

Boycie

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
597
Location
Florida and loving GOP country!
SoulfishHawk":1d3fis83 said:
He definitely was off on Sunday. Of course, he did take the team to what looked to be the game winning drive. As a whole, not a game that's up to par at all for him. Way too many jump balls too.

Agreed, but if we are going to rag on Bevell, and anyone else who has crapped the bed, then RW shouldn't be off limits.

And just to be clear....I am Pro Russ, and am thankful that he is our QB.
 

Seymour

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
7,459
Reaction score
22
Ace_Rimmer":18ceulud said:
SoulfishHawk":18ceulud said:
He definitely was off on Sunday. Of course, he did take the team to what looked to be the game winning drive. As a whole, not a game that's up to par at all for him. Way too many jump balls too.

Agreed, but if we are going to rag on Bevell, and anyone else who has crapped the bed, then RW shouldn't be off limits.

And just to be clear....I am Pro Russ, and am thankful that he is our QB.

Agree. I often defend Russ, but in this game not so much. He was just plain off. I mean how does he even follow up the best game of his career with one of the worst (worst this season anyway). That is beyond the normal range of erratic. Much of that was handed to him from penalties, but his reaction to them trying to get it all on one play fed into the problems massively. He went from over throwing previously to under throwing, he went from running little to running often, just weird stuff like you'd expect from a Jekyll / Hyde QB.
3rd and 3-4 and we take another shot down field? What happened to move the chains?
 

SoulfishHawk

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
29,850
Reaction score
10,297
Location
Sammamish, WA
Good points. I'm in the stands on Sunday yelling "enough with jump balls!"
And clearly I am almost always in his corner. But when someone has a bad game, they are not above the criticism.
I suspect he'll be on point Thursday night.
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
1,797
TwistedHusky":2kg6sebn said:
The team under Pete is going to be what it is.

A team that can be very good in the regular season but will struggle to be consistent offensively because he cannot evaluate coordinators well. This was a problem at USC and followed him here. He struck gold with Quinn and parlayed it into a SB but it is what it is.

He is loyal to people despite their incompetence.

So we get a team won't really be a legit SB contender, but will look good in some regular season games.

The moment you accept it, you will end up enjoying the games more.

They can still beat some good teams, and even have some fun games like the one they just had against the Texans. But Pete has a philosophy that is a liability. I honestly believe there are several coaches that would win a SB with this roster. But Pete (and his staff) is not one of them, unless somehow we find another Quinn to mask Bevell's incompetence.

Yes, he won a SB ...long ago. But those days are over.
Like Swiss Cheese ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
1,797
mistaowen":2wm341l2 said:
The whole mentality doesn't work if the offense can't put up points when the defense creates short fields. Need to start seeing some 7's when the defense causes a turnover or three and out. No more returning the ball with their own 3 and out.

Get the lead, let the D be aggressive, make the other team take chances. No more 'feeling them out' for a half. And if the running game isn't working, let short/intermediate passes take its place.
Yep, even the short/intermediate passes will help to set up a run, which it turn helps to set up the deeper passes.
Without a Run push O-Line, & a Marshawn Lynch, Pete is going to have to rethink his Run First philosophy.
Defenses have been forced to make adjustments to Pete's Offensive/Defensive schemes, and they're finding some success....Now it's time for Pete to RE-adjust.
Also, why would you continue with the FUTILE Run on first downs.....ADJUST.
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
1,797
Seymour":3j6luex1 said:
Agree. I often defend Russ, but in this game not so much. He was just plain off. I mean how does he even follow up the best game of his career with one of the worst (worst this season anyway). That is beyond the normal range of erratic. Much of that was handed to him from penalties, but his reaction to them trying to get it all on one play fed into the problems massively. He went from over throwing previously to under throwing, he went from running little to running often, just weird stuff like you'd expect from a Jekyll / Hyde QB.
3rd and 3-4 and we take another shot down field? What happened to move the chains?
He looked like he was playing like he was caught completely off guard.....There was NO "Separation By Preparation", by that I mean, I don't think they game planned for the Redskins, and it bit them in the ass.
Redskins had their backs to the wall with an injury riddled offense AND Defense, so we appeared as though this game was a gimme, and that all we had to do was JUST SHOW UP.
Pete got embarrassed, and it showed in his Monday Press Conference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top