This weeks Fire Bevell Thread

[NJSeahawk]

Roland. Bevell was Harvin's OC in Minnesota. Why aren't you blaming the only variable that has changed? Pete.

I say we fire Bevell!

Interesting point, though.
Maybe this is exactly why he's calling safe plays for Harvin? I read that Harvin BLEW up at the coaches during the game, sulking for the rest of it.

 

[DavidSeven]

In 2012, he caught 0 passes thrown 21+ yards. Zero. In 2011, he caught two passes over 21+. By contrast, Jordy Nelson caught 13 passes over 21 yards last year. DeSean Jackson had 12 (9 @ 31+ yards). Sidney Rice had seven in his last healthy season in Seattle. Jermaine Kearse caught more deep throws last season (while barely starting) than Harvin did from 2011-2012.

Christian Ponder. See? It's a trump card. Unless you're trying to say Percy's the problem there, not the QB, lol. If so, justify it.

His completions above 21 yards in 2009 and 2010 were 5 and 6 with gunslingin' Favre. In two years with Favre, he caught a ball over 30 yards exactly 3 times, only ONCE above 40 yards. So, Favre got him the ball a few more times between 21-30. What's your point? Bevell was his OC during those years. You want Bevell to be more like Bevell?

21-30 ain't a deep threat. Zach Miller caught 3 balls on 21-30 passes last year. That's more than Harvin had in 2011-2012 combined and is basically around Harvin's career average. Maybe we should be utilizing Miller's "speed" deep on the outside. If a handful of targets above 21 yards means you're a deep threat in this league, then every single receiver in the NFL is a deep threat and so are most tight ends.

 

[SouthSoundHawk]

Enough shitty screen passes.

I can't even look at the word screen anymore without it looking stupid.

 

[DavidSeven]

The gadget plays were put in place for a reason. For all the special things he's able to do, Russell has thus far been fairly inept in empty formations, can't throw short middle or step up in a collapsing pocket. So, what do teams do? Load the box, blitz the run gaps, play press man on the outside. If you got halfway decent corners and can spy Wilson effectively, then it's a wrap for our offense so far. The Seahawks paid a king's ransom for Harvin and designed a playbook for him to address this exact issue. They saw this before any of you did. Not being able to get anything in the short middle is a huge handicap to the OC and our receivers. It dials up the degree of difficulty on every single play up to 11. Basically conceding downs on empty sets is unsustainable, and you can't scrap those from the playbook because no one's biting on play-action on 3rd and 5+. One work-around is to feature these gadget plays to compensate for our inability to get anything in the short middle.

If you take out the gadget plays and run play-action exclusively, then you got the exact same thing we saw at the end of last year. Teams copying the Arizona/St. Louis formula and our offense struggling to establish a quick-strike offense due to the QB's inability to hit short middle in an empty set on third down.

Based on how teams are now defending the Seahawks, please someone tell me how removing the gadget plays address anything? How does smashing Lynch into a 8-or-9 man box address anything? The solution, IMO, is to execute down the field. Be willing to throw quickly and be able to make the plays. That's an execution issue, not a design issue, and that's what will open everything else up.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Roland. Bevell was Harvin's OC in Minnesota. Why aren't you blaming the only variable that has changed? Pete.

That's a semi-valid point, but consider the facts. Harvin's first two years were with Favre...A QB notorious for doing what he wanted in Green Bay, and Childress let him run the show. Then Bevell came to us in 2011. Harvin spent one non-Favre year with Bevell prior to coming to Seattle. Just a thought; not to mention, we don't know how much of the offensive philosophy was controlled by the head coaches in Minnesota. (Harvin had both Childress and Frazier in Minnesota at different points.)

We know Pete dictates our overall offensive philosophy here, but as far as I know, nobody knows how much he goes past the general "be risk-averse and run a lot to setup play action" methodology in terms of what he asks his OC to do. If you know more than that, please provide links, as I'm honestly curious.

 

[MysterMatt]

nm

 

[MysterMatt]

Based on how teams are now defending the Seahawks, please someone tell me how removing the gadget plays address anything? How does smashing Lynch into a 8-or-9 man box address anything? The solution, IMO, is to execute down the field. Be willing to throw quickly and be able to make the plays. That's an execution issue, not a design issue, and that's what will open everything else up.

Because Lynch has the ability to get through the jam at the line and make big plays happen? Duh. But hey, by all means, let's just keep things the way they are...running primarily gadget plays...that's totally awesome.

But really, I concur on the execution bit as well. I really only think you're half wrong. We need to go back to run first and make 'em pay down the field, much like last year.

 

[TCHawkfan]

Is the slant even in our playbook?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I just linked you four anti-Bevell threads made in the main forum alone during the playoffs only in a year we won the Super Bowl; but yeah, clearly we only dislike Bevell after a loss. :roll:

You linked four out of like 200 Bevell threads, and two of them weren't even anti Bevell threads.

Open up the playbook? That's an anti Bevell thread.

I'm tired of Bevell being a scapegoat. You do know this is Pete's team right? Bevell doesn't wipe his ass without Pete giving him permission. So all this hate towards Bevell should be directed towards Pete, because HE'S the one that has final say on gameplans, offensive schemes and playcalling.

Some O-Coordinators do have autonomy in the league, but Bevell ain't one of them.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I'm tired of Bevell being a scapegoat. You do know this is Pete's team right? Bevell doesn't wipe his ass without Pete giving him permission. So all this hate towards Bevell should be directed towards Pete, because HE'S the one that has final say on gameplans, offensive schemes and playcalling.

Some O-Coordinators do have autonomy in the league, but Bevell ain't one of them.

Do you have any evidence of this whatsoever? Lol.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I'm tired of Bevell being a scapegoat. You do know this is Pete's team right? Bevell doesn't wipe his ass without Pete giving him permission. So all this hate towards Bevell should be directed towards Pete, because HE'S the one that has final say on gameplans, offensive schemes and playcalling.

Some O-Coordinators do have autonomy in the league, but Bevell ain't one of them.

Do you have any evidence of this whatsoever? Lol.

Yeah, watch Pete's press conference when he was hired when he said he came here because Allen gave him the perfect situation of having full autonomy and decision making over an entire franchise.

Do you honestly think Bevell is calling plays or devising game plans/offensive schemes that Pete hasn't approved first?

 

[Largent80]

Thats why I said Pete needs to be held accountable as well

 

[Ozzy]

Is the slant even in our playbook?

When we do throw short slants we seem to have some success with them. I think Harvin actually did catch one of them. I would love to see more of the intermediate 8-15 yard range throws in our offense.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Yeah, watch Pete's press conference when he was hired when he said he came here because Allen gave him the perfect situation of having full autonomy and decision making over an entire franchise.

Do you honestly think Bevell is calling plays or devising game plans/offensive schemes that Pete hasn't approved first?

You know how some teams have an owner that interferes with everything and keeps the franchise in the gutter, like the late Al Davis did for a good while, and like Jerry Jones has done for a long time with the Cowboys, and some owners just hire the best guys they can find and keep their hands off otherwise, like Paul Allen does?

All the owners have equal power, but some stick their hands in WAY more than others. My point here is, use your head - Pete has a ton of power, but that does NOT mean he controls everything to the finest detail. If you have evidence that he does, I want to see it. I honestly don't know if he does. I would like to know. It appears you are just making assumptions to back your opinion, but if you're not, I'd like to see evidence to the contrary.

Having power doesn't mean you are slapping everyone in the face with it.

 

[Ozzy]

Roland. Bevell was Harvin's OC in Minnesota. Why aren't you blaming the only variable that has changed? Pete.

I say we fire Bevell!

Interesting point, though.
Maybe this is exactly why he's calling safe plays for Harvin? I read that Harvin BLEW up at the coaches during the game, sulking for the rest of it.

Where did you see this?

 

[Sports Hernia]

After watching Bevell's crap play calling 5 out of every 6 games, it has me wishing for Bates back, words I thought I'd never say.

 

[DavidSeven]

Yes, we do throw slants, and we're terrible at them. Watching Russell's slant attempts last year was like getting your teeth pulled. Not sure why people are longing for them now. Short memories.

 

[bbsplitter]

I think we just need to go get Christian Ponder. He is the missing link to Harvins effectiveness. In Ponder we trust. :les:

 

[MysterMatt]

Yes, we do throw slants, and we're terrible at them. Watching Russell's slant attempts last year was like getting your teeth pulled. Not sure why people are longing for them now. Short memories.

I think the point is more that we need to come up with some quick-strike, high-percentage passing plays, ala the slant, as they will help keep defenses honest. In a previous post you said we simply can't do them. In this post you seem to say the same. I reject that. It may not be Russell's best skill, but to suggest it's impossible, to me, is way premature.

 

[bbsplitter]

Yes, we do throw slants, and we're terrible at them. Watching Russell's slant attempts last year was like getting your teeth pulled. Not sure why people are longing for them now. Short memories.

I think the point is more that we need to come up with some quick-strike, high-percentage passing plays, ala the slant, as they will help keep defenses honest. In a previous post you said we simply can't do them. In this post you seem to say the same. I reject that. It may not be Russell's best skill, but to suggest it's impossible, to me, is way premature.

From what I remember Russell has been fairly effective with slants? The only time I don't remember completions on them is when WR's would have a drop. We don't run them a lot tho so small sample size.