This weeks Fire Bevell Thread

Ozzy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
9,308
Reaction score
3,834
Without being in the building its hard to know how to split up the blame but regardless Largent80's point is spot on as is Rolands. I would also add its only one game and we were a couple of horrible calls from scoring 40+ on Washington the game before. They will right the ship and figure this out. Too smart and talented not to.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,137
Reaction score
969
Location
Kissimmee, FL
austinslater25":20vfllag said:
I would also add its only one game and we were a couple of horrible calls from scoring 40+ on Washington the game before.
I'll probably get lambasted for this, but I think that's due more to some good execution (I CAN FEEL THE HATRED, GUYS - STAHP!) on our part than anything else. Predictability on offense is a fairly consistent thing with us. You can be predictable on offense if you want, but it requires consistently great execution...Which is difficult, at best, to maintain in the NFL.
 

Anthony!

New member
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
4,050
Reaction score
0
Location
Kent, wa
DavidSeven":1cz062kg said:
Anthony!":1cz062kg said:
DavidSeven":1cz062kg said:
When T-Jack plays, he throws short middle. Yes, part of our avoidance of that area is probably on coaching. But it's not all of it.

Ahh when did Tjack play enough to know that in the regular season? not a great point here

When T-Jack was the starter, our slot receiver was the most productive receiver on the team. In Wilson's rookie year, the slot player (Baldwin) disappeared. Even now, he only gets targeted when either playing outside or running a pattern to the outside.

Not to say T-Jack is more complete. That would be a ridiculous statement.


ahh that was several years ago, different players, different philosophy. I mean why not go back to Hass really.
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
Here is my problem with saying Bevell needs to go.

It means Pete is an idiot for hiring him. Or for not firing him. And Pete is not an idiot.
 

hawksfansinceday1

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
24,629
Reaction score
3
Location
Vancouver, WA
DavidSeven":124uhtqm said:
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 get that you think RW is the biggest problem with the offense and maybe you're right but shit man, he threw some lasers on slants in XLVIII. He can and has made that throw. Re-watch it if you don't believe me.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,137
Reaction score
969
Location
Kissimmee, FL
Scottemojo":3baiwkk7 said:
Here is my problem with saying Bevell needs to go.

It means Pete is an idiot for hiring him. Or for not firing him. And Pete is not an idiot.
Nobody's perfect. The Ravens fired their OC between weeks 14 and 15 in 2012. They had some hiccups the next few games...Yet went on to win the Super Bowl.

Faulty logic, Scotte. It also assumes that the person in question has no capacity to ever get better (a bad hire could become a good hire over time) or worse. (Good hire can go downhill over time.)

Really, I'm surprised to see you even try to make that point. Not trying to be a jerk, but I know you're smarter than that.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,613
Scottemojo":wutebcnh said:
Here is my problem with saying Bevell needs to go.

It means Pete is an idiot for hiring him. Or for not firing him. And Pete is not an idiot.

You're using logic and reason, which have no place in this discussion.

Bevell has also been widely commended for creating an offense around one of the most uniquely gifted QB's to ever come out of college in Russell.............AND he's been on just about every team's shortlist for head coaching jobs each of the past 2-3 years.

But gosh darn it if we lose, it's Bevell's fault, not the guy who hired him, or the D-coordinator, or the O-line coach, or the players themselves. It's 80% Bevell, if only we'd have another O-coordinator then all our offense problems would be solved!
 
OP
OP
Largent80

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
Well, Pete said something yesterday that had me scratching my head when asked about the lack of using Lynch. He said something to the effect that we were in 3rd downs too much.

Why is that Pete?....because since we were playing a team that had not done well against the run, we decide to use Harvin as a decoy or RB?...He sounded like an idiot yesterday to me, and he was beaten down. I hope it was the latter and he uses it to inspire himself and his coaches to use our personnel correctly.
 

DavidSeven

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
5,742
Reaction score
0
hawksfansinceday1":16c1309i said:
DavidSeven":16c1309i said:
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 get that you think RW is the biggest problem with the offense and maybe you're right but shit man, he threw some lasers on slants in XLVIII. He can and has made that throw. Re-watch it if you don't believe me.

When did I say he was the biggest problem? I'm as big a Wilson defender as anyone on this forum. I don't even think this offense is that bad, and Wilson's playmaking ability often compensates for everything we lack at the skill positions. We just need to find a way to get things done against teams with above-average corners and disciplined ends. Because that's the formula for stymieing this offense right now.

People want to chuck the playbook. I don't think that's the answer. Wilson had a bad game. Tossing him out ain't the answer either. He needs to get comfortable making throws when teams can successfully execute an impersonation of the Arizona defense. Doesn't mean he needs to change his entire game for every opponent. That's an overreaction, just as firing our OC would be. We just gotta be able to put certain teams on their heels when they challenge us to do nothing but throw at one-on-ones. And again, some of that is also on scheming and our receivers.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,137
Reaction score
969
Location
Kissimmee, FL
Sgt. Largent":1lxduy7a said:
Scottemojo":1lxduy7a said:
Here is my problem with saying Bevell needs to go.

It means Pete is an idiot for hiring him. Or for not firing him. And Pete is not an idiot.

You're using logic and reason, which have no place in this discussion.
If that meets your definitions of "logic" and "reason", well, frankly...I'm terrified. :shock: No decision could ever be right at the time but turn out to be wrong later, or vice-versa, yeah?...

I mean...Seriously? You're killin' me, Smalls.
 
OP
OP
Largent80

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
Well, there seems to be like 2 people that think Bevell is "above reproach", or it isn't his fault or, whatever. I haven't seen a single argument changing my mind so far.

Get back to what we did vs. Green Bay, and keep doing it until someone figures out how to stop it.

XOXO

Merlin Olson.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,137
Reaction score
969
Location
Kissimmee, FL
Largent80":2l07nvty said:
Get back to what we did vs. Green Bay, and keep doing it until someone figures out how to stop it.
You know what's funny? That was almost all the first half only of Green Bay, too. We became fairly vanilla in the second half, but it didn't matter. Almost all of the creativity was in the first half.
 

Sgt. Largent

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2012
Messages
25,560
Reaction score
7,613
RolandDeschain":txpkev5r said:
Sgt. Largent":txpkev5r said:
Scottemojo":txpkev5r said:
Here is my problem with saying Bevell needs to go.

It means Pete is an idiot for hiring him. Or for not firing him. And Pete is not an idiot.

You're using logic and reason, which have no place in this discussion.
If that meets your definitions of "logic" and "reason", well, frankly...I'm terrified. :shock: No decision could ever be right at the time but turn out to be wrong later, or vice-versa, yeah?...

I mean...Seriously? You're killin' me, Smalls.

I was obviously being a smart ass, but I think it's naive to think all of our offensive woes lay at the feet of Bevell, or even the majority of them.

Football is a complicated team game that requires many moving parts to all come together in order to be successful. Ownership, head coach, assistant coaches, players, desire, teamwork, continuity, health.........and even a little luck thrown in.

I do not think Bevell is absolved from responsibility when we have a poor offensive game, but I'm tired of seeing him get 90% of the blame, when in reality it's the sum of all the offensive parts most of the time when our offense struggles.......as well as at the feet of our head coach for not getting his players prepared.
 

hawksfansinceday1

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
24,629
Reaction score
3
Location
Vancouver, WA
Largent80":35sc6wt7 said:
Well, there seems to be like 2 people that think Bevell is "above reproach", or it isn't his fault or, whatever. I haven't seen a single argument changing my mind so far.

Get back to what we did vs. Green Bay, and keep doing it until someone figures out how to stop it.

XOXO

Merlin Olson.
XOXO

Lamar Lundy
 

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
Before we bash Bevell, we have to remember that he has one of the most difficult OC jobs in the NFL. Though Wilson is very talented, the combination of his height disadvantage, a bottom ten pass protecting line, his tendency to hold the ball, the inability of our receivers to get open on scrambles, and Wilson's hesitancy to throw to open receivers if they are not open enough makes passing the football very difficult, especially when you play in the NFL's best defensive division with a bunch of brilliant DC's who know how to attack your passing game.

To counter these issues, Bevell has implemented a new offense designed to work around these problems. And when he's remembered to hand the ball to Lynch 20+ times and take 3-4 shots deep a game , the offense has looked amazing.

Unfortunately, Bevell has at times been guilty of trying too hard. Too many trick plays. Too much manufacturing of yards. His offense this year is almost Chip Kelly-like, and Chip Kelly offenses tend to run hot and cold. And when they fail to hit on all cylinders, it's impossible to control a game.

It feels like this season, a premium has been put on scoring at the expense of control. Seattle is doing a pretty good job scoring, but they've conceded too much control in the process. They need to get some of that control back, and that starts by getting Lynch his 20+ carries every game.

It may be an unpopular opinion but I think Bevell has done a pretty good job this season with the exception of the most recent game. He needs to get our offense back to being a controlling unit, and he also needs to start tailoring his game plan more to what opposing defenses give him. But I think if he makes those adjustments, offense will be the least of our worries this season.
 
OP
OP
Largent80

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
kearly":padyyfn5 said:
He needs to get our offense back to being a controlling unit, and he also needs to start tailoring his game plan more to what opposing defenses give him. But I think if he makes those adjustments, offense will be the least of our worries this season.

He should have done that for Dallas, which is why I am not happy with him. They were giving up large rushing numbers and we artsy fartsed around and lost an important home game.

He doesn't get a "pass" from this fan.
 

DavidSeven

New member
Joined
Jan 18, 2013
Messages
5,742
Reaction score
0
The NFL is a constant, never-ending chess match. On paper, you see that the Dallas Cowboys are giving up rushing yards and that Seattle is a run-first team. So, you expect Seattle to run up the gut on Dallas, except that Dallas knows that this could be the plan and has decided to sell out to stop the run at all costs. However, Seattle anticipates this move and works in some plays to exploit what they expect Dallas to give them in the passing game.

Unfortunately, sometimes those plays don't end up working due to good individual defensive plays or poor execution by the offense. Before you know it, your run/pass ratios are out of whack and you can't convert a single 3rd down to get your RB some more carries. A game plan can look great on paper (and get Pete Carroll's approval stamp), but the players still need to execute. Going into the game, I thought Russell could get a lot by air because I figured Dallas would sell out to stop Lynch like Denver did. He didn't get it done. Sometimes the game just breaks that way. Oh well.

Did they get too cute? Yeah, probably. But to call it sheer incompetence is taking it too far. As Scotte and Sgt. have alluded to, to call Bevell incompetent is to call Pete Carroll incompetent. Remember folks, Pete Carroll is the one we hear is in Bevell's ear to implement gadget college plays -- it was his idea to implement read-option, his idea to run Harvin on jet sweeps, his idea to run the Auburn play against Green Bay. You don't think Pete loves these gadget plays when they're workin'? Then you don't know Big Balls Pete.
 
OP
OP
Largent80

Largent80

New member
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
36,653
Reaction score
5
Location
The Tex-ASS
One good thing is Bevell is green conscious and rides a bike to work.

People heard him screaming "Drat Harvin and our little QB too"!!!!!

Ip1Tjcz
 
Top