Bevell play calling

Couldn't control myself in starting another Bevell thread. My question (or concern) is why do we constantly when faced with a 3rd or 4th down play have the receiver catching the ball before reaching the 1st down line? This happened at least a few times last week and just don't get it. A buddy of mine was blaming the receiver however it seems that this is the way the palay is being called and is meant to be caught prior to the 1st down marker. Seems absolutely idiotic to me because instead of just catching the ball past the marker you must now catch the ball and get across the 1st down marker where many of the defenders are just waiting there to stop you and kill the play.

I just don't get the logic. Bevell.

seabowl":ml2zpbx5 said:

Couldn't control myself in starting another Bevell thread. My question (or concern) is why do we constantly when faced with a 3rd or 4th down play have the receiver catching the ball before reaching the 1st down line? This happened at least a few times last week and just don't get it. A buddy of mine was blaming the receiver however it seems that this is the way the palay is being called and is meant to be caught prior to the 1st down marker. Seems absolutely idiotic to me because instead of just catching the ball past the marker you must now catch the ball and get across the 1st down marker where many of the defenders are just waiting there to stop you and kill the play.

I just don't get the logic. Bevell.

Click to expand...

Ball safety.

mrt144":39bjm5kt said:

seabowl":39bjm5kt said:

Couldn't control myself in starting another Bevell thread. My question (or concern) is why do we constantly when faced with a 3rd or 4th down play have the receiver catching the ball before reaching the 1st down line? This happened at least a few times last week and just don't get it. A buddy of mine was blaming the receiver however it seems that this is the way the palay is being called and is meant to be caught prior to the 1st down marker. Seems absolutely idiotic to me because instead of just catching the ball past the marker you must now catch the ball and get across the 1st down marker where many of the defenders are just waiting there to stop you and kill the play.

I just don't get the logic. Bevell.

Click to expand...

Ball safety.

Click to expand...

That's right, the defenders are keeping the play in front of them, they know where you have to go. Ideally, you want to find a spot, or seam if you will, in the zone to get the 1st but often you just have to take what they give you. Trying to force the issue can risk an INT (ball safety). But I don't always see that, there are plenty of downfield first down passes.

dogorama":2u402off said:

mrt144":2u402off said:

seabowl":2u402off said:

Couldn't control myself in starting another Bevell thread. My question (or concern) is why do we constantly when faced with a 3rd or 4th down play have the receiver catching the ball before reaching the 1st down line? This happened at least a few times last week and just don't get it. A buddy of mine was blaming the receiver however it seems that this is the way the palay is being called and is meant to be caught prior to the 1st down marker. Seems absolutely idiotic to me because instead of just catching the ball past the marker you must now catch the ball and get across the 1st down marker where many of the defenders are just waiting there to stop you and kill the play.

I just don't get the logic. Bevell.

Click to expand...

Ball safety.

Click to expand...

That's right, the defenders are keeping the play in front of them, they know where you have to go. Ideally, you want to find a spot, or seam if you will, in the zone to get the 1st but often you just have to take what they give you. Trying to force the issue can risk an INT (ball safety). But I don't always see that, there are plenty of downfield first down passes.

Click to expand...

No offense but not buying it. With a QB like Russ you have to put trust in him to choose who and when to throw to.

seabowl":3fnkp5g6 said:

dogorama":3fnkp5g6 said:

That's right, the defenders are keeping the play in front of them, they know where you have to go. Ideally, you want to find a spot, or seam if you will, in the zone to get the 1st but often you just have to take what they give you. Trying to force the issue can risk an INT (ball safety). But I don't always see that, there are plenty of downfield first down passes.

Click to expand...

No offense but not buying it. With a QB like Russ you have to put trust in him to choose who and when to throw to.

Click to expand...

I'm with Dogo again on this one. It's the receiver's responsibility to get open beyond the stick. If he's not able to do that you take what you can and hope your guy can get over the line.

This has nothing to do with play design and everything to do with when & were the receiver uncovers.

Two cents.

"And again... we call a pass play behind the line of scrimmage."

I find myself saying that so many times it feels like a mantra.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's definitely part of the routine.

HawkAroundTheClock":2s5m1yn1 said:

"And again... we call a pass play behind the line of scrimmage."

I find myself saying that so many times it feels like a mantra.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's definitely part of the routine.

Click to expand...

I think you mean the line to gain...

Yep... Like the time they threw for a big downfield play on fourth down to save the game vs Miami.

Or the big third down conversion vs Green Bay in the NFCCG when they also threw downfield on a brilliantly designed call and one play later scored on a downfield bomb to win the game.

But yeah... That doesn't chime with the Bevell obsession.

Rob I've been critical of Bevell at times(also think he is great at certain elements of being an OC) but sometimes my bias gets the best of me and I don't see some of the examples that work against my bias. Thanks for keeping me in line, I need it.

Bevell is a lot of good and a little bit of baffling at times but overall he probably does much better than me or many others want to admit.

LymonHawk":2um5yksi said:

seabowl":2um5yksi said:

dogorama":2um5yksi said:

That's right, the defenders are keeping the play in front of them, they know where you have to go. Ideally, you want to find a spot, or seam if you will, in the zone to get the 1st but often you just have to take what they give you. Trying to force the issue can risk an INT (ball safety). But I don't always see that, there are plenty of downfield first down passes.

Click to expand...

No offense but not buying it. With a QB like Russ you have to put trust in him to choose who and when to throw to.

Click to expand...

I'm with Dogo again on this one. It's the receiver's responsibility to get open beyond the stick. If he's not able to do that you take what you can and hope your guy can get over the line.

This has nothing to do with play design and everything to do with when & were the receiver uncovers.

Two cents.

Click to expand...

Agree with both of you. Not a Bevell fan (empty backfield on 4th and inches!), but this isn't on him. Russ is going to his open option and hoping the receiver can make a play.

Remember there are multiple routes being run on any given play to different parts of the field. Is the criticism that none of our routes should include short concept stuff? If so, why should the defense bother covering the first ten yards at all? The "everybody run 15 yards downfield" idea isn't a good one.

If you're OK with our offense doing what every other offense in college or professional football does then it comes down to execution. When the QB makes the snap decision to hit the short route he does so because he thinks there's space for the receiver to get the first down. Often that requires an accurate throw that can hit the receiver in stride and then it's up to the receiver to get the YAC necessary.

If it doesn't work then who should we blame? Nobody, most of the time. It's hard to convert third and long against NFL caliber defensive backs and they make plays too. How many times have you seen our defense hold the opponent to 8 yards on a third and 10? Did you credit our defense or just think we were lucky their play caller was stupid enough to include a short route on that play? I guarantee you there was a Captain Hindsight fan for the opposing team frustrated that his team didn't throw downfield further, even though every other route was further downfield but just well covered by our DBs.

theENGLISHseahawk":1vfcli1e said:

Yep... Like the time they threw for a big downfield play on fourth down to save the game vs Miami.

Or the big third down conversion vs Green Bay in the NFCCG when they also threw downfield on a brilliantly designed call and one play later scored on a downfield bomb to win the game.

But yeah... That doesn't chime with the Bevell obsession.

Click to expand...

Or the times they threw downfield on 3rd and 2, missed, and lost the game because the other offense got back on the field too much.

Bevell's gambling is a double-edged sword. He doesn't take the highest-percentage route consistently, and that's why I remain steadfastly a critic of his situational play-calling.

MontanaHawk05":1jxqgggd said:

theENGLISHseahawk":1jxqgggd said:

Yep... Like the time they threw for a big downfield play on fourth down to save the game vs Miami.

Or the big third down conversion vs Green Bay in the NFCCG when they also threw downfield on a brilliantly designed call and one play later scored on a downfield bomb to win the game.

But yeah... That doesn't chime with the Bevell obsession.

Click to expand...

Or the times they threw downfield on 3rd and 2, missed, and lost the game because the other offense got back on the field too much.

Bevell's gambling is a double-edged sword. He doesn't take the highest-percentage route consistently, and that's why I remain steadfastly a critic of his situational play-calling.

Click to expand...

Good find Montana, Thanks!

MontanaHawk05":1v5bj6bg said:

theENGLISHseahawk":1v5bj6bg said:

Yep... Like the time they threw for a big downfield play on fourth down to save the game vs Miami.

Or the big third down conversion vs Green Bay in the NFCCG when they also threw downfield on a brilliantly designed call and one play later scored on a downfield bomb to win the game.

But yeah... That doesn't chime with the Bevell obsession.

Click to expand...

Or the times they threw downfield on 3rd and 2, missed, and lost the game because the other offense got back on the field too much.

Bevell's gambling is a double-edged sword. He doesn't take the highest-percentage route consistently, and that's why I remain steadfastly a critic of his situational play-calling.

Click to expand...

Again, many times the play is there and open, but not executed properly or a defender makes a great play and we punt. But if you unbiasedly look at the total body of work, Bevell has been a key cog in making our offense one of the league's most proficient in the last 5 years. I'll take that any day.

Siouxhawk":151cm2rl said:

Again, many times the play is there and open, but not executed properly or a defender makes a great play and we punt. But if you unbiasedly look at the total body of work, Bevell has been a key cog in making our offense one of the league's most proficient in the last 5 years. I'll take that any day.

Click to expand...

I think you might be confusing people taking issue w/ situational play calling, with saying he hasn't done anything positive.

Laloosh":12px790i said:

Siouxhawk":12px790i said:

Again, many times the play is there and open, but not executed properly or a defender makes a great play and we punt. But if you unbiasedly look at the total body of work, Bevell has been a key cog in making our offense one of the league's most proficient in the last 5 years. I'll take that any day.

Click to expand...

I think you might be confusing people taking issue w/ situational play calling, with saying he hasn't done anything positive.

Click to expand...

Sure. A situational play call on a third and 2. Overall, I believe more often than not that we succeed on those third and 2s than the majority of the league and I'll do my best Kirk Cousins in saying I like that.

HawkAroundTheClock":1drza539 said:

"And again... we call a pass play behind the line of scrimmage."

I find myself saying that so many times it feels like a mantra.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's definitely part of the routine.

Click to expand...

I was ready to throw my beer through the TV at that terrible lob pass behind the line on 4th and 1. Never had a chance.

But that's on Russell as much as it is on Bevell. Many times Russell changes the play, even on 4th down if he sees something..........like 9 dudes in the box to stop our quick FB hit on 4th down.

I'm not the biggest Bevell fan, but let's not forget who's behind center changing some of these plays........and in year 5? MANY of these plays.

seabowl":24tahv1d said:

Couldn't control myself in starting another Bevell thread. My question (or concern) is why do we constantly when faced with a 3rd or 4th down play have the receiver catching the ball before reaching the 1st down line?

Click to expand...

This is too anecdotal. Seems like, feels like. Need specifics. Show all of the 3rd downs. Show the play call. Show the defense. Results (which aren't offered either) aren't proof. There are legitimate reasons why throwing short could be the correct play. But without context there's no basis to discuss further.

If you want to make that claim, then make your case. Then let others pick it apart. Right now this is just subjective opinion. Which nobody can intelligently agree with. Maybe you are on to something here. But without any effort to justify the claim it's not worth examining.

Sgt. Largent":2nepijm8 said:

HawkAroundTheClock":2nepijm8 said:

"And again... we call a pass play behind the line of scrimmage."

I find myself saying that so many times it feels like a mantra.

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but it's definitely part of the routine.

Click to expand...

I was ready to throw my beer through the TV at that terrible lob pass behind the line on 4th and 1. Never had a chance.

But that's on Russell as much as it is on Bevell. Many times Russell changes the play, even on 4th down if he sees something..........like 9 dudes in the box to stop our quick FB hit on 4th down.

I'm not the biggest Bevell fan, but let's not forget who's behind center changing some of these plays........and in year 5? MANY of these plays.

Click to expand...

Sarge, if the 4th down in question is the one I believe you're referring to, it was a play that began as an empty backfield set. Russ didn't check into that set. Bevell called a play with that set.

That said, Russ's execution/choice of receiver is definitely in question as well. But wouldn't it be easier to be successful with that play if there was at least the threat of a run on 4th and inches?

I think a logical critique of certain sets and plays would be enforced by having concrete data on the number of times the set and play has been run and then extrapolating the success rate. Attylla referenced this. Otherwise it's as tangible as the proverbial fart in the wind.