Seahawks.NET AMAZON STOREFRONT

Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking

The Essential Online Seattle Football Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. LANGUAGE RATING: PG-13
Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:46 pm
  • Scorpion05 wrote:
    It's not delusional. What you are doing is picking apart one part of the game

    We dominated time of possession. So if the turnovers reflect that we didn't hold the ball for long, that means that when we didn't have turnovers the offense operated on a solid level. Otherwise, we wouldn't have dominated time of possession for much of the game. Then we stalled on some drives which evened it out a bit

    Wade Phillips adjustments plus Pete's conservative approach when we have a lead is why we weren't aggressive. Pete would rather punt than risk a turnover

    So yes, it's nice we had 5 turnovers. We also turned over the ball twice. But overall, despite that the offense DID convert third downs for much of the game and control the tempo. That is not delusional, that is an objective, fair, logical analysis of the game


    We won time of possession by 2 minutes and 32 seconds and we were +3 on turnovers. We had 15 1st downs on 13 possessions. Excuse me while I pinch myself.
    BEVELL IS THE DEVIL
    User avatar
    bevellisthedevil
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1164
    Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:43 pm
    Location: davenport


Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 6:58 pm
  • Just say again, Rams with zero O did same thing to us for years. Completely happy about O today, absolutely not. But they did sustain drives at times to spell the D. I mean we actually got a first down on initial drive of the game, thats exorcist head spinning kinda like actually splitting Jimmy out wide in single coverage on the goal line. I can live with the last drive to hit last field goal with time and the way D was playing. The 2 worst plays, IMO, were Rawls completely not recognizing his role on pre half drive and the 3rd and 2 after Earls pick. What happened to read option? Russ doesn't have to take it 99% of time but at least keeps D honest, helps O line, and opens actual RB yardage.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    User avatar
    DJ_CJ
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 217
    Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:48 pm
    Location: Cedar Rapids, IA


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 7:00 pm
  • DJ_CJ wrote:
    Threedee wrote:If firing Bevell midseason is a problem, there was always the offseason. And last offseason. And the offseason before that. Bevell didn't just start to be a cretinous moron yesterday.


    ^^ firing midseason makes zero sense... who takes over? And now a completely different scheme on the fly? Just use that 6'7" in seam routes instead of underneath/check down rights please.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    So, move away from Bevell's play-calling with Bevell?
    "We have an opportunity to win multiple Super Bowls."
    -Russell Wilson
    User avatar
    Threedee
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1502
    Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 5:08 pm
    Location: Federal Way, WA


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:04 pm
  • Bevell probably called one of his better overall games. The offense got just enough key first downs and sustained drives in the first half that allowed our D to get enough of a rest to play well in the second half. I did get worried with all the 3 and outs in the late stages of the game, but the Rams have a terrific D themselves. Thankfully our D had just enough left in the tank to finish out the game.

    If our OL can suck a little less each game (looking at you, Odhiambo) there is hope.

    Bevell was not the problem today. They tore up the script that they used in Tennessee, thank God.

    I'll take it.
    2017 Adopt-A-Rookie: Chris Carson
    User avatar
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1824
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:03 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:04 pm
  • Delusional? I think the real head-scratcher is the usual sect of supposed know-it-alls who bellyache right away in the aftermath of a game you could sense us taking control of. And a big game at that. Time after time Bevell called successful plays to move the chains and grind the clock. This while operating behind a line that sometimes looked superb and gave Russ loads of protection, other times inexplicably whiffing on a blitz that left Russ a sitting duck.

    Just have to say that the stance of those grumbling like this is hard to take serious anymore.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:08 pm
  • Siouxhawk wrote:Time after time Bevell called successful plays to move the chains and grind the clock .


    I raughed out roud reading this gem.
    Aw Mang
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 47
    Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 7:12 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:15 pm
  • Aw Mang wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:Time after time Bevell called successful plays to move the chains and grind the clock .


    I raughed out roud reading this gem.

    I like to "raugh" too after a hard-earned division road win.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:16 pm
  • Recall in the second half we had a first down stolen from us by the refs on the phantom phony OPI call on Tanner McEvoy. That looked to be the start of a good drive. Stolen. Bad reffing is not under Bevell's control. It was a good play and play call stolen by a bogus call.
    2017 Adopt-A-Rookie: Chris Carson
    User avatar
    olyfan63
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1824
    Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 2:03 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:28 pm
  • Siouxhawk wrote:Delusional? I think the real head-scratcher is the usual sect of supposed know-it-alls who bellyache right away in the aftermath of a game you could sense us taking control of. And a big game at that. Time after time Bevell called successful plays to move the chains and grind the clock. This while operating behind a line that sometimes looked superb and gave Russ loads of protection, other times inexplicably whiffing on a blitz that left Russ a sitting duck.

    Just have to say that the stance of those grumbling like this is hard to take serious anymore.


    You could sense us taking control of the game? We won because a rookie dropped a pass in the end zone that he would probably catch 7 or 8 out of 10 times. That is not "taking control of the game." That is sheer luck. And we needed it even after 5 takeaways. If I am on this defense, I am PISSED.
    Send Lawyers, Guns and Money!
    GO 'HAWKS!!
    User avatar
    WmHBonney
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 932
    Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:11 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:40 pm
  • Siouxhawk wrote:Delusional? I think the real head-scratcher is the usual sect of supposed know-it-alls who bellyache right away in the aftermath of a game you could sense us taking control of. And a big game at that. Time after time Bevell called successful plays to move the chains and grind the clock. This while operating behind a line that sometimes looked superb and gave Russ loads of protection, other times inexplicably whiffing on a blitz that left Russ a sitting duck.

    Just have to say that the stance of those grumbling like this is hard to take serious anymore.


    The same names are also attached to posts saying we had "no chance" to beat the Rams today, and that posters were "delusional" who believed the Hawks might actually have a chance--just see the score predictions thread! Claims from such posters should be suspect from the start from now on because what they are "sure" of is only in their own minds, not reality. This was proven today. I thoroughly enjoyed the win today, and it should deflate the hubris of some around here who think they know best; they don't.

    The O played very conservatively to preserve the great work the D was doing (until that last drive). People may not like this philosophy, but it earned a win against a strong Rams team. Absolutely no reason exists to upset the apple cart mis-season.
    ____________
    BLUE and GREEN...
    User avatar
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1517
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:25 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:49 pm
  • bevellisthedevil wrote:13 possessions - 241 yards for an average of 18.5 yards per possession and a grand total of 16 points. In addition, the defense got the ball back to the offense with 5 turnovers.

    Turnover #1 - We got the ball at our own 20 8 plays 29 yards punt
    Turnover #2 - we got the ball at their 30 4 plays 15 yards intercepted
    Turnover #2- We got the ball at our own 29 3 plays -2 yards punt
    Turnover #3 We got the ball at their 46 3 plays 8 yards punt
    Turnover #4 We got the ball at their 20 4 plays 3 yards field goal YESSSS! a field goal

    So we get 5 turnovers and run a total of 22 plays and gain 53 yards and score 1 field goal and somehow the offense did its job? There are way too many delusional people on this site. Its entertaining but delusional.

    How is any of that acceptable to anyone? How is 5 turnovers, 3 in Rams territory and netting 3 total points even remotely close to acceptable?


    Sad thing is the defense and special teams literally set them up for 6 points at least, and they couldnt even do that right. And also had a turnover which put the rams in FG range I believe.

    Also outside of the last 2 drives before the half and the drive after the half the offense was so bad.....taking those 3 out...

    6 plays 4 yards 2:56 PUNT
    8 plays 29 yards 4:16 PUNT
    1 Play 0 yards :11 INT
    3 Plays 3 yards 1:47 PUNT
    4 Plays 15 yards 2:01 INT
    3 plays -2 yards 2:20 PUNT
    3 plays 3 yards 1:03 PUNT
    3 plays 8 yards 1:45 PUNT
    4 plays 3 yards 1:37 FG

    You guys have GOT to be kidding me with being happy about this offensive performance. This is the same crap that happens almost every game. Defense keeps us in it, or gets turnovers and the offense usually does JUST ENOUGH to win the game, with like, 2 drives, usually at the end of the half or end of the game. Its pissing me off

    SEVEN DRIVES that didnt even get 10 yards, ONLY ONE OF THOSE past 5 yards

    Our offense decided to only show up for last half of the 2nd quarter and starting 3rd quarter. Outside of that they were on a milk carton.. MISSING
    Last edited by WilsonMVP on Sun Oct 08, 2017 9:05 pm, edited 4 times in total.
    Image

    "Jed York does not own the 49ers; Russell Wilson does"
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2477
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:55 pm
  • Ad Hawk wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:Delusional? I think the real head-scratcher is the usual sect of supposed know-it-alls who bellyache right away in the aftermath of a game you could sense us taking control of. And a big game at that. Time after time Bevell called successful plays to move the chains and grind the clock. This while operating behind a line that sometimes looked superb and gave Russ loads of protection, other times inexplicably whiffing on a blitz that left Russ a sitting duck.

    Just have to say that the stance of those grumbling like this is hard to take serious anymore.


    The same names are also attached to posts saying we had "no chance" to beat the Rams today, and that posters were "delusional" who believed the Hawks might actually have a chance--just see the score predictions thread! Claims from such posters should be suspect from the start from now on because what they are "sure" of is only in their own minds, not reality. This was proven today. I thoroughly enjoyed the win today, and it should deflate the hubris of some around here who think they know best; they don't.

    The O played very conservatively to preserve the great work the D was doing (until that last drive). People may not like this philosophy, but it earned a win against a strong Rams team. Absolutely no reason exists to upset the apple cart mis-season.


    I think there's a reasonable middle ground there. Bevell deserves some flame and many times i think it's perfectly justified for folks here to question what they see.

    But i agree that to come after him after excellent performances the past two weeks may prove an unfair, illogical bias.

    But beware of the''some around here think they know best'' rhetoric because I for one called bevell out hard three weeks ago.

    I stated the below in numerous threads:

    Why can't we ever develop a quick passing game?. It's the obvious answer to our O line.

    Why can't we develop a decent 50/50 ball between Russ and Jimmy?. Why was Russ throwing jump balls for Jimmy three yards out of bounds when that's the easiest pass in football?. Had it not been practiced?

    Why was Lockett virtually invisible as a receiver?. Why not even 1 jet sweep?. Why isn't the ball getting into the hands of the fastest guy on the field until garbage time?

    Among other things... And right there i see three things that essentially moved the ball and won the game for us.

    Do I not know the obvious, ie, best?. And I'll tell you there are people throwing shade smarter than me for sure.
    Optimus25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1357
    Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:16 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Sun Oct 08, 2017 11:45 pm
  • Lockett did have a jet sweep that got a first down. I think it was on the TD drive.

    Also, does anyone really feel like we had control of the game. Don't get me wrong, I'm stoked that we won, but it came down to the last play. If the O could have got one first down on the penultimate or last possessions, we would've iced the game. It didn't happen though.

    The whole Bevell calling the plays that helped us grind out the points in the second quarter isn't fully true. Wilson was pulling first downs out of his ass on that drive. It was incredible but also really sad to see how damn difficult operating in this offense is for him. Seriously, it seemed like Goff had lots of options on most plays and could move through his reads to convert quite a few 3rd and longs. I get he had a bad day overall, but you can see the difference in the previous games this season. Whenever Russ drops back it just doesn't seem easy to find a completion at all on 75% of the plays. I don't know why it is that way but I wish it wasn't
    adeltaY
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 286
    Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 8:22 pm
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 4:42 am
  • Bevell was good at times yesterday (thought the TD drive in the 2nd was awesome), and he was downright awful at times yesterday (the last couple possessions to close out the game were a joke). The offense still stinks and I dont think anybody can deny that. As great as the D played yesterday, it still took us a miracle drop by a Rams WR for us to even win. Thats the scary part. We were never in control of that game and we should have been.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:08 am
  • bevellisthedevil wrote:
    Scorpion05 wrote:
    It's not delusional. What you are doing is picking apart one part of the game

    We dominated time of possession. So if the turnovers reflect that we didn't hold the ball for long, that means that when we didn't have turnovers the offense operated on a solid level. Otherwise, we wouldn't have dominated time of possession for much of the game. Then we stalled on some drives which evened it out a bit

    Wade Phillips adjustments plus Pete's conservative approach when we have a lead is why we weren't aggressive. Pete would rather punt than risk a turnover

    So yes, it's nice we had 5 turnovers. We also turned over the ball twice. But overall, despite that the offense DID convert third downs for much of the game and control the tempo. That is not delusional, that is an objective, fair, logical analysis of the game


    We won time of possession by 2 minutes and 32 seconds and we were +3 on turnovers. We had 15 1st downs on 13 possessions. Excuse me while I pinch myself.



    Yes, against a defense we always struggle against

    The Dallas Cowboys, with their weapons, RB, and O-line struggled in the 2nd half because guess what? Wade Phillips has been great against almost every team he's faced so far with adjustments

    Our offense talent wise is overmatched by the Rams defense. We did an adequate job and won an ugly game. You should pinch yourself because your observation isn't reflective of the rest of the NFL. Teams win ugly games like this even with that kind of turnover margin
    Scorpion05
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 213
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:05 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:27 am
  • pittpnthrs wrote:Bevell was good at times yesterday (thought the TD drive in the 2nd was awesome), and he was downright awful at times yesterday (the last couple possessions to close out the game were a joke). The offense still stinks and I dont think anybody can deny that. As great as the D played yesterday, it still took us a miracle drop by a Rams WR for us to even win. Thats the scary part. We were never in control of that game and we should have been.


    That was all Wilson. I have never seen a drive that was so hard. Despite the OC RW willed that ball in tho the endzone.
    User avatar
    Smellyman
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4014
    Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 6:58 pm
    Location: Taipei


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:35 am
  • BigMeach wrote:Can someone please tell me a point in todays game where Bevell called a bad play? Actually since it's such a point of contension I'd expect 10 specific, easy to point out, bad play calls per game.

    The only issue I saw today was the offensive execution and RW making some bad throws. While I agree that Bevell iritates the hell out of me sometimes, a lot of people here act like replacing him would suddenly make our offense amazing.



    The play calling at the end of the game when you have a chance to finish them was absolutely embarrassing. 2 runs and short throw no where near the end zone. They decided to play it really safe, settle for the field goal and put their defense in a must stop situation. It was a horrible idea that was bailed out by a missed TD from Cupp. I really do think replacing Bevell would instantly breathe life into the offense. Pete is too loyal and stubborn at this point to admit and I love Pete as much as anyone but he dropped the ball and continues to drop the ball here.
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6324
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:39 am
  • Siouxhawk wrote:We controlled the rhythm and tempo of the game. Had some really nice drives that gave us a time of possession big advantage and good field position. Defense had plenty of rest and oftentimes started with the Rams' backs to their own endzone. Ultimately the defense was tasked with protecting the lead and they did that. If you've paid attention to the Seahawks, that's how we produce wins.


    Sioux were you ok with the last offensive possession? I have a dozen or more really smart football guys that were absolutely baffled by the play calling there when you could of sealed a win. I know you love Bevell but I think you admitting when he does make mistakes would go a long way in people being more receptive of what he does do right.
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6324
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:40 am
  • WilsonMVP wrote:
    bevellisthedevil wrote:13 possessions - 241 yards for an average of 18.5 yards per possession and a grand total of 16 points. In addition, the defense got the ball back to the offense with 5 turnovers.

    Turnover #1 - We got the ball at our own 20 8 plays 29 yards punt
    Turnover #2 - we got the ball at their 30 4 plays 15 yards intercepted
    Turnover #2- We got the ball at our own 29 3 plays -2 yards punt
    Turnover #3 We got the ball at their 46 3 plays 8 yards punt
    Turnover #4 We got the ball at their 20 4 plays 3 yards field goal YESSSS! a field goal

    So we get 5 turnovers and run a total of 22 plays and gain 53 yards and score 1 field goal and somehow the offense did its job? There are way too many delusional people on this site. Its entertaining but delusional.

    How is any of that acceptable to anyone? How is 5 turnovers, 3 in Rams territory and netting 3 total points even remotely close to acceptable?


    Sad thing is the defense and special teams literally set them up for 6 points at least, and they couldnt even do that right. And also had a turnover which put the rams in FG range I believe.

    Also outside of the last 2 drives before the half and the drive after the half the offense was so bad.....taking those 3 out...

    6 plays 4 yards 2:56 PUNT
    8 plays 29 yards 4:16 PUNT
    1 Play 0 yards :11 INT
    3 Plays 3 yards 1:47 PUNT
    4 Plays 15 yards 2:01 INT
    3 plays -2 yards 2:20 PUNT
    3 plays 3 yards 1:03 PUNT
    3 plays 8 yards 1:45 PUNT
    4 plays 3 yards 1:37 FG

    You guys have GOT to be kidding me with being happy about this offensive performance. This is the same crap that happens almost every game. Defense keeps us in it, or gets turnovers and the offense usually does JUST ENOUGH to win the game, with like, 2 drives, usually at the end of the half or end of the game. Its pissing me off

    SEVEN DRIVES that didnt even get 10 yards, ONLY ONE OF THOSE past 5 yards

    Our offense decided to only show up for last half of the 2nd quarter and starting 3rd quarter. Outside of that they were on a milk carton.. MISSING


    What you said is accurate, except for the whole leaving out 3 good drives thing you just did

    Most teams win based on just that. 3 or 4 good drives. Most football games end in a score of say, 17-10, or in the low 20s. Every now and then, both teams score 30. So what would have been adequate for you, maybe one more TD? Fine, that'd be great

    We scored 16 points. So basically your logic is, because we didn't score 28, or 30, our offense is horrible? It needs work sure, all I'm saying is...let's not pretend as if this was a 9-3 game. The score card is pretty common with what happens across the league consistently. This does not mean some of us are satisfied, of course we have a high scoring offense. A high scoring offense would make us a perfect team. But let's not pretend as if us not scoring almost 30 points is out of the norm

    What I was truly disappointed in was the last drive. We should have iced the game. That was pitiful
    Last edited by Scorpion05 on Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
    Scorpion05
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 213
    Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:05 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 7:40 am
  • TwistedHusky wrote:I would love to see this team with a competent OC.

    I wonder if half of Wilson's supposed problems are the result of having such an incompetent OC.

    The only guy on the offense worth a damn is Baldwin. The rest I could take or leave.

    But I think it is more the result of the guy calling the plays than the guy running them on the field.

    This was a great game by the Defense and another example of what a joke our offense is.


    Typical exaggeration.

    Britt is a good Center. Richardson is showing he's a legit #2 WR when he stays on the field, and Lockett is as well. Graham is still elite, we just don't utilize him correctly and play to his strengths.

    Oh, and there's that cat, Russell WIlson. Funny how you can disparage the entire OL, yet say Wilson is crap for playing behind it and the only good player is Baldwin (who gets passes from WIlson). Your comment lost any legitimacy right here.
    Hawks46
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7372
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:01 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:52 am
  • austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:We controlled the rhythm and tempo of the game. Had some really nice drives that gave us a time of possession big advantage and good field position. Defense had plenty of rest and oftentimes started with the Rams' backs to their own endzone. Ultimately the defense was tasked with protecting the lead and they did that. If you've paid attention to the Seahawks, that's how we produce wins.


    Sioux were you ok with the last offensive possession? I have a dozen or more really smart football guys that were absolutely baffled by the play calling there when you could of sealed a win. I know you love Bevell but I think you admitting when he does make mistakes would go a long way in people being more receptive of what he does do right.

    Yes, I'm fine with it because it is what Pete dictates. We had the 3 in the bag, meaning they would have to score a touchdown to win. The identity of our team is defense, so we were forcing the Rams to drive 75 yards with a minute left on the clock. That's what we're built to do, close out those games. It worked and we picked up a tremendous win.

    Also, Doug was inches from making a toe drag that would have been a first down to seal the win.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:52 am
  • Scorpion05 wrote:
    WilsonMVP wrote:
    bevellisthedevil wrote:13 possessions - 241 yards for an average of 18.5 yards per possession and a grand total of 16 points. In addition, the defense got the ball back to the offense with 5 turnovers.

    Turnover #1 - We got the ball at our own 20 8 plays 29 yards punt
    Turnover #2 - we got the ball at their 30 4 plays 15 yards intercepted
    Turnover #2- We got the ball at our own 29 3 plays -2 yards punt
    Turnover #3 We got the ball at their 46 3 plays 8 yards punt
    Turnover #4 We got the ball at their 20 4 plays 3 yards field goal YESSSS! a field goal

    So we get 5 turnovers and run a total of 22 plays and gain 53 yards and score 1 field goal and somehow the offense did its job? There are way too many delusional people on this site. Its entertaining but delusional.

    How is any of that acceptable to anyone? How is 5 turnovers, 3 in Rams territory and netting 3 total points even remotely close to acceptable?


    Sad thing is the defense and special teams literally set them up for 6 points at least, and they couldnt even do that right. And also had a turnover which put the rams in FG range I believe.

    Also outside of the last 2 drives before the half and the drive after the half the offense was so bad.....taking those 3 out...

    6 plays 4 yards 2:56 PUNT
    8 plays 29 yards 4:16 PUNT
    1 Play 0 yards :11 INT
    3 Plays 3 yards 1:47 PUNT
    4 Plays 15 yards 2:01 INT
    3 plays -2 yards 2:20 PUNT
    3 plays 3 yards 1:03 PUNT
    3 plays 8 yards 1:45 PUNT
    4 plays 3 yards 1:37 FG

    You guys have GOT to be kidding me with being happy about this offensive performance. This is the same crap that happens almost every game. Defense keeps us in it, or gets turnovers and the offense usually does JUST ENOUGH to win the game, with like, 2 drives, usually at the end of the half or end of the game. Its pissing me off

    SEVEN DRIVES that didnt even get 10 yards, ONLY ONE OF THOSE past 5 yards

    Our offense decided to only show up for last half of the 2nd quarter and starting 3rd quarter. Outside of that they were on a milk carton.. MISSING


    What you said is accurate, except for the whole leaving out 3 good drives thing you just did

    Most teams win based on just that. 3 or 4 good drives. Most football games end in a score of say, 17-10, or in the low 20s. Every now and then, both teams score 30. So what would have been adequate for you, maybe one more TD? Fine, that'd be great

    We scored 16 points. So basically your logic is, because we didn't score 28, or 30, our offense is horrible? It needs work sure, all I'm saying is...let's not pretend as if this was a 9-3 game. The score card is pretty common with what happens across the league consistently. This does not mean some of us are satisfied, of course we have a high scoring offense. A high scoring offense would make us a perfect team. But let's not pretend as if us not scoring almost 30 points is out of the norm

    What I was truly disappointed in was the last drive. We should have iced the game. That was pitiful


    3 of those points came because of the defense getting a turnover. They ALSO turned the ball over after special teams handed them FG range position at Rams 30 yard line, and they ALSO handed the rams 3 points by throwing an interception setting the rams up at the SEATTLE 19. In the past two games we have allowed 28 points.....8 of those have been directly because of the offense and then the defense itself has scored 2TD and set up a FG by INT
    Image

    "Jed York does not own the 49ers; Russell Wilson does"
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2477
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:56 am
  • Siouxhawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:We controlled the rhythm and tempo of the game. Had some really nice drives that gave us a time of possession big advantage and good field position. Defense had plenty of rest and oftentimes started with the Rams' backs to their own endzone. Ultimately the defense was tasked with protecting the lead and they did that. If you've paid attention to the Seahawks, that's how we produce wins.


    Sioux were you ok with the last offensive possession? I have a dozen or more really smart football guys that were absolutely baffled by the play calling there when you could of sealed a win. I know you love Bevell but I think you admitting when he does make mistakes would go a long way in people being more receptive of what he does do right.

    Yes, I'm fine with it because it is what Pete dictates. We had the 3 in the bag, meaning they would have to score a touchdown to win. The identity of our team is defense, so we were forcing the Rams to drive 75 yards with a minute left on the clock. That's what we're built to do, close out those games. It worked and we picked up a tremendous win.

    Also, Doug was inches from making a toe drag that would have been a first down to seal the win.


    I wanted them to go for it. You get 2 yards the game is over and if you dont they start at their own 10 yard line or so with 1 min 10 sec to go with no TOs. Instead we kicked a FG went up 6 and they started at their own 25 and should of won the game in the last seconds
    Image

    "Jed York does not own the 49ers; Russell Wilson does"
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2477
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:00 am
  • WilsonMVP wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:We controlled the rhythm and tempo of the game. Had some really nice drives that gave us a time of possession big advantage and good field position. Defense had plenty of rest and oftentimes started with the Rams' backs to their own endzone. Ultimately the defense was tasked with protecting the lead and they did that. If you've paid attention to the Seahawks, that's how we produce wins.


    Sioux were you ok with the last offensive possession? I have a dozen or more really smart football guys that were absolutely baffled by the play calling there when you could of sealed a win. I know you love Bevell but I think you admitting when he does make mistakes would go a long way in people being more receptive of what he does do right.

    Yes, I'm fine with it because it is what Pete dictates. We had the 3 in the bag, meaning they would have to score a touchdown to win. The identity of our team is defense, so we were forcing the Rams to drive 75 yards with a minute left on the clock. That's what we're built to do, close out those games. It worked and we picked up a tremendous win.

    Also, Doug was inches from making a toe drag that would have been a first down to seal the win.


    I wanted them to go for it. You get 2 yards the game is over and if you dont they start at their own 10 yard line or so with 1 min 10 sec to go with no TOs. Instead we kicked a FG went up 6 and they started at their own 25 and should of won the game in the last seconds

    But if we don't pick up the 2, they only need to get into field goal range for a tie game. I think Pete made the right choice.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:04 am
  • Siouxhawk wrote:
    WilsonMVP wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    Sioux were you ok with the last offensive possession? I have a dozen or more really smart football guys that were absolutely baffled by the play calling there when you could of sealed a win. I know you love Bevell but I think you admitting when he does make mistakes would go a long way in people being more receptive of what he does do right.

    Yes, I'm fine with it because it is what Pete dictates. We had the 3 in the bag, meaning they would have to score a touchdown to win. The identity of our team is defense, so we were forcing the Rams to drive 75 yards with a minute left on the clock. That's what we're built to do, close out those games. It worked and we picked up a tremendous win.

    Also, Doug was inches from making a toe drag that would have been a first down to seal the win.


    I wanted them to go for it. You get 2 yards the game is over and if you dont they start at their own 10 yard line or so with 1 min 10 sec to go with no TOs. Instead we kicked a FG went up 6 and they started at their own 25 and should of won the game in the last seconds

    But if we don't pick up the 2, they only need to get into field goal range for a tie game. I think Pete made the right choice.


    Sometimes you have to have balls and go for it. Its not 4th and 10 its 4th and 2 at Rams 10 and you are ahead. And lets not act like Walsh is mr automatic.....that wasnt an auto 3 points either. God Forbid our offense actually have to do something for a win though. People would be ripping our D if we lost too which would be rediculous.
    Image

    "Jed York does not own the 49ers; Russell Wilson does"
    User avatar
    WilsonMVP
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2477
    Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2013 11:40 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:10 am
  • The same Walsh who has ONE missed FG this year and went 3 for 3 yesterday? 23 Teams have kickers that have missed at least one field goal.
    Last edited by SoulfishHawk on Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6240
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:11 am
  • To each their own. I liked the decision to make the kick and leave them a minute with no timeouts to drive the length of the field for a needed touchdown. We gave them the middle of the field. They had 1 good crack at the end zone, but we prevailed. Couldn't be more pleased with the win.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:16 am
  • WilsonMVP wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:
    WilsonMVP wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:Yes, I'm fine with it because it is what Pete dictates. We had the 3 in the bag, meaning they would have to score a touchdown to win. The identity of our team is defense, so we were forcing the Rams to drive 75 yards with a minute left on the clock. That's what we're built to do, close out those games. It worked and we picked up a tremendous win.

    Also, Doug was inches from making a toe drag that would have been a first down to seal the win.


    I wanted them to go for it. You get 2 yards the game is over and if you dont they start at their own 10 yard line or so with 1 min 10 sec to go with no TOs. Instead we kicked a FG went up 6 and they started at their own 25 and should of won the game in the last seconds

    But if we don't pick up the 2, they only need to get into field goal range for a tie game. I think Pete made the right choice.


    Sometimes you have to have balls and go for it. Its not 4th and 10 its 4th and 2 at Rams 10 and you are ahead. And lets not act like Walsh is mr automatic.....that wasnt an auto 3 points either. God Forbid our offense actually have to do something for a win though. People would be ripping our D if we lost too which would be rediculous.


    Result proves it was the right choice. Anything less is living in a fantasy land of what if's. Next?
    Milehighhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 551
    Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:33 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:18 am
  • You could come up with a LOT of what if's over a 60 minute game.
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6240
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:21 am
  • I approve of this thread.
    Image

    There are three certainties in life. Death, taxes and the perpetual shuffling of the Seattle Seahawks offensive line.
    User avatar
    Aros
    [[ .NET Godfather ]]
     
    Posts: 11106
    Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
    Location: Just 4 miles from Richard Sherman!


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:27 am
  • adeltaY wrote:Lockett did have a jet sweep that got a first down. I think it was on the TD drive.


    I was saying those were the things I was asking for bevell to run three weeks ago. And of course he got a first down. It’s amazing how easy football can be when you put the ball in the hands of the fast and good players.

    Ball gets in Lockett’s hands. TD drive. Not a coincidence. Exactly my point three weeks ago.
    Optimus25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1357
    Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 7:16 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:36 am
  • Siouxhawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:We controlled the rhythm and tempo of the game. Had some really nice drives that gave us a time of possession big advantage and good field position. Defense had plenty of rest and oftentimes started with the Rams' backs to their own endzone. Ultimately the defense was tasked with protecting the lead and they did that. If you've paid attention to the Seahawks, that's how we produce wins.


    Sioux were you ok with the last offensive possession? I have a dozen or more really smart football guys that were absolutely baffled by the play calling there when you could of sealed a win. I know you love Bevell but I think you admitting when he does make mistakes would go a long way in people being more receptive of what he does do right.

    Yes, I'm fine with it because it is what Pete dictates. We had the 3 in the bag, meaning they would have to score a touchdown to win. The identity of our team is defense, so we were forcing the Rams to drive 75 yards with a minute left on the clock. That's what we're built to do, close out those games. It worked and we picked up a tremendous win.

    Also, Doug was inches from making a toe drag that would have been a first down to seal the win.


    Not being a jerk but that line of thinking is absolutely nuts to me. Even if you rely on your defense why would you not but your team in the best possible position to win? There isn't a coach in the league(outside of our staff maybe) who wouldn't rather be up 10. I guarantee New England goes for the 7 there. Even with our defense I still think its smart to take a shot at the end zone there. I'm even fine blaming Pete over Bevell or a combination of both but regardless it was a dumb decision and it should of cost them. We got luck on the Cupp miss. I can't think of a single argument as to why you essentially quit there and settle. For the record most of the football minds online thought it was a bad idea as well.
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6324
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:40 am
  • Siouxhawk wrote:To each their own. I liked the decision to make the kick and leave them a minute with no timeouts to drive the length of the field for a needed touchdown. We gave them the middle of the field. They had 1 good crack at the end zone, but we prevailed. Couldn't be more pleased with the win.


    Sioux so you would rather be up 6 then 10 there with a little over a minute left? Am I understanding you right? I'm honestly baffled by this. Again not being a jerk or meaning to but I can't figure this one out....
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6324
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:05 pm
  • austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:To each their own. I liked the decision to make the kick and leave them a minute with no timeouts to drive the length of the field for a needed touchdown. We gave them the middle of the field. They had 1 good crack at the end zone, but we prevailed. Couldn't be more pleased with the win.


    Sioux so you would rather be up 6 then 10 there with a little over a minute left? Am I understanding you right? I'm honestly baffled by this. Again not being a jerk or meaning to but I can't figure this one out....


    Anyone would rather have 10 than 6 points. Don't be ridiculous.

    But the point is this: How in the world are you able to guarantee 10 points? That's the crazy part of your argument. There's not only no guarantee or getting 10, but the potential of a pick and failure to even get the 3 goes up exponentially by attempting longer passes into the EZ. Running the ball kept it on the ground. It's not like they didn't go for more yards, they just didn't convert it.

    What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.
    ____________
    BLUE and GREEN...
    User avatar
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1517
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:25 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:11 pm
  • It is baffling. Rather than scoring a TD and putting the game out of reach, he would rather play for the 3? Am I reading that right? Thats such a loser mentality that its perplexing. We really should have lost yesterday to be honest. That should emphasize how bad that line of thinking is or was.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:13 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:I'm just shocked we actually threw a jump ball to Graham for a TD. Amazing how that works isnt it.

    I about soiled my pants when I saw that. It's almost like we watched it happen every other week in New Orleans for five years and then decided to try something that was obviously successful ourselves.

    Such a rare event, I'm almost at a loss for words...
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 30808
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Bothell, WA


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:16 pm
  • Ad Hawk wrote:What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.


    I dont think taking a shot to the endzone is the subject here. Its more on the fact that we ran the same exact play twice with Rawls and then brought in a 3 TE set that had nobody even close to being open. It almost felt like the staff wasnt even trying there. A little more creativity and willingness to move the ball forward is what i'm asking for.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:23 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    Ad Hawk wrote:What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.


    I dont think taking a shot to the endzone is the subject here. Its more on the fact that we ran the same exact play twice with Rawls and then brought in a 3 TE set that had nobody even close to being open. It almost felt like the staff wasnt even trying there. A little more creativity and willingness to move the ball forward is what i'm asking for.


    You can want creativity, that's fine. But you'd better back up your generalities with specifics.

    The rest--assuming what the staff actually feels or wants?--you have no ability to know. You can speculate all you want, but you'll be called on it all day for what it is: your uneducated opinion. I mean uneducated in the most honorable way, though. You may be a long-time fan, player, or even coach, but you're not on the hawks staff so you have no clue what's in their head.

    The results aren't acceptable to you. So sorry. The win must not be acceptable either, then. Their philosophy worked this time, as it has often, even when you don't like it. They're not above critique, I agree. But they won yesterday; you didn't.
    ____________
    BLUE and GREEN...
    User avatar
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1517
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:25 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:34 pm
  • Ad Hawk wrote:
    austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:To each their own. I liked the decision to make the kick and leave them a minute with no timeouts to drive the length of the field for a needed touchdown. We gave them the middle of the field. They had 1 good crack at the end zone, but we prevailed. Couldn't be more pleased with the win.


    Sioux so you would rather be up 6 then 10 there with a little over a minute left? Am I understanding you right? I'm honestly baffled by this. Again not being a jerk or meaning to but I can't figure this one out....


    Anyone would rather have 10 than 6 points. Don't be ridiculous.

    But the point is this: How in the world are you able to guarantee 10 points? That's the crazy part of your argument. There's not only no guarantee or getting 10, but the potential of a pick and failure to even get the 3 goes up exponentially by attempting longer passes into the EZ. Running the ball kept it on the ground. It's not like they didn't go for more yards, they just didn't convert it.

    What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.


    You can't guarantee it but you can guarantee you wont get it if you don't even try. So with you reasoning since you can't be 100% you just fold and say lets settle for the 3 with 3 downs to take a shot even though the 3 itself isn't guaranteed? I'm even more baffled then I was before. I'll say it again....almost every other coach in the league or any level of football would of taken a calculated shot at the end zone to end the game and try to win it right there, especially with a veteran QB.
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6324
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:36 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:
    Ad Hawk wrote:What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.


    I dont think taking a shot to the endzone is the subject here. Its more on the fact that we ran the same exact play twice with Rawls and then brought in a 3 TE set that had nobody even close to being open. It almost felt like the staff wasnt even trying there. A little more creativity and willingness to move the ball forward is what i'm asking for.


    Exactly. It was the equivalence of not even trying. I'm not even suggesting we blame Bevell, maybe its on Pete or more likely a combination of both but regardless it was a weird decision. We gave ourselves almost zero chance to be successful there.
    User avatar
    austinslater25
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6324
    Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:05 pm
    Location: Tri-Cities, Washington


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:40 pm
  • Ad Hawk wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    Ad Hawk wrote:What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.


    I dont think taking a shot to the endzone is the subject here. Its more on the fact that we ran the same exact play twice with Rawls and then brought in a 3 TE set that had nobody even close to being open. It almost felt like the staff wasnt even trying there. A little more creativity and willingness to move the ball forward is what i'm asking for.


    You can want creativity, that's fine. But you'd better back up your generalities with specifics.

    The rest--assuming what the staff actually feels or wants?--you have no ability to know. You can speculate all you want, but you'll be called on it all day for what it is: your uneducated opinion. I mean uneducated in the most honorable way, though. You may be a long-time fan, player, or even coach, but you're not on the hawks staff so you have no clue what's in their head.

    The results aren't acceptable to you. So sorry. The win must not be acceptable either, then. Their philosophy worked this time, as it has often, even when you don't like it. They're not above critique, I agree. But they won yesterday; you didn't.


    Your right, I dont know how they feel. All I can do is relay my feelings and opinions from what I see and I saw them running the same play twice with the second one getting them practically nothing. If thats acceptable to you than so be it, but its pretty laughable when thinking about it.

    I'm stoked we won yesterday, but it could have been a whole lot easier than the game going down to the last play. Win or lose, this offense still stinks. I'm sure you would agree with that, but maybe not.
    User avatar
    pittpnthrs
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 186
    Joined: Fri May 19, 2017 10:19 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:42 pm
  • I think it is too simple to place all the blame on Bevell, but our offense is a complete trainwreck. I only hope it can get better after the bye.
    User avatar
    iigakusei
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1402
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 6:14 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:52 pm
  • austinslater25 wrote:
    pittpnthrs wrote:
    Ad Hawk wrote:What play would you have called that would have guaranteed a TD there? And it better be a sure thing with no chance at interception, able to still burn the clock even if it falls incomplete, and leaves the Rams with no time left on the clock.


    I dont think taking a shot to the endzone is the subject here. Its more on the fact that we ran the same exact play twice with Rawls and then brought in a 3 TE set that had nobody even close to being open. It almost felt like the staff wasnt even trying there. A little more creativity and willingness to move the ball forward is what i'm asking for.


    Exactly. It was the equivalence of not even trying. I'm not even suggesting we blame Bevell, maybe its on Pete or more likely a combination of both but regardless it was a weird decision. We gave ourselves almost zero chance to be successful there.


    No, not at all the equivalent. That's only in your own mind.

    Trying and not getting something against people trying to stop you isn't the same as not trying.

    Could they have called something different? Perhaps, but why didn't the called play get them 2 yards? If that's execution, then perhaps any call they had made could have suffered the same because of ineptitude of the line, backs, or otherwise.
    ____________
    BLUE and GREEN...
    User avatar
    Ad Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1517
    Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 8:25 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:54 pm
  • Actually burning that last time out was huge in that sequence. It prevented at least another shot at the end zone by the Rams.

    I'm with AdHawk firmly on this one. The end of the game fit the Hawks' identity under Pete to a T.

    And it's quite presumptive to think we'd automatically score a TD there. Too many bad things could happen, including stopping the clock.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:56 pm
  • pittpnthrs wrote:It is baffling. Rather than scoring a TD and putting the game out of reach, he would rather play for the 3? Am I reading that right? Thats such a loser mentality that its perplexing. We really should have lost yesterday to be honest. That should emphasize how bad that line of thinking is or was.


    I was frustrated as well, but in Pete's mind he still trusts the D to hold a lead late in the 4th, so yeah the playcalls are conservative.

    And with Russell already throwing a pick, a gimpy Doug and not 100% yet Lockett it's hard to blame him.

    Remember, the Rams front 7 is the teeth of their defense. So combo with our terrible line, it's hard to find high percentage short routes and runs to put it in the endzone without taking risks.

    I don't like it either, but I get it from a HC/playcall point of view.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 12029
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 12:57 pm
  • Siouxhawk wrote:Actually burning that last time out was huge in that sequence. It prevented at least another shot at the end zone by the Rams.

    I'm with AdHawk firmly on this one. The end of the game fit the Hawks' identity under Pete to a T.

    And it's quite presumptive to think we'd automatically score a TD there. Too many bad things could happen, including stopping the clock.


    No it didn't. They turned the ball over on downs, and did not run out of time.
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2521
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:36 pm
  • austinslater25 wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:To each their own. I liked the decision to make the kick and leave them a minute with no timeouts to drive the length of the field for a needed touchdown. We gave them the middle of the field. They had 1 good crack at the end zone, but we prevailed. Couldn't be more pleased with the win.


    Sioux so you would rather be up 6 then 10 there with a little over a minute left? Am I understanding you right? I'm honestly baffled by this. Again not being a jerk or meaning to but I can't figure this one out....
    Buffalo made the same decision 2 weeks ago, kicking a field goal, going up by 6 and daring the opposition to counter with a TD. They also won their game. Seems like a sound choice to me.
    User avatar
    Palmegranite
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 191
    Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 9:53 am


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:38 pm
  • I was really on the fence about it. I see getting the 3 and making them score a TD. But also, not sure why they can't roll Russ out to see if he can get the first down w/his speed. 1st down and the game is over
    R.I.P. THE EDGAR, YOU WILL BE MISSED......
    User avatar
    SoulfishHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 6240
    Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2012 9:59 am
    Location: Sammamish, WA


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 1:49 pm
  • No question that taking the 3 is the right move there. Your offense had ZERO 1st downs the entire 4th Q, so why bet on them making this and have 3 points with 1 timeout tie the game and give them the MoJo?
    User avatar
    Seymour
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2521
    Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:41 pm


Re: Weekly fire Bevell Wishful thinking
Mon Oct 09, 2017 2:04 pm
  • Seymour wrote:
    Siouxhawk wrote:Actually burning that last time out was huge in that sequence. It prevented at least another shot at the end zone by the Rams.

    I'm with AdHawk firmly on this one. The end of the game fit the Hawks' identity under Pete to a T.

    And it's quite presumptive to think we'd automatically score a TD there. Too many bad things could happen, including stopping the clock.


    No it didn't. They turned the ball over on downs, and did not run out of time.

    If they had that time out in their back pocket, it changes things for them strategy wise.
    User avatar
    Siouxhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3396
    Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:46 pm


PreviousNext


It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:43 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information