Take back something I said about Bevell

I never liked the hire. IMO he benefited from exceptional personnel in Minny and a once in a lifetime year from Farve.

Well

Millen pointed out Bevell didn't even call the plays in Minny, it was Childress.

So, yeah.

It just seems to me we have plays we're good at yet give up on them. I like how the 49ers keep running the trap plays because we couldn't stop it.. We had some nice screen plays to the RBs going in the 1st half. Why give up on them?. make them stop us..

In the end we'll never know.. If the offense passing game doesnt improve they wil have to do something and that somethng might not be good for Bevel. So hard to tell since we don't know the play calls.. are the other teams scheming us well or is it 100% executions. hard to say.

He's confusing.

Moore on the sideline route? Set-up a wheel route for Turbin, when Leon's there (not ripping on Turbin, that's a tough catch for inexpeirenced backs). Why Tate on those jump posts every time, why not the best WR on the roster, Rice? Why ditch I formation at the 50?

When the plays there, it seems the wrong players are getting their numbers called.

Speaking of Tate.. I don't understand how after 3 years he forgets the plays? How many times do we see him run wrong route or look confused of the play? Then the lapse in concentration on the dropped slant. A high school WR can catch that.. crazy.

I understand Rice probably double covered (best WR) but why is Tate the target on huge 3rd down and short? I don't trust him. He makes big plays but geez.. We really need BIG #2 WR with great hands. Then they can't key on Rice if we have a go too guy on 3rd down.

With ya on that. My guess would be if Tate has another game like that, he won't see the field anymore.

If Sydney is doubled, scheme differently. A healthy and commited Rice is a rarity you can't waste.

Are you watching this Viking game? I loved that play call for Ponder in the red zone. it was play action but a quick dump off for a TD. I love our play action but it seems the plays take SOOO long to develop. Why not make it easy on the QB?

Well, I can't fault Bevell for the Hawks play-action. The philosiphies are different; Vikes to dink n dunk, Hawks to go up top. And, the Hawks are outstanding in play-action pass protection. Yes, for some reason, the Hawks Oline is tremendous on those plays.

Nothing matches; WCO coordinater, with University of Wisconsin offensive model, with no WCO routs short.

The entire things just off.

Because he's usually wrong, I didn't listen when Absolute said "the Hawks offense can't figure out an identity, but I'd totally bang Bevell". The banging Bevell part is odd, but the rest is true.

pehawk":2zbkwkfu said:

I never liked the hire. IMO he benefited from exceptional personnel in Minny and a once in a lifetime year from Farve.

Well

Millen pointed out Bevell didn't even call the plays in Minny, it was Childress.

So, yeah.

Click to expand...

That's not completely accurate.... Childress called plays the year that Farve took them deep into the playoffs. Bevell called the others. So, yeah.

There would be no discussion of Bevell if we would just catch the ball. Our best WRs, TEs and RBs are average at best catching the ball and no team can overcome a bad passing game. Wilson did what a QB needed to do to get the ball where it could be caught. Bevell nor Wilson are to blame for Sunday's debacle.

Well, I never liked the hire, period. And, I do aknowledge the drops. But, as I said, maybe those we're the wrong players to utilize?

pehawk":2xxl65x5 said:

Well, I never liked the hire, period. And, I do aknowledge the drops. But, as I said, maybe those we're the wrong players to utilize?

Click to expand...

The problem with that Pe, is that pretty much every player had a drop.

pehawk":4ydxhdzg said:

Well, I never liked the hire, period. And, I do aknowledge the drops. But, as I said, maybe those we're the wrong players to utilize?

Click to expand...

Maybe we don't have enough RIGHT players to execute the plays called in Thursdays game, it's like everyone had forgotten the playbook, or the singnals were confusing to the players, dunno.
More than anything else, it just looked like there were too many timing gafs.
I just hope they sit these guys down and pick the problems apart and fix them, so's not to make these same damned mistakes for the rest of the Season, at times they looked awful on both sides of the ball in this game, and it wasn't just any one player or Coach at fault.

Beyond the inexperienced QB the Seahawks offense is like a post-menopausal woman.

No flow.

It's almost like after every play he throws the playbook in a hopper and whatever one he picks out becomes the next play.

Then again, I have seasons to the NY Giants and have the priviledge of watching an elite QB in his prime (Wilson is actually better than Eli at the same point in their careers) , with an excellent OC and guys who are familiar with each other and all on the same page. So I admit I'm tainted.

canucklhead":np2u55yf said:

Beyond the inexperienced QB the Seahawks offense is like a post-menopausal woman.

No flow.

It's almost like after every play he throws the playbook in a hopper and whatever one he picks out becomes the next play.

Then again, I have seasons to the NY Giants and have the priviledge of watching an elite QB in his prime (Wilson is actually better than Eli at the same point in their careers) , with an excellent OC and guys who are familiar with each other and all on the same page. So I admit I'm tainted.

Click to expand...

I hear ya. 'Fluid' is the last word that comes to mind when watching this offense. Seems like they either get a dramatic burst or nothing at all. I think getting the timing down on the short-to-intermediate routhes would help a lot, but the OC needs to start running more of those plays, so the guys can actually get in rythum and string a few plays together.

Again i think the Vikings Model of dink in dunk would be good for our young QB. Ponder is also athletic and them move him around the in pocket. Their plays seem to be quick hitters and it gets him in the flow of the game better. Not a lot of WR progressions to go thru (better for a young or rookie QB). Unlike the vikings we would have the extra element of the deep ball off play action every once in a while but it shouldn't be our bread and butter.

Wilson could be better than Ponder IMO. Wilson's ran that type of offense at NC state..

pehawk":1h1333yf said:

He's confusing.

Moore on the sideline route? Set-up a wheel route for Turbin, when Leon's there (not ripping on Turbin, that's a tough catch for inexpeirenced backs). Why Tate on those jump posts every time, why not the best WR on the roster, Rice? Why ditch I formation at the 50?

When the plays there, it seems the wrong players are getting their numbers called.

Click to expand...

DISAGREE... the ball was placed perfectly, easy over the left shoulder catch that landed softly in his hands.. it was too easy of a catch and he was probably thinking TD before he secured it... no excuse that's not a tough catch at all, and that play has got to be made... having said that moving on, i'm sure nobody feels worse than turbin about it..

We had the same situation here with Holmgren and Haskell. The funny thing about that whole issue was that something bad had happened one week and the offense looked crazy good (it was a week where Seneca was starting because Matt was out I believe). Anyway, it was the same personnel as the previous week, but the team looked great. I didn't know what was going on.

Then later I heard that Holmy had turned over play-calling for the entire week to Gil. Apparently Holmy was dealing with some personal issue or something or the other, and Haskell had put in the whole game plan (not just contributed with a set of plays that Holmy hand picked down to specifics like usual). Gil did the whole scripted scenario for the beginning of the game, and then called the entire game from then on out and the offense looked terrific.

I remember watching Gil call the offense all by his lonesome in Carolina and ripping the league up. It was sort of like they were running an offense under Steve Bueurlein at QB of all people that was nearly identical to what teams are running now. Steve B. threw for about 4,000 yards and they had lots of receivers and RB's piling up yards. Their defense sucked though, so I believe everybody got canned, and Holmy got the Seattle job, and Gil rejoined him here anyway (He had been with him at GB). He should have been named Carolina's head coach, and at some point he should have been calling plays for the Hawks on a weekly basis.

Maybe Pete is thinking that Bevell is deserving of a real chance to call the plays, as he's never really 100% gotten the chance, because sometimes those guys do pretty well (Jay Gruden in Cinci is doing pretty well, and for years people said he was an Arena guy only). I don't blame Pete for giving him a chance. Sometimes those guys blow you away. It's better than re-treading another Gregg Knapp I think. There are so many of those guys that just get turn after turn after turn. That was one of the main reasons I was pretty bummed out about Bates getting the axe after only one year. If nothing else, he seemed to have some really good ideas and seemed to have a lot to learn, but if he picked up offense half as well as his dad picked up defense then we were going to have a stellar coordinator. Big Jim was always tweaking things and finding ways to create mismatch hell on opponents, and the rumors were always that his son saw things the same way offensively. I don't know why that whole deal fell apart after one year. Rumor was it was the running game, but that makes no sense. The only thing I can figure is he wanted to keep Hass around. Oh well. Live and learn. Hopefully they bring in some wizard that can get it done, or it is a situation like Haskell's where they just need to figure out the right balance. For all I know Cable is calling 75% of the plays and Bevell is only scripting the first 2 drives. Who knows for sure?

Dinking and dunking also can effectively control the clock. Not a popular approach with wideouts and fantasy football folk, but if done smoothly it can wear a defense down.

The Niners created some problems with their linebacking core that we were trying to work around. It was obvious to this onlooker that we were doing a lot of the same things the Giants were doing against SF. Trouble with that is we found out the Niners had worked out those chinks in the armor and we didn't make adjustments soon enough. They covered well and they rushed well.

I saw two halves of football offensively on Thursday. SF was playing a ton of single-safety looks and were covering the middle very effectively in the first half. They came out in the second half with the same thing but disguised the linebackers a bit better so as to force Russ into very few checkdown opportunities. Seemed to me that we weren't reading and calling audibles very much. Gotta hand it to the SF D, they're good.

In terms of the offense, I can't stop thinking about why we can't approach the run with an effort that just says "yes, we are going to run to the left now, so go ahead and try to stop us". We saw this type of thing in the '05 season quite a bit. We'd line up in that power sweep formation, the defense knew it was coming, and we executed it for positive yards every time. Yes, we had two HOFers on the left side, but they got help from the TE's and WR's a ton to make it all work. Why in the world can't we just decide we want to simply load up the left side, put in our beefiest WR's to help block, and just run the damn ball off tackle. What the hell is up with all the off-guard stuff?

Look, I may be talking out my ass a bit here, but I believe there is something to lining up in an obvious running formation, and passing from it on occasion when we see what the secondary is doing. If we are a running team, let's give them what they expect. I bring up the Holmy offense only to point out that he'd have success with the screen pass plays by showing run to the strong side, then run a weak-side screen to the fullback. IIRC, we'd take a look at the safeties pre-snap and if they were cheating up we'd run the crossing route off of play action with success as well.

v1rotv2 makes a great point. It's a lot like how business treats middle-management when the field isn't doing well. The store managers get all the credit when the stores do good, but the area supervisor/regional manager gets yelled at when the stores do bad. Bevell's responsibility is to put-together an offensive attack based on a particular defense. He's going to chart-out plays based on matchups and situations from a known playbook. Aside from trick plays which really can only be successfully done once, every offense in the league all runs basically the same way. Blockers block, QB's throw, and RB's run. It's an exact science and there are very few secrets anymore.

Even if the OC is a genius that calls all the plays, the HC is still going to walk up and say things like "I think we need to pass here, don't ya think?" Not to mention, Russ is going to have some input during those time-outs as well. I sound like I'm defending him, but Bevell can only draw up what are players are capable of executing. If wideouts can't get separation or can't catch the ball, all the scheming in the world won't help you.

Shark and Houston, THANK YOU. Great stuff - and another example of why I love this place.

My opinion on why Bates was shown the door is simple; McDaniels was available, they saw him as an upgrade, wanted to keep him from the Rams, but knew McDaniels wouldn't even pick up the phone if the Bates was still employed. They fired Bates, called McDaniels, McDaniels used the Hawks to leverage the Rams for real money and voila - Bevell.

hawker84":2vzc4o8a said:

pehawk":2vzc4o8a said:

He's confusing.

Moore on the sideline route? Set-up a wheel route for Turbin, when Leon's there (not ripping on Turbin, that's a tough catch for inexpeirenced backs). Why Tate on those jump posts every time, why not the best WR on the roster, Rice? Why ditch I formation at the 50?

When the plays there, it seems the wrong players are getting their numbers called.

Click to expand...

DISAGREE... the ball was placed perfectly, easy over the left shoulder catch that landed softly in his hands.. it was too easy of a catch and he was probably thinking TD before he secured it... no excuse that's not a tough catch at all, and that play has got to be made... having said that moving on, i'm sure nobody feels worse than turbin about it..

Click to expand...

How come Russell gets a get-out-of-jail card for being a rookie, but Turbin does not?

Although the pass was placed perfectly, it was wobbling, and not that easy to catch. IMHO, you could see it in Turbin's eyes when he reached for the ball. YMMV.