Bevell defenders, anyone, please explain this to me

[hawknation2015]

5 pass plays in a row in the 4th quarter while ostensibly trying to burn clock would elevate Bevell to top 5, but I'm not an infallible football genius.

Wilson alone is what makes the Hawks the #1 rushing team by yardage.

If you were to combine RB rushing yards into one player we would be slightly above average.

So only RB rushing yards is effective, counts and therefore gives credit to Bevell and the offense? That makes no sense.

How do you credit RWs yards to play design and calling by Bevell wholly? Even if I concede that point are you happy with our rushing offense this year by the eye test? It appears Bevell isn't either based on how he approaches its utilization in game appropriate situations.

Lots of Russell's yardage is from designed read option plays. Is that not play calling?

My entire point is people on here are too hyper focused on Bevell when a play doesn't work. But this offense is performing the same as it's performed statistically since 2012 (save for lack of explosive plays).

What's changed, and IMO has led to our 2-4 record is the defense. So why all the Bevell hate? Other than the same ol' lazy he sucks, play didn't work, blah blah blah.

Russell has 2-3 options EVERY passing play. He didn't have to throw it to Jimmy, so why is that Bevell's fault? Russell's the one who took the safe throw to the sideline that didn't result in a 1st down. 90% of passing plays in every scheme across the league has a short, intermediate and long route as options.

Our best 3rd down weapon is running a route three yards short of the first down marker . . . THAT'S A PROBLEM.

We have been and continue to be a terrible red zone team under Bevell . . . THAT'S ALSO A PROBLEM.

Not everything should be blamed on Bevell, but he certainly deserves a share of the blame for designing these failures.

 

[mrt144]

The only thing about this play that disappointed me is that Lynch stayed in to block, making it a 6 on 5 blocking situation, and a pass rusher still got to Wilson in under 2 seconds with another guy a step behind him. Gilliam flopped on his cut block and nobody accounted for the extra blitzer outside of Britt.

So to me, the failure of this play is on execution, specifically with regards to protection.

As far as the throws Wilson didn't make, I'm not sure it's a smart move to throw a high risk pass from your own 35 with a 9 point lead late in a game. Throwing to Graham was the textbook thing to do in such a crappy situation, forced by the piss poor protection.

Auto-punt . . . because pressed between the sideline and a defender, Graham is not getting those three yards for the first down.

Which goes back to why Graham is cutting off that route three yards shy of the first down.

The question necessitates a follow up - if JFG makes the out break at the 1st down marker, how close is that to being a sack? The interdepencies of players in football is fascinating and yet we still have people saying RW is the primary factor in offensive failures.

We should have more faith in the most elusive QB in the league to buy time for his receivers to run FIVE YARDS downfield. At the same time, if you use Graham at Split End and let him run a curl route past the first down line, that is the same number of steps as an out route . . . it's just past the first down marker. That is the benefit of using a big receiver outside; he would not have to spend time running to the sideline to get open because he is already there, available for a jump ball against a smaller defender.

But then he wouldn't be sitting in the pocket and making Elite QB type plays and thats apparently what HE NEEDS TO DO.

I really wish I had a dossier on every poster here about how much blame they assign and what they want so I can preserve my sanity in making salient points to the right people on why their opinions are bad. :stirthepot: RW is never going to make anyone happy regardless of how he plays, it's a syphian task trying to get people to back down from all the 'needs to' and 'has tos'.

 

[marko358]

But this offense is performing the same as it's performed statistically since 2012 (save for lack of explosive plays).

Scoring wise, we are ranked 17th so far this year. We were top ten in the previous 3. That's a big drop-off.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

But this offense is performing the same as it's performed statistically since 2012 (save for lack of explosive plays).

Scoring wise, we are ranked 17th so far this year. We were top ten in the previous 3. That's a big drop-off.

Sure, lack of explosive plays like I mentioned would do that.

But overall? 13th in total offense this year, 9th last year. #1 in rushing both years. 21st in passing this year, 27th last year.

Can we do better? Absolutely. Red zone is still terrible, lack of rushing TD's, 4th quarter offense is garbage.

Is Bevell to blame for all of it? Nope, he's one of many to blame, including Pete, Russell, WR corp, TE corp and O-line.

IF you want me to rank offensive stinkiness;

1. O-line
2. Russell
3. Bevell
4. Pete
5. WR's
6. TE's

 

[marko358]

You keep avoiding the scoring statistic though...the one stat that matters most. It would be like getting excited about a baseball team with great OBP stats and an inability to score runs. Who cares at the end of the day.

 

[mrt144]

5 pass plays in a row in the 4th quarter while ostensibly trying to burn clock would elevate Bevell to top 5, but I'm not an infallible football genius.

Wilson alone is what makes the Hawks the #1 rushing team by yardage.

If you were to combine RB rushing yards into one player we would be slightly above average.

So only RB rushing yards is effective, counts and therefore gives credit to Bevell and the offense? That makes no sense.

How do you credit RWs yards to play design and calling by Bevell wholly? Even if I concede that point are you happy with our rushing offense this year by the eye test? It appears Bevell isn't either based on how he approaches its utilization in game appropriate situations.

Lots of Russell's yardage is from designed read option plays. Is that not play calling?

My entire point is people on here are too hyper focused on Bevell when a play doesn't work. But this offense is performing the same as it's performed statistically since 2012 (save for lack of explosive plays).

What's changed, and IMO has led to our 2-4 record is the defense. So why all the Bevell hate? Other than the same ol' lazy he sucks, play didn't work, blah blah blah.

Russell has 2-3 options EVERY passing play. He didn't have to throw it to Jimmy, so why is that Bevell's fault? Russell's the one who took the safe throw to the sideline that didn't result in a 1st down. 90% of passing plays in every scheme across the league has a short, intermediate and long route as options.

Oh man, you gave me the best talking point ever.

Wilson has as many passing options as time will allow and route takes receivers.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8g59 ... FNmd0VOWXM

And I laugh in your face at this idea that we're running an offensive scheme that even comes close to reflecting what you're saying.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8g59 ... 29oaXd3dWc

 

[Sgt. Largent]

You keep avoiding the scoring statistic though...the one stat that matters most. It would be like getting excited about a baseball team with great OBP stats and an inability to score runs. Who cares at the end of the day.

How is saying the lack of our usual explosive plays avoiding the scoring statistic?

Isn't how god awful the O-line is, especially in pass protection avoiding the real elephant in the room change this year? I'm sure Bevell would love to call plays where Russell can actually drop back and have more than 1.2 seconds to go through his progressions and find an open target downfield...........instead of the ball being hiked and running for his life 65% of the time.

 

[hawknation2015]

We should have more faith in the most elusive QB in the league to buy time for his receivers to run FIVE YARDS downfield. At the same time, if you use Graham at Split End and let him run a curl route past the first down line, that is the same number of steps as an out route . . . it's just past the first down marker. That is the benefit of using a big receiver outside; he would not have to spend time running to the sideline to get open because he is already there, available for a jump ball against a smaller defender.

But then he wouldn't be sitting in the pocket and making Elite QB type plays and thats apparently what HE NEEDS TO DO.

I really wish I had a dossier on every poster here about how much blame they assign and what they want so I can preserve my sanity in making salient points to the right people on why their opinions are bad. :stirthepot: RW is never going to make anyone happy regardless of how he plays, it's a syphian task trying to get people to back down from all the 'needs to' and 'has tos'.

Part of it is learning to be elusive within the pocket, i.e. climbing the pocket, which is something Wilson continues to improve on.

Like most people here, I am more critical of design than the execution on this particular play.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Oh man, you gave me the best talking point ever.

Wilson has as many passing options as time will allow and route takes receivers.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8g59 ... FNmd0VOWXM

Damn you Bevell !!!!

 

[marko358]

You keep avoiding the scoring statistic though...the one stat that matters most. It would be like getting excited about a baseball team with great OBP stats and an inability to score runs. Who cares at the end of the day.

How is saying the lack of our usual explosive plays avoiding the scoring statistic?

Maybe I'm wrong but I thought explosive play meant anything over X yards (20 for pass and 12 for run?). Doesn't necessarily mean it's a scoring play.

 

[Recon_Hawk]

The only thing about this play that disappointed me is that Lynch stayed in to block, making it a 6 on 5 blocking situation, and a pass rusher still got to Wilson in under 2 seconds with another guy a step behind him. Gilliam flopped on his cut block and nobody accounted for the extra blitzer outside of Britt.

So to me, the failure of this play is on execution, specifically with regards to protection.

As far as the throws Wilson didn't make, I'm not sure it's a smart move to throw a high risk pass from your own 35 with a 9 point lead late in a game. Throwing to Graham was the textbook thing to do in such a crappy situation, forced by the piss poor protection.

Auto-punt . . . because pressed between the sideline and a defender, Graham is not getting those three yards for the first down.

Which goes back to why Graham is cutting off that route three yards shy of the first down.

The question necessitates a follow up - if JFG makes the out break at the 1st down marker, how close is that to being a sack? The interdepencies of players in football is fascinating and yet we still have people saying RW is the primary factor in offensive failures.

We should have more faith in the most elusive QB in the league to buy time for his receivers to run FIVE YARDS downfield. At the same time, if you use Graham at Split End and let him run a curl route past the first down line, that is the same number of steps as an out route . . . it's just past the first down marker. That is the benefit of using a big receiver outside; he would not have to spend time running to the sideline to get open because he is already there, available for a jump ball against a smaller defender.

We saw in the 3rd down slant that went incomplete to Graham that his size alone wasn't enough to post up against the smaller corner.

We've seen at least three red zone attempts that Russ hasn't been able to make that throw, either

Why do people want to turn this offense into the Jimmy Graham Jump Ball Show or think it's that simple to convert that type of pass? There's no predictability. At best it's a 50-50 play and any series that calls on that to be the go-to 3rd down will eventually fail, leading to a punt.

 

[mrt144]

Oh man, you gave me the best talking point ever.

Wilson has as many passing options as time will allow and route takes receivers.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8g59 ... FNmd0VOWXM

Damn you Bevell !!!!

I made a critique of this play in another thread.

How is this supposed to get a first down? It was 3rd and 9.

I am genuinely at a loss as how this is supposed to work with our talent.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Oh man, you gave me the best talking point ever.

Wilson has as many passing options as time will allow and route takes receivers.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8g59 ... FNmd0VOWXM

Damn you Bevell !!!!

I made a critique of this play in another thread.

How is this supposed to get a first down? It was 3rd and 9.

Lockett ran a 10 yard 1st down out, Graham ran a seam route and other two receivers had one on one coverage and inside receiver was open.

Bevell's the reason that play didn't work? LOL! Are you sure it's not because Russell got mowed over in less than 2 seconds?

You guys are awesome, I love this stuff. It makes me feel good about my sanity.

 

[mrt144]

Why do people want to turn this offense into the Jimmy Graham Jump Ball Show or think it's that simple to convert that type of pass? There's no predictability. At best it's a 50-50 play and any series that calls on that to be the go-to 3rd down will eventually fail, leading to a punt.

It's like pointing to the flea flicker as a proof that Bevell is an infallible football genius - it was a jump ball that Ricardo came down with. Despite the trickery the DB wasn't biting. These are kinds of plays that look great but then you realize that within the context of the rest of the moribund offense, it was a shot in the dark that paid off and then was followed up with more moribund offense.

 

[mrt144]

Oh man, you gave me the best talking point ever.

Wilson has as many passing options as time will allow and route takes receivers.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8g59 ... FNmd0VOWXM

Damn you Bevell !!!!

I made a critique of this play in another thread.

How is this supposed to get a first down? It was 3rd and 9.

Lockett ran a 10 yard 1st down out, Graham ran a seam route and other two receivers had one on one coverage and inside receiver was open.

Bevell's the reason that play didn't work? LOL! Are you sure it's not because Russell got mowed over in less than 2 seconds?

You guys are awesome, I love this stuff. It makes me feel good about my sanity.

It'd work if the Hawks were a completely different team top to bottom (and if CAR wasn't playing a zone with the top two DBs having eyes on RW the entire time) That has INT written all over it.

 

[hawknation2015]

We saw in the 3rd down slant that went incomplete to Graham that his size alone wasn't enough to post up against the smaller corner.

We've seen at least three red zone attempts that Russ hasn't been able to make that throw, either

Why do people want to turn this offense into the Jimmy Graham Jump Ball Show or think it's that simple to convert that type of pass? There's no predictability. At best it's a 50-50 play and any series that calls on that to be the go-to 3rd down will eventually fail, leading to a punt.

You are going to take one play that Graham ran over the middle of the field, where Russell's vision is at its worst, and extrapolate that Graham is suddenly incapable of dominating smaller defenders in jump ball situations OUTSIDE?

Wow.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

[

It'd work if the O-line was completely different from top to bottom (and if CAR wasn't playing a zone with the top two DBs having eyes on RW the entire time) That has INT written all over it.

Fixed

 

[mrt144]

[

It'd work if the O-line was completely different from top to bottom (and if CAR wasn't playing a zone with the top two DBs having eyes on RW the entire time) That has INT written all over it.

Fixed

But the point of failure I'm driving at is that the scheme is taking for granted that OL protection will be there. If we can ask for RW to grow as a player, surely we can ask a OC to grow as a coordinator. I mean, we don't have to be entirely consistent all the time in scrutiny, it's just beyond the pale that people are asking a 4th year QB to play like a 13 year HoF right now rather than asking a 10 year OC veteran to understand that certain plays are DOA because the line sucks so bad.

And I still contest that the Seahawks are running a passing offense like the rest of the league. We aren't, and the Hawks have barely invested in it.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

[

It'd work if the O-line was completely different from top to bottom (and if CAR wasn't playing a zone with the top two DBs having eyes on RW the entire time) That has INT written all over it.

Fixed

But the point of failure I'm driving at is that the scheme is taking for granted that OL protection will be there. If we can ask for RW to grow as a player, surely we can ask a OC to grow as a coordinator. I mean, we don't have to be entirely consistent all the time in scrutiny, it's just beyond the pale that people are asking a 4th year QB to play like a 13 year HoF right now rather than asking a 10 year OC veteran to understand that certain plays are DOA because the line sucks so bad.

And I still contest that the Seahawks are running a passing offense like the rest of the league. We aren't, and the Hawks have barely invested in it.

Wait, the entire premise of this thread is to blame Bevell for calling a play that wasn't long enough to get the first down.

Now you want him to call more shorter plays so Russell doesn't get plowed over like in the gif posted.

Make up your mind. Do you want safer shorter O-line sucks plays, or do you want longer Russell gets sacked 10 times a game downfield unsuccessful plays.

I'm trying to get across that in BOTH these scenarios, there's only one constant failure, and it's not Bevell..........it's the O-line.

 

[mrt144]

[

It'd work if the O-line was completely different from top to bottom (and if CAR wasn't playing a zone with the top two DBs having eyes on RW the entire time) That has INT written all over it.

Fixed

But the point of failure I'm driving at is that the scheme is taking for granted that OL protection will be there. If we can ask for RW to grow as a player, surely we can ask a OC to grow as a coordinator. I mean, we don't have to be entirely consistent all the time in scrutiny, it's just beyond the pale that people are asking a 4th year QB to play like a 13 year HoF right now rather than asking a 10 year OC veteran to understand that certain plays are DOA because the line sucks so bad.

And I still contest that the Seahawks are running a passing offense like the rest of the league. We aren't, and the Hawks have barely invested in it.

Wait, the entire premise of this thread is to blame Bevell for calling a play that wasn't long enough to get the first down.

Now you want him to call more shorter plays so Russell doesn't get plowed over like in the gif posted.

Make up your mind. Do you want safer shorter O-line sucks plays, or do you want longer Russell gets sacked 10 times a game downfield unsuccessful plays.

I'm trying to get across that in BOTH these scenarios, there's only one constant failure, and it's not Bevell..........it's the O-line.

I thought you said 90% of pass plays in the NFL have long intermediate and deep routes yet here we are.

Bevell should call plays that are situationally cognizant, I don't really agree that the 3rd and 9 is one of those.