All Kidding Aside...Would You Fire Bevell?

[LickMyNuts]

I think DB does a poor job of compensating for our weaknesses and attacking the weakness of the other team.

He does well when the run game is going and he can play off of that.

 

[chet380]

I would have after he threw Lockette under the bus after that play.

He never did that.

Many people disagree with you and I'm one of them.

Well, I disagree with your disagreement -- my view of that pass play is that Lockette should have anticipated defensive pressure and used his greater size to knock the smaller DB off the ball.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I'm perfectly willing to start blaming Pete for some things, and I have been. I'll give you that. But then you have to start asking about Bevell's specific play-call choices. We were back to long sideline bombs on 3rd down this week, and taking Michael out in favor of Alex Collins.

Why don't we complain when those 3rd down sideline bombs result in long completions and TD's............as they have a very high rate with Russell as our QB?

That's what Pete and Bevell have coached Russell to do, that's why. If the defense shows blitz or 8-9 men in the box and there's one on one coverage on the outside? Check out of the play and try and burn the defense.

Michael went out cause he needed a break, he's not at the point where he can carry the ball 30 times in 90+ degree heat. Rawls was hurt, so in went Collins.

Did you also notice Russell has to literally tell Michael the play twice almost EVERY play? In the huddle and then he's still confused with the pass pro. Which is why Russell kept running the clock down to zero seemingly every play trying to get the protection right.

Everyone's in love with Michael again, but man is he still a dummy when it comes to pass pro and ball protection. He ain't ready to be our every down back, he's just not.

Those sideline bombs often involve Russell Wilson buying time with his legs.... Guess what? Against the Rams who have a terrifying front seven that plays aggressively with a immobile Russell Wilson that is NOT the correct play call. Especially when we were not working off of the play action, or when Russell Wilson is not a threat to take off. They may have worked in the past, but guess what? That was then this is now. Bevell was unable to adapt to the hand he was played and as a result we kept trying the same things, and expecting a different result.

My question is why are we deviating from what worked for us last year? When we implemented a more traditional quick passing game, and went from our traditional approach to things our offense tore it up. Our offensive line looked better, and Wilson didn't have to pull plays out of nowhere with his improv. skills as often.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

I would have after he threw Lockette under the bus after that play.

He never did that.

Many people disagree with you and I'm one of them.

Well, I disagree with your disagreement -- my view of that pass play is that Lockette should have anticipated defensive pressure and used his greater size to knock the smaller DB off the ball.

Never said otherwise. I said many people, myself included think Bevell threw Lockette under the bus rather than fall on the sword as many people think he should have done.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Those sideline bombs often involve Russell Wilson buying time with his legs.... Guess what? Against the Rams who have a terrifying front seven that plays aggressively with a immobile Russell Wilson that is NOT the correct play call. Especially when we were not working off of the play action, or when Russell Wilson is not a threat to take off. They may have worked in the past, but guess what? That was then this is now. Bevell was unable to adapt to the hand he was played and as a result we kept trying the same things, and expecting a different result.

My question is why are we deviating from what worked for us last year? When we implemented a more traditional quick passing game, and went from our traditional approach to things our offense tore it up. Our offensive line looked better, and Wilson didn't have to pull plays out of nowhere with his improv. skills as often.

1. It did work yesterday, twice to Lockett just in the first half.

2. We've tried your quick outs, slants, bubble screens and short crosses against the Rams. Nothing has worked, that's why we keep losing.

So it's not like Bevell and Pete just aren't trying new things, or what's worked against other teams. When your mobile QB isn't mobile, your O-line is getting blown up every play, no one can go three straight plays without getting a penalty and your WR's can't get any separation even on the easiest of pass plays............you lose 9-3.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Many people disagree with you and I'm one of them.

Well, I disagree with your disagreement -- my view of that pass play is that Lockette should have anticipated defensive pressure and used his greater size to knock the smaller DB off the ball.

Never said otherwise. I said many people, myself included think Bevell threw Lockette under the bus rather than fall on the sword as many people think he should have done.

He answered the question. It was the right answer. I didn't realize he was acting in a Shakespearen tragedy.

 

[Natethegreat]

Those sideline bombs often involve Russell Wilson buying time with his legs.... Guess what? Against the Rams who have a terrifying front seven that plays aggressively with a immobile Russell Wilson that is NOT the correct play call. Especially when we were not working off of the play action, or when Russell Wilson is not a threat to take off. They may have worked in the past, but guess what? That was then this is now. Bevell was unable to adapt to the hand he was played and as a result we kept trying the same things, and expecting a different result.

My question is why are we deviating from what worked for us last year? When we implemented a more traditional quick passing game, and went from our traditional approach to things our offense tore it up. Our offensive line looked better, and Wilson didn't have to pull plays out of nowhere with his improv. skills as often.

1. It did work yesterday, twice to Lockett just in the first half.

2. We've tried your quick outs, slants, bubble screens and short crosses against the Rams. Nothing has worked, that's why we keep losing.

So it's not like Bevell and Pete just aren't trying new things, or what's worked against other teams. When your mobile QB isn't mobile, your O-line is getting blown up every play, no one can go three straight plays without getting a penalty and your WR's can't get any separation even on the easiest of pass plays............you lose 9-3.

I would add that we are not opening running lanes so far this year either. I do think our pass pro has been decent considering the lines we have played.
Compared to last year they truly are better than last year at this time but that is a low bar to get over I realize.

 

[NFSeahawks]

Okung wouldn't have made any difference.

Denver: 141 rush yards/game. 4.7 ypc.

Seattle: 89.5 rush yards/game. 3.2 ypc.

But okay, Sowell = Okung. ::eyeroll.

Okung made a difference.

I'll admit I didn't want to keep him and I'll also admit that I was wrong.

The run blocking has been terrible, perhaps I didn't give Okung enough credit.

Sigh...

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Many people disagree with you and I'm one of them.

Well, I disagree with your disagreement -- my view of that pass play is that Lockette should have anticipated defensive pressure and used his greater size to knock the smaller DB off the ball.

Never said otherwise. I said many people, myself included think Bevell threw Lockette under the bus rather than fall on the sword as many people think he should have done.

He answered the question. It was the right answer. I didn't realize he was acting in a Shakespearen tragedy.

Many people think not handing the ball to Lynch was a tragedy of proportions well beyond anything Shakespeare ever wrote. And I don't believe it was the right answer just as I don't believe a supervisor should ever reprimand an employee in front of other employees.

 

[Siouxhawk]

I understand what you're saying, but I just don't equate not breaking to the ball hard enough as a reprimand. To me it's just honesty.

 

[NFSeahawks]

He answered the question. It was the right answer. I didn't realize he was acting in a Shakespearen tragedy.

Many people think not handing the ball to Lynch was a tragedy of proportions well beyond anything Shakespeare ever wrote. And I don't believe it was the right answer just as I don't believe a supervisor should ever reprimand an employee in front of other employees.

Everyone thinks that, let this guy thinks what he wants.

We all have eyes and we all have brains. It's not rocket science. Thank him for his lens on it though. It's cool to have different views.

Bevell's history in the league speaks for itself.

Bevell's decision making as offensive coordinator is questionable at best. There is lots of evidence to back that up too.

 

[JimmyG]

Our offense has been very efficient and effective the last few years (based on metrics like DVOA, etc). We've done very well, despite the fact that most of our cap room has gone towards the defense. I think Bevell has done a terrific job.

As others have mentioned, offensive coordinators are always the easiest to scapegoat. In fact, I remember being on a Broncos messages board and seeing Broncos fans complain about Kubiak's playcalling when the Broncos were literally the highest-scoring offenses of all time. Fans will never be satisfied with playcalling. Ever. Playcalling is a game of chess, and play calls will inevitably fail.

The two biggest issues with this offense right now are Wilson's bum ankle, which has handicapped the offense, and the offensive line, which has been absolutely dreadful, especially in the running game. Bevell is the least of our concerns, but predictably, everybody goes with the easy and baseless scapegoat that most fans use.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

22 offensive possessions this year with 1 TD says it's reasonable to question the OC, bad o-line or not (and they have been bad).

 

[Spin Doctor]

Those sideline bombs often involve Russell Wilson buying time with his legs.... Guess what? Against the Rams who have a terrifying front seven that plays aggressively with a immobile Russell Wilson that is NOT the correct play call. Especially when we were not working off of the play action, or when Russell Wilson is not a threat to take off. They may have worked in the past, but guess what? That was then this is now. Bevell was unable to adapt to the hand he was played and as a result we kept trying the same things, and expecting a different result.

My question is why are we deviating from what worked for us last year? When we implemented a more traditional quick passing game, and went from our traditional approach to things our offense tore it up. Our offensive line looked better, and Wilson didn't have to pull plays out of nowhere with his improv. skills as often.

1. It did work yesterday, twice to Lockett just in the first half.

2. We've tried your quick outs, slants, bubble screens and short crosses against the Rams. Nothing has worked, that's why we keep losing.

So it's not like Bevell and Pete just aren't trying new things, or what's worked against other teams. When your mobile QB isn't mobile, your O-line is getting blown up every play, no one can go three straight plays without getting a penalty and your WR's can't get any separation even on the easiest of pass plays............you lose 9-3.

How many points did it get us? How many times did it fail? Quite a few, and it only netted us three points. We can't keep relying on big plays to get us down the field. Quick outs, slants, WCO style of attack is realistically the best option given the situation. Tell me, why are long developing routes a good idea given the Hawks situation that game?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Tell me, why are long developing routes a good idea given the Hawks situation that game?

Taking a three or five step drop and lobbing a ball down the sideline hoping your WR makes a play isn't a long developing route.

And if that's happening more than once or twice a game it's because you can't get anything else going. Believe me, everyone would LOVE to just run the ball, but this line is so terrible it's getting pushed back two yards on RUN plays, that's panic button time my friend.

So against the Ram's D that mauls our line and press covers our WR's to death, you try and get them to back off by making those sort of plays downfield.........and it worked a couple times until Lockett got hurt.

Of all the things to complain about ,this is like #8 on my list.

- horrific O-line play
- stupid penalties
- defense that couldn't keep the Rams deep in their territory to try and get our offense short fields
- no turnovers, again
- fumble by Michael
- miscommunication with LB's and DB's passing off TE's and receivers, again
- Richardson running the ball out before halftime even though Pete told his SPECIFICALLY to not do so, and it cost us a FG attempt

 

[johnnyfever]

Tell me, why are long developing routes a good idea given the Hawks situation that game?

Taking a three or five step drop and lobbing a ball down the sideline hoping your WR makes a play isn't a long developing route.

And if that's happening more than once or twice a game it's because you can't get anything else going. Believe me, everyone would LOVE to just run the ball, but this line is so terrible it's getting pushed back two yards on RUN plays, that's panic button time my friend.

So against the Ram's D that mauls our line and press covers our WR's to death, you try and get them to back off by making those sort of plays downfield.........and it worked a couple times until Lockett got hurt.

Of all the things to complain about ,this is like #8 on my list.

- horrific O-line play
- stupid penalties
- defense that couldn't keep the Rams deep in their territory to try and get our offense short fields
- no turnovers, again
- fumble by Michael
- miscommunication with LB's and DB's passing off TE's and receivers, again
- Richardson running the ball out before halftime even though Pete told his SPECIFICALLY to not do so, and it cost us a FG attempt

So just to make sure I'm reading this right, in your opinion offensive strategy and playcalling doesn't factor at all in this loss according to your list. You thought the playcalling was just fine.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

So just to make sure I'm reading this right, in your opinion offensive strategy and playcalling doesn't factor at all in this loss according to your list. You thought the playcalling was just fine.

It's football, after losses EVERYTHING matters.

So of course playcalling is one of those. But some of you guys act like all our problems are solved by firing Bevell, and my guess is you wouldn't even notice if we switched coordinators, for the better even. Pete has laid the foundation and philosophy for how he wants his offense run, and you're seeing it......for better and for worse. Right now it's worse. End of last year? It was for the better.

See how that works? QB healthy and on point, O-line blocking and gelling, WR's and TE's running crisp routes and making plays and RB's beast moding? #1 scoring offense the 2nd half of season.

Terrible O-line? Hurt RB's? Hurt QB? Hurt TE's? WR's dropping balls and leaving for full quarters due to injury? Stinkville.

 

[johnnyfever]

So just to make sure I'm reading this right, in your opinion offensive strategy and playcalling doesn't factor at all in this loss according to your list. You thought the playcalling was just fine.

It's football, after losses EVERYTHING matters.

So of course playcalling is one of those. But some of you guys act like all our problems are solved by firing Bevell, and my guess is you wouldn't even notice if we switched coordinators, for the better even. Pete has laid the foundation and philosophy for how he wants his offense run, and you're seeing it......for better and for worse. Right now it's worse. End of last year? It was for the better.

See how that works? QB healthy and on point, O-line blocking and gelling, WR's and TE's running crisp routes and making plays and RB's beast moding? #1 scoring offense the 2nd half of season.

Terrible O-line? Hurt RB's? Hurt QB? Hurt TE's? WR's dropping balls and leaving for full quarters due to injury? Stinkville.

No need to be condescending, and I haven't called for firing bevell, but leaving offensive playcalling off of your list of reasons we lost makes no sense. The second half of the season is exactly the point I have been making. We changed our strategy from the beginning of last years, and the first 2 games of this years to a way more spread out offense. So far, we are not seeing that this year, so the point you are making about the sudden shift in production for the latter part of last year is EXACTLY the point I and others are making about a lack of offensive strategy being the number 1 reason for the poor performance in the first 2 games. If we don't expand the field of coverage for a defense they can bunch at the line. We need to take as much pressure off of this line until we get it figured out. The only way this is accomplished is with a change from what we are seeing right now. Who is in charge of making these changes? Bevell and Carroll.

 

[raisethe3]

Yes. This guy should've been fired after Super Bowl 49. But whatever, Pete is too loyal to him.

 

[nash72]

Well, I disagree with your disagreement -- my view of that pass play is that Lockette should have anticipated defensive pressure and used his greater size to knock the smaller DB off the ball.

Never said otherwise. I said many people, myself included think Bevell threw Lockette under the bus rather than fall on the sword as many people think he should have done.

He answered the question. It was the right answer. I didn't realize he was acting in a Shakespearen tragedy.

Many people think not handing the ball to Lynch was a tragedy of proportions well beyond anything Shakespeare ever wrote. And I don't believe it was the right answer just as I don't believe a supervisor should ever reprimand an employee in front of other employees.[/quote]

The decision to even call a pass to Ricardo Lockette in that situation is the real crime here. Not only was it one of the worst calls ever, the call had the pass going to a special teams pundit who was probably the worst receiver on the team. There was nothing right or good about that play or the call. Bevell took absolutely no credit for its failure either.