Bevell Revisited

[Sarlacc83]

If we didn't have RW, I promise you we'd not be in the lead of the NFC right now. On the other hand, with a random different offensive coordinator, I feel very confident we'd be 10-1 or even 11-0 right now. Disagree if you want, it's just my opinion.

Here is the list of current NFL offensive coordinators:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... ordinators

Please go through the list and name 10 (hell 5) of them you'd prefer over Bevell. I think you'll find that most of the great offensive systems belong to the head coach not the OC (Payton, McCarthy, etc.). And that's because very good to great OCs become head coaches rather quickly. (Funny, given the rumors around Bevell's name, right?)

 

[bestfightstory]

If we didn't have RW, I promise you we'd not be in the lead of the NFC right now. On the other hand, with a random different offensive coordinator, I feel very confident we'd be 10-1 or even 11-0 right now. Disagree if you want, it's just my opinion.

Here is the list of current NFL offensive coordinators:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... ordinators

Please go through the list and name 10 (hell 5) of them you'd prefer over Bevell. I think you'll find that most of the great offensive systems belong to the head coach not the OC (Payton, McCarthy, etc.). And that's because very good to great OCs become head coaches rather quickly. (Funny, given the rumors around Bevell's name, right?)

<<crickets>>

 

[Sac]

I'd take Norv Turner as an OC.

 

[Sports Hernia]

If we didn't have RW, I promise you we'd not be in the lead of the NFC right now. On the other hand, with a random different offensive coordinator, I feel very confident we'd be 10-1 or even 11-0 right now. Disagree if you want, it's just my opinion.

Here is the list of current NFL offensive coordinators:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... ordinators

Please go through the list and name 10 (hell 5) of them you'd prefer over Bevell. I think you'll find that most of the great offensive systems belong to the head coach not the OC (Payton, McCarthy, etc.). And that's because very good to great OCs become head coaches rather quickly. (Funny, given the rumors around Bevell's name, right?)

<<crickets>>

LOL.
You could have made the same argument for d-cords last offseason when Gus left, and guess what, They found a better guy to replace him with. :229031_shrug: They'll do the same if Bevell leaves.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Sigh, Sarlacc & BFS.

a) I love faulty syllogisms.
b) This is such a pointless debate, Bevell lovers will keep riding him no matter what, it seems.
c) You will interpret this as me giving up and you winning the "argument", but in reality, I'm just too exasperated to continue arguing this for the time being.
d) Go ahead and think you're right, I don't care.
e) Enjoy your feeling of thinking you won.
f) Profit.

 

[Hawks46]

I'd like to point out one thing - every single offensive coordinator in this league is a genius if his team executes everything very well. That doesn't mean the coordinator is great. In fact, I would say the biggest test of a coordinator is how they handle long periods of poor execution. Great ones adjust and find a way to improve, even if it doesn't get them a win. Bad ones keep banging their heads against the wall. A particularly great example of this is Roman down in San Francisco. Keeps calling 7-step dropbacks for Kaepernick in the dumbest situations all of the time every week, it's pretty funny. As much as I've criticized Bevell, he is not a BAD coordinator, I think he is just merely average/mediocre.

iRo for the win! :th2thumbs:

(I couldn't let what I saw slide. Rather, I refused to.)

Funny, Bellichick just came out and said the same thing, something along the lines of "there's very thin line between Genius and being Awful".

 

[jlwaters1]

Sigh, Sarlacc & BFS.

a) I love faulty syllogisms.
b) This is such a pointless debate, Bevell lovers will keep riding him no matter what, it seems.
c) You will interpret this as me giving up and you winning the "argument", but in reality, I'm just too exasperated to continue arguing this for the time being.
d) Go ahead and think you're right, I don't care.
e) Enjoy your feeling of thinking you won.
f) Profit.

what exactly do you not like about Bevell? Honest question. You say it's a logical fallacy that he's not a large part of the success of the team. But that's just an opinion. You have no way of quantifying his impact on this team's success anymore than I do. You say he's average. I think he's doing a good job. Could he be better? Sure, but we don't know everything that is being factored into these calls.

As you say in another post, a OC looks like a genius if execution is perfect, IMO the execution has been far and away the bigger hindrance to our success than the play calling. Look at most of the early games, drives were constantly being scuttled with untimely penalties or miscues. the execution was average at best for most of the 1st half of the season.

 

[Sarlacc83]

Sigh, Sarlacc & BFS.

a) I love faulty syllogisms.
b) This is such a pointless debate, Bevell lovers will keep riding him no matter what, it seems.
c) You will interpret this as me giving up and you winning the "argument", but in reality, I'm just too exasperated to continue arguing this for the time being.
d) Go ahead and think you're right, I don't care.
e) Enjoy your feeling of thinking you won.
f) Profit.

I love the preemptive strike to cover up your mistake. You made the claim any random o-coordinator could do better than Bevell. I directly challenged your claim. So, no, definitely not faulty.

If we didn't have RW, I promise you we'd not be in the lead of the NFC right now. On the other hand, with a random different offensive coordinator, I feel very confident we'd be 10-1 or even 11-0 right now. Disagree if you want, it's just my opinion.

Here is the list of current NFL offensive coordinators:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... ordinators

Please go through the list and name 10 (hell 5) of them you'd prefer over Bevell. I think you'll find that most of the great offensive systems belong to the head coach not the OC (Payton, McCarthy, etc.). And that's because very good to great OCs become head coaches rather quickly. (Funny, given the rumors around Bevell's name, right?)

<<crickets>>

LOL.
You could have made the same argument for d-cords last offseason when Gus left, and guess what, They found a better guy to replace him with. :229031_shrug: They'll do the same if Bevell leaves.

Funny, because Gus's defense allowed fewer points with lesser defensive talent. (And their advanced stats are about the same, with Quinn's being a touch higher.) I personally think it's a wash.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I love the preemptive strike to cover up your mistake. You made the claim any random o-coordinator could do better than Bevell. I directly challenged your claim. So, no, definitely not faulty.

Go ahead and think that. I don't care. Assume you're right. Also, you missed the reference point of the faulty syllogism comment.

Funny, because Gus's defense allowed fewer points with lesser defensive talent. (And their advanced stats are about the same, with Quinn's being a touch higher.) I personally think it's a wash.

You don't seem to know what you're talking about, here. Factor in the several special teams bonehead turnover scores we've allowed that get credited to the defense that we didn't allow last year, and the increased turnovers our offense has coughed up and see where it really ranks. Also, after 11 games played last year our defense was allowing an average of 16.81 points per game. Right now through 11 games, we're allowing 16.27 points per game, including the scores our special teams unit has screwed us over with.

Our defense is playing better than last year's.

 

[daketah]

Bevell is going to call plays that win the Super Bowl, then he is going to accept a head coaching job somewhere in the league.

His replacement will inherit a good squad and will likely call plays that lead to another playoff berth.

We will complain about anything that doesn't win style points like Alabama over Sisters of the Poor.

Some of us will argue with the Debbie Downers of the crowd, the rest will defend our position to the Cloud 9ers.

Wash, rinse, repeat. Dynasty.

My sentimental pick for the next OC is Jim Zorn.

 

[KK84]

Bevell is going to call plays that win the Super Bowl, then he is going to accept a head coaching job somewhere in the league.

His replacement will inherit a good squad and will likely call plays that lead to another playoff berth.

We will complain about anything that doesn't win style points like Alabama over Sisters of the Poor.

Some of us will argue with the Debbie Downers of the crowd, the rest will defend our position to the Cloud 9ers.

Wash, rinse, repeat. Dynasty.

My sentimental pick for the next OC is Jim Zorn.

Meh. As much I love Zorn, he should be a career qb coach.

 

[TheRealDTM]

All of our losses are entirely his fault. I want him gone.

Our loss is thanks to Sidney Rice paper. Dude should have made a play on that ball, he straight quit. Still mad about that.

As far as that coaching link goes, I'd take McDaniels, Whizenhunt, Norv Turner and Jay Gruden in a heartbeat, after that it does get into Bevell territory

edit: forgot Mike Shula!

 

[volsunghawk]

If we didn't have RW, I promise you we'd not be in the lead of the NFC right now. On the other hand, with a random different offensive coordinator, I feel very confident we'd be 10-1 or even 11-0 right now. Disagree if you want, it's just my opinion.

Here is the list of current NFL offensive coordinators:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ac ... ordinators

Please go through the list and name 10 (hell 5) of them you'd prefer over Bevell. I think you'll find that most of the great offensive systems belong to the head coach not the OC (Payton, McCarthy, etc.). And that's because very good to great OCs become head coaches rather quickly. (Funny, given the rumors around Bevell's name, right?)

I would pick Whisenhunt, Gilbride, and Turner, maybe.

I think Whisenhunt could do well with Wilson, and Gilbride seems like he would fit well in a run-heavy system. Turner is a terrible HC, but he gets results with QBs, and I think he'd be good for Wilson's continued development.

Don't really see anyone else on that list I'd like (and several names I don't even recognize).

 

[MontanaHawk05]

They should bring in Paul Chryst.

 

[Sarlacc83]

I love the preemptive strike to cover up your mistake. You made the claim any random o-coordinator could do better than Bevell. I directly challenged your claim. So, no, definitely not faulty.

Go ahead and think that. I don't care. Assume you're right. Also, you missed the reference point of the faulty syllogism comment.

See bolded.

Funny, because Gus's defense allowed fewer points with lesser defensive talent. (And their advanced stats are about the same, with Quinn's being a touch higher.) I personally think it's a wash.

You don't seem to know what you're talking about, here. Factor in the several special teams bonehead turnover scores we've allowed that get credited to the defense that we didn't allow last year, and the increased turnovers our offense has coughed up and see where it really ranks. Also, after 11 games played last year our defense was allowing an average of 16.81 points per game. Right now through 11 games, we're allowing 16.27 points per game, including the scores our special teams unit has screwed us over with.

Our defense is playing better than last year's.

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

 

[RolandDeschain]

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

We've also had several TDs scored after our backups were put in this year already, and at 11 games in last year, we hadn't yet brought out the backup squad.

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

 

[-The Glove-]

I said it last year...I'd love to see what Turner could do with this O

 

[Sarlacc83]

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

We've also had several TDs scored after our backups were put in this year already, and at 11 games in last year, we hadn't yet brought out the backup squad.

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

You are right about the points. I was taking my stats from a previous calculation and forgot to update.

However:

# of 30 point games against Bradley last year (with a slate of better QBs nonetheless): 0 Yes this includes ST. Just goes to show that Bradley was able to keep the score low so that miscues from Wilson in the redzone and ST gaffes didn't raise the overall.

# of 20+ point games: 5 to 5 (though you can take out 7 against the Vikings).

WASH

 

[Sports Hernia]

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

We've also had several TDs scored after our backups were put in this year already, and at 11 games in last year, we hadn't yet brought out the backup squad.

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

You are right about the points. I was taking my stats from a previous calculation and forgot to update.

However:

# of 30 point games against Bradley last year (with a slate of better QBs nonetheless): 0 Yes this includes ST. Just goes to show that Bradley was able to keep the score low so that miscues from Wilson in the redzone and ST gaffes didn't raise the overall.

# of 20+ point games: 5 to 5 (though you can take out 7 against the Vikings).

WASH

Care to state how many games Bradley's softzone-prevent cost the Hawks last year in the last few minutes of games? Or is that a taboo subject among the Bradley-fanboys?

 

[Sarlacc83]

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

We've also had several TDs scored after our backups were put in this year already, and at 11 games in last year, we hadn't yet brought out the backup squad.

See bolded. Reading. It's fundamental.

You are right about the points. I was taking my stats from a previous calculation and forgot to update.

However:

# of 30 point games against Bradley last year (with a slate of better QBs nonetheless): 0 Yes this includes ST. Just goes to show that Bradley was able to keep the score low so that miscues from Wilson in the redzone and ST gaffes didn't raise the overall.

# of 20+ point games: 5 to 5 (though you can take out 7 against the Vikings).

WASH

Care to state how many games Bradley's softzone-prevent cost the Hawks last year in the last few minutes of games?

Seattle lost 6 games. 2 were arguably because of soft zone (Detroit and Miami). Though the Miami game hung more on Pete's insistence in having a soft offense and in the Detroit game, they couldn't stop the Lions all day. The Bears game sort of counts, except that Sherman could've gotten in front of Marshall. Losses are a team effort.

Face it, your bias blinds you.