Do you want Bevell gone?

[olyfan63]

Spin Doctor, loved your situational-awareness-challenged chess player analogy for Bevell.

I don't see much point in getting rid of Bevell. To me, it would be more like, let's get a few more weapons.
But weapons more like Sidney Rice and Golden Tate, and less like Percy Harvin.

Remember that Russell Wilson tied the NFL record for most TD passes in the first two seasons under Bevell, with Rice, Tate, Baldwin, and Miller to throw to. Remember the bomb to Sidney Rice that beat the Patriots in 2012. All Bevell.

 

[brimsalabim]

Well it doesn't look like he is heading back to Wiskey unless he wants to be OC there. It's being reported that they have hired Paul Cryst from Pitt.

 

[Scottemojo]

I would love to see Bevell move on if we could bring in somebody better. I don't just want him gone because I'm an angry moron. I want to see progress at any and every position in the organization.

:salute:

Pretty much the way I see it.

 

[Russ Willstrong]

Paul Chryst = Wisconsin head coach. Bevell is ours!! Yea!!

 

[pehawk]

Yes. Darrell Bevell is a middle of the road offensive coordinator. Despite his meek presence his play calling is extreme. In some areas he looks like a genius, an innovator, in other areas he looks mediocre and flatout clueless. There is no inbetween with Darrell Bevell.

Bevell is a big picture guy, and this is why I think he might be okay as a head coach. I think his game plans are imaginative, and filled with outside of the box thinking. He's a chess player, he understands the opposing defenses weakness and if need be he'll spend the whole game setting up certain plays that take maximum advantage of the opposing teams nature. You can just tell that he spends a lot of time watching game film, he is able to exploit even the most mundane behavior tendencies of certain teams. That is not a quality that you see in many offensive coordinators.

Unfortunately the fact that he is a chess player is also his most glaring weakness. Like a chess game, his play calling is slow developing. His goal is to control the middle of the board so to speak, and he places his pieces very carefully, and very deliberately like any chess player would so that he will set himself up for the mid game phase of chess. This translates to an offense that sputters for the first half, sometimes for three quarters. He spends too much time setting up his gambets, implementing his plots, and plans -- this translates to an offense that can't get out of its own way for at least one quarter.

What Bevell will do is call the same plays over, and over again, give very obvious looks and run with a tepid, predictable bland offense, then he'll start to capitalize around the second half. He will lull the defense into complacency, and then suddenly his offense will spring to life almost miraculously when the defense finally decides to take his gambit. That is what this offense is; a giant gambit.

Darrell Bevell sticks to the game plan even when it doesn't work. He doesn't know how or flat out refuses to adapt to the situation. This also means that his situational awareness is almost non existent. His play calling becomes hilariously bad on third and short, and goal line situations. He tries to use a scalpel when the situation requires a meat cleaver or visa versa. This leads to a middle of the road offensive coordinator.

Bevell is a genius in some aspects of the game, but sadly that is also his greatest shortcoming as an offensive coordinator. Strictly as in game planning he is one of the best there is, but when his desktop theories get tested in the real world they lead to mediocre results. Real games involve adjustments and situational awareness, both qualities he doesn't have. If Bevell was not the chess player that he is, he would be one of the worst offensive coordinators in the league. This is why he is a mediocre offensive coordinator and why he could possibly be a great head coach.

Yeah, this is a good post and analogy.

 

[akscoundrel]

Yes. Darrell Bevell is a middle of the road offensive coordinator. Despite his meek presence his play calling is extreme. In some areas he looks like a genius, an innovator, in other areas he looks mediocre and flatout clueless. There is no inbetween with Darrell Bevell.

Bevell is a big picture guy, and this is why I think he might be okay as a head coach. I think his game plans are imaginative, and filled with outside of the box thinking. He's a chess player, he understands the opposing defenses weakness and if need be he'll spend the whole game setting up certain plays that take maximum advantage of the opposing teams nature. You can just tell that he spends a lot of time watching game film, he is able to exploit even the most mundane behavior tendencies of certain teams. That is not a quality that you see in many offensive coordinators.

Unfortunately the fact that he is a chess player is also his most glaring weakness. Like a chess game, his play calling is slow developing. His goal is to control the middle of the board so to speak, and he places his pieces very carefully, and very deliberately like any chess player would so that he will set himself up for the mid game phase of chess. This translates to an offense that sputters for the first half, sometimes for three quarters. He spends too much time setting up his gambets, implementing his plots, and plans -- this translates to an offense that can't get out of its own way for at least one quarter.

What Bevell will do is call the same plays over, and over again, give very obvious looks and run with a tepid, predictable bland offense, then he'll start to capitalize around the second half. He will lull the defense into complacency, and then suddenly his offense will spring to life almost miraculously when the defense finally decides to take his gambit. That is what this offense is; a giant gambit.

Darrell Bevell sticks to the game plan even when it doesn't work. He doesn't know how or flat out refuses to adapt to the situation. This also means that his situational awareness is almost non existent. His play calling becomes hilariously bad on third and short, and goal line situations. He tries to use a scalpel when the situation requires a meat cleaver or visa versa. This leads to a middle of the road offensive coordinator.

Bevell is a genius in some aspects of the game, but sadly that is also his greatest shortcoming as an offensive coordinator. Strictly as in game planning he is one of the best there is, but when his desktop theories get tested in the real world they lead to mediocre results. Real games involve adjustments and situational awareness, both qualities he doesn't have. If Bevell was not the chess player that he is, he would be one of the worst offensive coordinators in the league. This is why he is a mediocre offensive coordinator and why he could possibly be a great head coach.

This post seems full of contradiction. So he's an intelligent, out of the box creative thinker who watches film to look at exploiting opponents, looks at the big picture (winning the game), and is a better chess player than most, and yet, is mediocre and needs to gtfo?

The only time I would agree with him being mediocre was in the Harvin days earlier this year. Really just amounted to him being predicatable. And not handing the ball off to marshawn. We had to redo our offense overnight, and at this point the results aren't horrible. And, most importantly, he plays within petes philosophy and to the strengths of this team(defense).

Would rather keep bevell, and focus on our o line, wide receiver and possibly t.e. situation. Getting a true #1 would be huge, and having a line that could consistently block for wilson would be huge. And not having miller is huge.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I would love to see Bevell move on if we could bring in somebody better. I don't just want him gone because I'm an angry moron. I want to see progress at any and every position in the organization.

:salute:

Ah, so those of us that want him gone regardless are angry morons. Excellent!

 

[Spin Doctor]

Yes. Darrell Bevell is a middle of the road offensive coordinator. Despite his meek presence his play calling is extreme. In some areas he looks like a genius, an innovator, in other areas he looks mediocre and flatout clueless. There is no inbetween with Darrell Bevell.

Bevell is a big picture guy, and this is why I think he might be okay as a head coach. I think his game plans are imaginative, and filled with outside of the box thinking. He's a chess player, he understands the opposing defenses weakness and if need be he'll spend the whole game setting up certain plays that take maximum advantage of the opposing teams nature. You can just tell that he spends a lot of time watching game film, he is able to exploit even the most mundane behavior tendencies of certain teams. That is not a quality that you see in many offensive coordinators.

Unfortunately the fact that he is a chess player is also his most glaring weakness. Like a chess game, his play calling is slow developing. His goal is to control the middle of the board so to speak, and he places his pieces very carefully, and very deliberately like any chess player would so that he will set himself up for the mid game phase of chess. This translates to an offense that sputters for the first half, sometimes for three quarters. He spends too much time setting up his gambets, implementing his plots, and plans -- this translates to an offense that can't get out of its own way for at least one quarter.

What Bevell will do is call the same plays over, and over again, give very obvious looks and run with a tepid, predictable bland offense, then he'll start to capitalize around the second half. He will lull the defense into complacency, and then suddenly his offense will spring to life almost miraculously when the defense finally decides to take his gambit. That is what this offense is; a giant gambit.

Darrell Bevell sticks to the game plan even when it doesn't work. He doesn't know how or flat out refuses to adapt to the situation. This also means that his situational awareness is almost non existent. His play calling becomes hilariously bad on third and short, and goal line situations. He tries to use a scalpel when the situation requires a meat cleaver or visa versa. This leads to a middle of the road offensive coordinator.

Bevell is a genius in some aspects of the game, but sadly that is also his greatest shortcoming as an offensive coordinator. Strictly as in game planning he is one of the best there is, but when his desktop theories get tested in the real world they lead to mediocre results. Real games involve adjustments and situational awareness, both qualities he doesn't have. If Bevell was not the chess player that he is, he would be one of the worst offensive coordinators in the league. This is why he is a mediocre offensive coordinator and why he could possibly be a great head coach.

This post seems full of contradiction. So he's an intelligent, out of the box creative thinker who watches film to look at exploiting opponents, looks at the big picture (winning the game), and is a better chess player than most, and yet, is mediocre and needs to gtfo?

The only time I would agree with him being mediocre was in the Harvin days earlier this year. Really just amounted to him being predicatable. And not handing the ball off to marshawn. We had to redo our offense overnight, and at this point the results aren't horrible. And, most importantly, he plays within petes philosophy and to the strengths of this team(defense).

Would rather keep bevell, and focus on our o line, wide receiver and possibly t.e. situation. Getting a true #1 would be huge, and having a line that could consistently block for wilson would be huge. And not having miller is huge.

It's not really a contradiction if you pay very close attention to Bevell. He's great at planning, and looking at the overall big picture, but when the situation calls for him to adapt he doesn't. This leads to slow offenses, normally it works out in the end, but that is only because we've been blessed with a smothering defense. His offenses take far too long to develop properly. I also think that his play calling is also holding Russell back a bit.

Yeah.. if had big playmakers it would help, but our offensive numbers are actually similar to last years when we had Tate healthy and Baldwin playing in the slot. Our red zone woes are partially due to his play calling.

 

[seahawk12thman]

No

IMHO Derell Bevell is an excellent OC. He has evolved and quite frankly he seems to have a great pulse on the game. I am probably the only poster that feels this way but I would like him to stay.

 

[seahawk12thman]

Yes. Darrell Bevell is a middle of the road offensive coordinator. Despite his meek presence his play calling is extreme. In some areas he looks like a genius, an innovator, in other areas he looks mediocre and flatout clueless. There is no inbetween with Darrell Bevell.

Bevell is a big picture guy, and this is why I think he might be okay as a head coach. I think his game plans are imaginative, and filled with outside of the box thinking. He's a chess player, he understands the opposing defenses weakness and if need be he'll spend the whole game setting up certain plays that take maximum advantage of the opposing teams nature. You can just tell that he spends a lot of time watching game film, he is able to exploit even the most mundane behavior tendencies of certain teams. That is not a quality that you see in many offensive coordinators.

Unfortunately the fact that he is a chess player is also his most glaring weakness. Like a chess game, his play calling is slow developing. His goal is to control the middle of the board so to speak, and he places his pieces very carefully, and very deliberately like any chess player would so that he will set himself up for the mid game phase of chess. This translates to an offense that sputters for the first half, sometimes for three quarters. He spends too much time setting up his gambets, implementing his plots, and plans -- this translates to an offense that can't get out of its own way for at least one quarter.

What Bevell will do is call the same plays over, and over again, give very obvious looks and run with a tepid, predictable bland offense, then he'll start to capitalize around the second half. He will lull the defense into complacency, and then suddenly his offense will spring to life almost miraculously when the defense finally decides to take his gambit. That is what this offense is; a giant gambit.

Darrell Bevell sticks to the game plan even when it doesn't work. He doesn't know how or flat out refuses to adapt to the situation. This also means that his situational awareness is almost non existent. His play calling becomes hilariously bad on third and short, and goal line situations. He tries to use a scalpel when the situation requires a meat cleaver or visa versa. This leads to a middle of the road offensive coordinator.

Bevell is a genius in some aspects of the game, but sadly that is also his greatest shortcoming as an offensive coordinator. Strictly as in game planning he is one of the best there is, but when his desktop theories get tested in the real world they lead to mediocre results. Real games involve adjustments and situational awareness, both qualities he doesn't have. If Bevell was not the chess player that he is, he would be one of the worst offensive coordinators in the league. This is why he is a mediocre offensive coordinator and why he could possibly be a great head coach.

This post seems full of contradiction. So he's an intelligent, out of the box creative thinker who watches film to look at exploiting opponents, looks at the big picture (winning the game), and is a better chess player than most, and yet, is mediocre and needs to gtfo?

The only time I would agree with him being mediocre was in the Harvin days earlier this year. Really just amounted to him being predicatable. And not handing the ball off to marshawn. We had to redo our offense overnight, and at this point the results aren't horrible. And, most importantly, he plays within petes philosophy and to the strengths of this team(defense).

Would rather keep bevell, and focus on our o line, wide receiver and possibly t.e. situation. Getting a true #1 would be huge, and having a line that could consistently block for wilson would be huge. And not having miller is huge.

It's not really a contradiction if you pay very close attention to Bevell. He's great at planning, and looking at the overall big picture, but when the situation calls for him to adapt he doesn't. This leads to slow offenses, normally it works out in the end, but that is only because we've been blessed with a smothering defense. His offenses take far too long to develop properly. I also think that his play calling is also holding Russell back a bit.

I couldn't disagree more. Bevell has done an excellent job calling plays in the second half and that is when the Hawks make their adjustments. Not understanding the Bevell hate; quite frankly it is idiotic... be careful what you wish for.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Not understanding the Bevell hate;

That is very clear.

 

[-The Glove-]

Yes. Darrell Bevell is a middle of the road offensive coordinator. Despite his meek presence his play calling is extreme. In some areas he looks like a genius, an innovator, in other areas he looks mediocre and flatout clueless. There is no inbetween with Darrell Bevell.

Bevell is a big picture guy, and this is why I think he might be okay as a head coach. I think his game plans are imaginative, and filled with outside of the box thinking. He's a chess player, he understands the opposing defenses weakness and if need be he'll spend the whole game setting up certain plays that take maximum advantage of the opposing teams nature. You can just tell that he spends a lot of time watching game film, he is able to exploit even the most mundane behavior tendencies of certain teams. That is not a quality that you see in many offensive coordinators.

Unfortunately the fact that he is a chess player is also his most glaring weakness. Like a chess game, his play calling is slow developing. His goal is to control the middle of the board so to speak, and he places his pieces very carefully, and very deliberately like any chess player would so that he will set himself up for the mid game phase of chess. This translates to an offense that sputters for the first half, sometimes for three quarters. He spends too much time setting up his gambets, implementing his plots, and plans -- this translates to an offense that can't get out of its own way for at least one quarter.

What Bevell will do is call the same plays over, and over again, give very obvious looks and run with a tepid, predictable bland offense, then he'll start to capitalize around the second half. He will lull the defense into complacency, and then suddenly his offense will spring to life almost miraculously when the defense finally decides to take his gambit. That is what this offense is; a giant gambit.

Darrell Bevell sticks to the game plan even when it doesn't work. He doesn't know how or flat out refuses to adapt to the situation. This also means that his situational awareness is almost non existent. His play calling becomes hilariously bad on third and short, and goal line situations. He tries to use a scalpel when the situation requires a meat cleaver or visa versa. This leads to a middle of the road offensive coordinator.

Bevell is a genius in some aspects of the game, but sadly that is also his greatest shortcoming as an offensive coordinator. Strictly as in game planning he is one of the best there is, but when his desktop theories get tested in the real world they lead to mediocre results. Real games involve adjustments and situational awareness, both qualities he doesn't have. If Bevell was not the chess player that he is, he would be one of the worst offensive coordinators in the league. This is why he is a mediocre offensive coordinator and why he could possibly be a great head coach.

This post seems full of contradiction. So he's an intelligent, out of the box creative thinker who watches film to look at exploiting opponents, looks at the big picture (winning the game), and is a better chess player than most, and yet, is mediocre and needs to gtfo?

The only time I would agree with him being mediocre was in the Harvin days earlier this year. Really just amounted to him being predicatable. And not handing the ball off to marshawn. We had to redo our offense overnight, and at this point the results aren't horrible. And, most importantly, he plays within petes philosophy and to the strengths of this team(defense).

Would rather keep bevell, and focus on our o line, wide receiver and possibly t.e. situation. Getting a true #1 would be huge, and having a line that could consistently block for wilson would be huge. And not having miller is huge.

It's not really a contradiction if you pay very close attention to Bevell. He's great at planning, and looking at the overall big picture, but when the situation calls for him to adapt he doesn't. This leads to slow offenses, normally it works out in the end, but that is only because we've been blessed with a smothering defense. His offenses take far too long to develop properly. I also think that his play calling is also holding Russell back a bit.

Yeah.. if had big playmakers it would help, but our offensive numbers are actually similar to last years when we had Tate healthy and Baldwin playing in the slot. Our red zone woes are partially due to his play calling.

Agree with everything said here...he seems too slow to adapt in-game and that's my biggest knock on him

 

[-The Glove-]

Yes. Darrell Bevell is a middle of the road offensive coordinator. Despite his meek presence his play calling is extreme. In some areas he looks like a genius, an innovator, in other areas he looks mediocre and flatout clueless. There is no inbetween with Darrell Bevell.

Bevell is a big picture guy, and this is why I think he might be okay as a head coach. I think his game plans are imaginative, and filled with outside of the box thinking. He's a chess player, he understands the opposing defenses weakness and if need be he'll spend the whole game setting up certain plays that take maximum advantage of the opposing teams nature. You can just tell that he spends a lot of time watching game film, he is able to exploit even the most mundane behavior tendencies of certain teams. That is not a quality that you see in many offensive coordinators.

Unfortunately the fact that he is a chess player is also his most glaring weakness. Like a chess game, his play calling is slow developing. His goal is to control the middle of the board so to speak, and he places his pieces very carefully, and very deliberately like any chess player would so that he will set himself up for the mid game phase of chess. This translates to an offense that sputters for the first half, sometimes for three quarters. He spends too much time setting up his gambets, implementing his plots, and plans -- this translates to an offense that can't get out of its own way for at least one quarter.

What Bevell will do is call the same plays over, and over again, give very obvious looks and run with a tepid, predictable bland offense, then he'll start to capitalize around the second half. He will lull the defense into complacency, and then suddenly his offense will spring to life almost miraculously when the defense finally decides to take his gambit. That is what this offense is; a giant gambit.

Darrell Bevell sticks to the game plan even when it doesn't work. He doesn't know how or flat out refuses to adapt to the situation. This also means that his situational awareness is almost non existent. His play calling becomes hilariously bad on third and short, and goal line situations. He tries to use a scalpel when the situation requires a meat cleaver or visa versa. This leads to a middle of the road offensive coordinator.

Bevell is a genius in some aspects of the game, but sadly that is also his greatest shortcoming as an offensive coordinator. Strictly as in game planning he is one of the best there is, but when his desktop theories get tested in the real world they lead to mediocre results. Real games involve adjustments and situational awareness, both qualities he doesn't have. If Bevell was not the chess player that he is, he would be one of the worst offensive coordinators in the league. This is why he is a mediocre offensive coordinator and why he could possibly be a great head coach.

This post seems full of contradiction. So he's an intelligent, out of the box creative thinker who watches film to look at exploiting opponents, looks at the big picture (winning the game), and is a better chess player than most, and yet, is mediocre and needs to gtfo?

The only time I would agree with him being mediocre was in the Harvin days earlier this year. Really just amounted to him being predicatable. And not handing the ball off to marshawn. We had to redo our offense overnight, and at this point the results aren't horrible. And, most importantly, he plays within petes philosophy and to the strengths of this team(defense).

Would rather keep bevell, and focus on our o line, wide receiver and possibly t.e. situation. Getting a true #1 would be huge, and having a line that could consistently block for wilson would be huge. And not having miller is huge.

It's not really a contradiction if you pay very close attention to Bevell. He's great at planning, and looking at the overall big picture, but when the situation calls for him to adapt he doesn't. This leads to slow offenses, normally it works out in the end, but that is only because we've been blessed with a smothering defense. His offenses take far too long to develop properly. I also think that his play calling is also holding Russell back a bit.

I couldn't disagree more. Bevell has done an excellent job calling plays in the second half and that is when the Hawks make their adjustments. Not understanding the Bevell hate; quite frankly it is idiotic... be careful what you wish for.

Nice..."I don't agree with their opinions so it must be idiotic "

 

[seahawk12thman]

Not understanding the Bevell hate;

That is very clear.

Wasn't it Bevell that went to the read option when the Hawks went 11-5?
Doesn't Bevell get credit for keeping the O together during lasts years attrition of the oline? Particularly the Houston game when they were down 20-3 at halftime? His playcalling was fantastic that day along with Russell Wilson.
The New England game he did a fantastic job as well.
New Orleans game?
Niners NFCCG when he decided to use a two tight end set (two tackles) and man block. Marched right down the field and scored. Brilliant!!

Has he had bad games? yes who hasn't. I just don't want to see people bitching on here about how we "miss Bevell".

 

[lukerguy]

Bevell is a brilliant play designer but poor play caller. I'm not sure he isn't getting better at play calling though. I think he will continue to improve the longer he stays in Seattle. I wouldn't be devastated if he left either, but I do think continuity is a good thing in the NFL.

 

[seahawk12thman]

Nobody in here is an idiot and that is not what I am trying to say. Perhaps I am being idiotic but I think overall he has done a fantastic job.. :17: