2016:
Hawks.................................. Enemies
16.............................................. 3 = WIN
3 ................................................6 = LOSS
24.............................................. 3 = WIN
14...............................................10 = WIN
17............................................... 3 = WIN
0................................................. 3 = TIE*************************
14..............................................13 = LOSS**********************
28...............................................17 = WIN
19.............................................. 14 = WIN
16............................................... 7 = WIN
5 ................................................14 = LOSS
23............................................... 7 = WIN
3................................................. 21 = LOSS
10................................................ 3 = WIN
3.................................................. 14 = LOSS
19.................................................14 = WIN
2017:
3................................................... 0 = LOSS**************************
6 ................................................... 6 = WIN****************************
7 .................................................... 9 = LOSS
So what is presented is a breakdown of scores at halftime ranging back through all of 2016 games. Games where outcomes have asterisks note that the outcome is an anomaly, in that either the outcome was a tie, halftime was tied, or leading at half we lose. Otherwise every other game follows the (rudimentary) pattern of leading at half= predictable win, trailing at half=predictable loss.
ONE THING TO NOTE WORTH ALL CAPS:
THE HAWKS HAVE NOT WON A GAME WHEN TRAILING AT HALF THE ENTIRE 2016 AND 2017 SEASONS.
I'm not even looking at the playoffs because they are their own animal. To find the last time the Seahawks won a regular season game when trailing at half, you need to go back to week 12 of 2015!
So why do we stubbornly hold the mantra of coming out slow, wearing them down, playing for the 4th quarter cause that's supposedly when you win games, get hot as hell in 2 minute drives every Sunday, etc.?
All the evidence points to us having every reason to come out firing like crazy. Two times in this span we have lost a game leading at half. Both times were against HoF quarterbacks and the halftime leads were 1 point and then 3 points. A combined total of 4 points going against Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers is essentially no lead at all, proving my point even more- we need to score in bunches early and often.
We have a historically crappy Oline. We have sustained some unfortunate drops. Russ is incredibly inaccurate early but can throw dimes as the game wears on inexplicably.
Forgive me for coming down on Bevell in spite of these obstacles. I have a job. I have obstacles. I figure out a way. If I locked any of you passionate fans in a room with Russ for an off season, I feel like you could come up with a plan to get him going early.
ANOTHER POINT WORTH ALL CAPS:
WE HAVE ONE OF THE GREATEST DEFENSES IN HISTORY. THIS OFFSEASON, BEVELL SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE WEAKNESSES OF THIS LINE SIMPLY BY VIRTUE OF RUNNING HIS OFFENSE AGAINST OUR DEFENSE. BY SEEING THE FINAL PRODUCT IN THIS MANNER, THEY SHOULD HAVE LOOKED AS BAD OR PROBABLY WORSE THAN THEY DO IN FRONT OF OUR VERY EYES. HE THEN SHOULD HAVE BAILED ON THE CURRENT PLAN AND TOLD PETE TO BRING IN TRASH OFF THE STREET TO COMPETE FOR THE ROSTER. ANYTHING AT ALL DIFFERENT COULD PROBABLY PAN OUT BETTER, SO WHY IS THIS ''THE'' FINAL PRODUCT WITH EXTREMELY LIMITED ATTEMPTS TO FIX? WHO EXACTLY HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN FOR COMPETITION?
Granted all that is more on Cable, but Bevell is the final stop for orchestrator of the offense. If the symphony sucks, he needs to answer why. Then if Cable gives him a BS answer, Bevell should be vocalizing those answers to Pete. But all I heard was everything's rosy and the off season was a success minus Fant's injury. But we look far worse than simply an injury to Fant.
I feel like many of you could figure out how to utilize Tyler Lockett. When he catches the ball these days I swear I completely, 100% forgot we even have him on the team. Oh by the way, he's probably a top 5 'football speed' player in the league we're talking about there.
I feel like many of you could figure out how to utilize Jimmy Graham. I mean at least we threw the fade for him at the goal line for once. But as I've discussed with some around here, I'm less than impressed with that play's execution. I maintain it looks like we've ran that about twice in practice lately.
I feel like many of you could figure out how to utilize Carson. I swear I saw us start imposing our will on Tennessee Sunday when we started plowing forward when we picked up our first couple of first downs. Pounded the rock right into their territory. Then abandoned the run. Nice. Enter Jon Ryan.
I feel like many of you would utilize Russell Wilson earlier. Use his mobility, use his IQ. Use him period as anything but what he's not: a traditional pocket QB.
To preempt any arguments against, recently when I critiqued coaches I got chastised by some claiming I don't know X's and O's and that I needed to argue what exactly could have been done in some of the examples I cited above to be better. One even said he had coaching experience and wanted my take on certain things in a more, profound way. Which is fine, but my question is why would that be your defense of Bevell? The proper way to discuss this would be tell me why the choices being made, the plays that were called, were the CORRECT ones. Why attack me, straw man style? If you defend DB, then cite specific examples, in game, of where it was the right choice and where we failed. Tell me how the execution looked well rehearsed and I'm wrong, or tell me how it was just player malfunction. That's how I argue against DB, with specifics, and all I hear are random examples of "well, it was just the line breaking down" Ok, well you have to expect that to occur often, so what are you scheming in the event of? Everything in life goes so much deeper than the surface explanation.
Or you hear "We've been incredibly successful since xxxx, so we shouldn't critique DB, since he's been calling the plays the whole time". I think even average critics have this argument defeated, because quite simply, how successful COULD we have been without DB? I think more. I can't say how much more. Maybe there's not a better option at OC, got it, I haven't looked in to that. But since Feb 2015 there hasn't been a better choice? That's when the help wanted sign should have came out and avoided all this.
At this point I have the evidence to blame the offense for every loss or tie since 2016 started. Slow starts or just not enough points on the board by halftime unequivocally dooms this team. I know that's too rudimentary with all the variables, but the fact is we have a historically great defense. EVERY team wants to put up more points at the end of the day, we just quite simply have the luxury of being a team who can nearly predict with certainty offensive production to wins, because our defense is stout enough to predictably hold opposing teams within a "mean".
Therefore, who is in charge of the offense to start games, or put another way- who is in charge of the offensive game plan? I see Pete knowing the plan, but not orchestrating it. Just because he signs off on it, I don't see him being the one to stay up night after night planning every detail and how to execute. That should be someone else....Someone, who COORDINATES these things.
Hawks.................................. Enemies
16.............................................. 3 = WIN
3 ................................................6 = LOSS
24.............................................. 3 = WIN
14...............................................10 = WIN
17............................................... 3 = WIN
0................................................. 3 = TIE*************************
14..............................................13 = LOSS**********************
28...............................................17 = WIN
19.............................................. 14 = WIN
16............................................... 7 = WIN
5 ................................................14 = LOSS
23............................................... 7 = WIN
3................................................. 21 = LOSS
10................................................ 3 = WIN
3.................................................. 14 = LOSS
19.................................................14 = WIN
2017:
3................................................... 0 = LOSS**************************
6 ................................................... 6 = WIN****************************
7 .................................................... 9 = LOSS
So what is presented is a breakdown of scores at halftime ranging back through all of 2016 games. Games where outcomes have asterisks note that the outcome is an anomaly, in that either the outcome was a tie, halftime was tied, or leading at half we lose. Otherwise every other game follows the (rudimentary) pattern of leading at half= predictable win, trailing at half=predictable loss.
ONE THING TO NOTE WORTH ALL CAPS:
THE HAWKS HAVE NOT WON A GAME WHEN TRAILING AT HALF THE ENTIRE 2016 AND 2017 SEASONS.
I'm not even looking at the playoffs because they are their own animal. To find the last time the Seahawks won a regular season game when trailing at half, you need to go back to week 12 of 2015!
So why do we stubbornly hold the mantra of coming out slow, wearing them down, playing for the 4th quarter cause that's supposedly when you win games, get hot as hell in 2 minute drives every Sunday, etc.?
All the evidence points to us having every reason to come out firing like crazy. Two times in this span we have lost a game leading at half. Both times were against HoF quarterbacks and the halftime leads were 1 point and then 3 points. A combined total of 4 points going against Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers is essentially no lead at all, proving my point even more- we need to score in bunches early and often.
We have a historically crappy Oline. We have sustained some unfortunate drops. Russ is incredibly inaccurate early but can throw dimes as the game wears on inexplicably.
Forgive me for coming down on Bevell in spite of these obstacles. I have a job. I have obstacles. I figure out a way. If I locked any of you passionate fans in a room with Russ for an off season, I feel like you could come up with a plan to get him going early.
ANOTHER POINT WORTH ALL CAPS:
WE HAVE ONE OF THE GREATEST DEFENSES IN HISTORY. THIS OFFSEASON, BEVELL SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THE WEAKNESSES OF THIS LINE SIMPLY BY VIRTUE OF RUNNING HIS OFFENSE AGAINST OUR DEFENSE. BY SEEING THE FINAL PRODUCT IN THIS MANNER, THEY SHOULD HAVE LOOKED AS BAD OR PROBABLY WORSE THAN THEY DO IN FRONT OF OUR VERY EYES. HE THEN SHOULD HAVE BAILED ON THE CURRENT PLAN AND TOLD PETE TO BRING IN TRASH OFF THE STREET TO COMPETE FOR THE ROSTER. ANYTHING AT ALL DIFFERENT COULD PROBABLY PAN OUT BETTER, SO WHY IS THIS ''THE'' FINAL PRODUCT WITH EXTREMELY LIMITED ATTEMPTS TO FIX? WHO EXACTLY HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN FOR COMPETITION?
Granted all that is more on Cable, but Bevell is the final stop for orchestrator of the offense. If the symphony sucks, he needs to answer why. Then if Cable gives him a BS answer, Bevell should be vocalizing those answers to Pete. But all I heard was everything's rosy and the off season was a success minus Fant's injury. But we look far worse than simply an injury to Fant.
I feel like many of you could figure out how to utilize Tyler Lockett. When he catches the ball these days I swear I completely, 100% forgot we even have him on the team. Oh by the way, he's probably a top 5 'football speed' player in the league we're talking about there.
I feel like many of you could figure out how to utilize Jimmy Graham. I mean at least we threw the fade for him at the goal line for once. But as I've discussed with some around here, I'm less than impressed with that play's execution. I maintain it looks like we've ran that about twice in practice lately.
I feel like many of you could figure out how to utilize Carson. I swear I saw us start imposing our will on Tennessee Sunday when we started plowing forward when we picked up our first couple of first downs. Pounded the rock right into their territory. Then abandoned the run. Nice. Enter Jon Ryan.
I feel like many of you would utilize Russell Wilson earlier. Use his mobility, use his IQ. Use him period as anything but what he's not: a traditional pocket QB.
To preempt any arguments against, recently when I critiqued coaches I got chastised by some claiming I don't know X's and O's and that I needed to argue what exactly could have been done in some of the examples I cited above to be better. One even said he had coaching experience and wanted my take on certain things in a more, profound way. Which is fine, but my question is why would that be your defense of Bevell? The proper way to discuss this would be tell me why the choices being made, the plays that were called, were the CORRECT ones. Why attack me, straw man style? If you defend DB, then cite specific examples, in game, of where it was the right choice and where we failed. Tell me how the execution looked well rehearsed and I'm wrong, or tell me how it was just player malfunction. That's how I argue against DB, with specifics, and all I hear are random examples of "well, it was just the line breaking down" Ok, well you have to expect that to occur often, so what are you scheming in the event of? Everything in life goes so much deeper than the surface explanation.
Or you hear "We've been incredibly successful since xxxx, so we shouldn't critique DB, since he's been calling the plays the whole time". I think even average critics have this argument defeated, because quite simply, how successful COULD we have been without DB? I think more. I can't say how much more. Maybe there's not a better option at OC, got it, I haven't looked in to that. But since Feb 2015 there hasn't been a better choice? That's when the help wanted sign should have came out and avoided all this.
At this point I have the evidence to blame the offense for every loss or tie since 2016 started. Slow starts or just not enough points on the board by halftime unequivocally dooms this team. I know that's too rudimentary with all the variables, but the fact is we have a historically great defense. EVERY team wants to put up more points at the end of the day, we just quite simply have the luxury of being a team who can nearly predict with certainty offensive production to wins, because our defense is stout enough to predictably hold opposing teams within a "mean".
Therefore, who is in charge of the offense to start games, or put another way- who is in charge of the offensive game plan? I see Pete knowing the plan, but not orchestrating it. Just because he signs off on it, I don't see him being the one to stay up night after night planning every detail and how to execute. That should be someone else....Someone, who COORDINATES these things.
