Offensive Coordinator replacement for 2016

[Hasselbeck]

When was the last time an NFL OC got fired in the middle of a season? Just wondering.

The Ravens did it and won the Super Bowl that year.

Their first or second SB?

Their most recent one. They fired Cam Cameron and promoted Jim Caldwell to OC.

 

[hawker232]

Jon Gruden

 

[Frogger009]

In my opinion Darrell Bevell is a pumpkin farmer. We should burn his crops and salt his field!

 

[hawkfan68]

Bevell doesn't utilize a player's strength. He didn't with Harvin and he isn't thus far with Jimmy Graham. No wonder players are getting frustrated. Graham's strength is receiving not blocking. It's no use trading for top talent because Bevell will find a way not to use it properly. Harvin with jet sweeps last year. Look how the Bills are using Harvin. He's doing much better as a receiver there. Top players come to die in the Seahawk offense. Hell he doesn't even use Fred Jackson properly. It's ridiculous watching Jimmy Graham blocking play after play and then throwing to Luke Willson. Seriously? Send Graham out and keep Willson to block. That would be a better choice.

While he's long in the tooth, Steve Spurrier would instantly improve the passing offense. At the very least he'd be better than Bevell.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Bevell doesn't utilize a player's strength. He didn't with Harvin and he isn't thus far with Jimmy Graham. No wonder players are getting frustrated. Graham's strength is receiving not blocking. It's no use trading for top talent because Bevell will find a way not to use it properly. Harvin with jet sweeps last year. Look how the Bills are using Harvin. He's doing much better as a receiver there. Top players come to die in the Seahawk offense. Hell he doesn't even use Fred Jackson properly. It's ridiculous watching Jimmy Graham blocking play after play and then throwing to Luke Willson. Seriously? Send Graham out and keep Willson to block. That would be a better choice.

While he's long in the tooth, Steve Spurrier would instantly improve the passing offense. At the very least he'd be better than Bevell.

yawn

 

[chris98251]

Spurrier would be good, one problem he has a Ego that would Rival Donald Trump.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

I volunteer as tribute. But if not, then Bill Laveroni. I'm sure we can entice him back into the fold.

 

[justafan]

It is a little ridiculous to assume that anyone on this forum can judge the playcalling, even with the All-22. Holmgren and Millen have both said it's impossible to judge playcalling at the professional level, but we apparently have savants and psychics on this forum who can parse out OC error from faulty QB play, bad audibles, bad route running, poor o-line blocking, head coach dictation, etc. Our 3rd down call was "predictable" even though Cincinnati converted a huge 3rd down where every route was diagnosed and covered by our secondary -- the difference: one set of players got it done by making plays, the other didn't.

Ultimately, this is a results based business, which can be unfortunate for OCs who are hamstrung by poor QB play, but that's what it is. Scott Linehan, Todd Haley, and Kyle Shanahan look pretty competent with Tony Romo, Ben Roethlisberger, and Matt Ryan. Not so when their QBs are Brandon Weeden, Mike Vick, and Brian Hoyer. Where does Russ fall in this spectrum? Certainly above the bottom-feeders, but anyone who watched Philip Rivers manage his offense on Monday night and thinks we're getting the same thing from Russell Wilson is being purposely dense.

If the results of this offense ends up being poor for a significant stretch, Bevell will ultimately take the blame for that. That might not be fair if he's getting no resources on his offense and his QB is regressing, but that's the nature of the business. However, we need to stop pretending that anyone here knows what's going on in any specific play call. I have seen so much mis-analysis spread throughout this place as gospel, and we spend so much energy every week on trying to determine the impossible.

I have argued in Bevels defense and I still agree with execution and playmaking trumps playcalls.I agree with almost everything in your post.

Its rarely obvious who to blame but at this point it doesnt matter to me.Whether its execution or xs and os Bevel is ultimately responsible for both.The breakdowns are happening too often.Especially in the redzone or 3rd down conversions.With the Oline playing that well there was no excuse to score 17 points.

I do know Wilson needs to get a lot better at getting the ball out on time,seeing the D and getting into the right play when he sees it.
With Wilsons strength being improvisation and his weakness being consistent with the other skills great QBs have, I am afraid it will always be hard to coach Wilson in a conventional offense.

 

[rideaducati]

Bring Bates Back. That Seahawk team had the talent on it to win two games and they ended up winning a playoff game. Imagine what he could do with this Seahawk squad.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

That said, if the offense is consistently performing poorly and that is proven by the numbers, then ultimately the OC takes the heat for that. Just like a mid-level manager takes the heat for a failing division he oversees. But no one has statistical support for this over Bevell's tenure. It's all "gut feeling" that the offense could do better than the top-10 standing it's consistently found itself in over the last three years, despite having a quarterback who anyone can see is somewhat limited and having almost no resources devoted anywhere on this offense.

It's not a "gut feeling" that Bevell is calling play-action on fourth down, or deep sideline bombs on 3rd and short, or FBs in motion as wide receivers, or Graham blocking on crucial 3rd downs. There are clear instances of dumb playcalls where Bevell is trying so hard to be unpredictable that he just gets dumb.

This isn't like the mid-level manager taking heat over stats, it's more like a mid-level manager taking heat because he got witnessed verbally abusing employees or putting people on projects they're terrible at.

And as Kearly said...even if you can ignore all that stuff, Russell Wilson needs better than an average OC. He probably needs one of the league's best, someone with real creativity.

 

[CodeWarrior]

Bring Bates Back. That Seahawk team had the talent on it to win two games and they ended up winning a playoff game. Imagine what he could do with this Seahawk squad.

Bates loved the fade and people complained about it. Bevell hates the fade and people complain about it.

Long story short: I like Bates.

 

[Siouxhawk]

That said, if the offense is consistently performing poorly and that is proven by the numbers, then ultimately the OC takes the heat for that. Just like a mid-level manager takes the heat for a failing division he oversees. But no one has statistical support for this over Bevell's tenure. It's all "gut feeling" that the offense could do better than the top-10 standing it's consistently found itself in over the last three years, despite having a quarterback who anyone can see is somewhat limited and having almost no resources devoted anywhere on this offense.

It's not a "gut feeling" that Bevell is calling play-action on fourth down, or deep sideline bombs on 3rd and long, or FBs in motion as wide receivers, or Graham blocking on crucial 3rd downs. There are clear instances of dumb playcalls where Bevell is trying so hard to be unpredictable that he just gets dumb.

This isn't like the mid-level manager taking heat over stats, it's more like a mid-level manager taking heat because he got witnessed verbally abusing employees or putting people on projects they're terrible at.

And as Kearly said...even if you can ignore all that stuff, Russell Wilson needs better than an average OC. He probably needs one of the league's best, someone with real creativity.

Bevell is the best in the league at working with Russell. If you've ever noticed the sideline shots, there's a constant teaching and learning dialogue going on.
And here's something to consider for those latching onto the "play calls lack creativity" narrative -- you realize these play calls aren't created by Bevell in a vacuum. The entire coaching staff scripts and practices them, with Pete very much a part of the process. As a defensive expert, don't you think Pete would detect the blinking red lights many of you detractors claim to see that the play schemes are so simple that opposing defensive coordinators can foil with ease?
No way.
You know something ironic though? I hope you're right. Then we'll have opposing defenses right where we want them and when they think we're going to ZIG, we'll ZAG and leave them face-planted.

 

[DavidSeven]

It's not a "gut feeling" that Bevell is calling play-action on fourth down, or deep sideline bombs on 3rd and short, or FBs in motion as wide receivers, or Graham blocking on crucial 3rd downs. There are clear instances of dumb playcalls where Bevell is trying so hard to be unpredictable that he just gets dumb.

This isn't like the mid-level manager taking heat over stats, it's more like a mid-level manager taking heat because he got witnessed verbally abusing employees or putting people on projects they're terrible at.

And as Kearly said...even if you can ignore all that stuff, Russell Wilson needs better than an average OC. He probably needs one of the league's best, someone with real creativity.

At the end of the day, you are judged by the overall performance, which is measured in statistical performance and wins. Both are areas that our offense has excelled in over the last three years. You run the numbers on explosives, turnover ratios, and rushing, and Bevell/Cable are delivering what Carroll wants. Once that stuff starts to slide (and maybe that's this year), then we can talk about institutional change. Measuring success on anything beyond that is predicated on nothing more than gut feelings, because no one here has enough information to judge most play calls in isolation.

The plays you cite above -- no one can prove those are calls by Bevell, Cable, Carroll, or an audible by Wilson. We can only assume, and I have no idea why so many people are passionate about assigning blame for specific calls when they haven't the faintest clue where it came from or even why it was called. I have seen Russell check to empty countless times, and yet this is Bevell's fault every time it fails (even though, statistically, we are excellent in that formation). I already pointed out in another thread that Russ is the one who decided to pull Graham in to block on 3rd-and-4.

The reason I push back on the Bevell stuff so much is that I don't think people take the time to think it through. Did Russ send his FBs in motion off a called run? Did Bevell call it to exploit some advantage over the defense's heavy package? If there are bad reasons for why a QB or OC made a decision, how about let's discuss why those underlying reasons don't work rather than going immediately to "zomg, two fullbacks just motioned wide, fire Bevell lol" (exaggerating here). Ultimately, there is a reason for everything that is called -- doesn't mean the reasoning is good, but nothing is called for no reason. I'm more interested in the philosophy of a call, rather than getting into snap judgments of whether it's good or bad. If you can't think of one reason why a play is called, then you are not qualified to judge the call IMO.

P.S. If Russ needs a better-than-average OC to be effective, why did we hand him $88M? Cam Newton is carrying his team on his back right now, and Carolina definitely isn't doing it by out-coaching anyone on offense. At some point, a QB who's making 20x the salary of his OC needs to take ownership of the offense.

 

[Sac]

Gruden.

 

[mrt144]

It's not a "gut feeling" that Bevell is calling play-action on fourth down, or deep sideline bombs on 3rd and short, or FBs in motion as wide receivers, or Graham blocking on crucial 3rd downs. There are clear instances of dumb playcalls where Bevell is trying so hard to be unpredictable that he just gets dumb.

This isn't like the mid-level manager taking heat over stats, it's more like a mid-level manager taking heat because he got witnessed verbally abusing employees or putting people on projects they're terrible at.

And as Kearly said...even if you can ignore all that stuff, Russell Wilson needs better than an average OC. He probably needs one of the league's best, someone with real creativity.

P.S. If Russ needs a better-than-average OC to be effective, why did we hand him $88M? Cam Newton is carrying his team on his back right now, and Carolina definitely isn't doing it by out-coaching anyone on offense. At some point, a QB who's making 20x the salary of his OC needs to take ownership of the offense.

Because the size and duration of a contract aren't absolutely tied to intrinsic forward looking performance levels. The contract sausage takes into account market value - something fundamentally dislocated from forward looking performance based on QB talent scarcity. It also takes into account the opportunity cost of acquiring a new QB talent and integrating them into your system.

Because you give RW a large contract doesn't mean you can reasonably expect him to perform like Rodgers or Brady. Well maybe you CAN expect it but disappointment looms large with that expectation.

Pricing in the NFL is wacky but I just seem all the "expects" and "needs" and I wonder.

What does Cam Newton have to show for carrying his team right now? Nothing worth celebrating.

 

[candybars]

Look how the Bills are using Harvin. He's doing much better as a receiver there.

Harvin has fewer receptions and about 90 yards more with Buffalo than he did with Seattle through the same number of games. I would hardly call that much better.

 

[DavidSeven]

It's not a "gut feeling" that Bevell is calling play-action on fourth down, or deep sideline bombs on 3rd and short, or FBs in motion as wide receivers, or Graham blocking on crucial 3rd downs. There are clear instances of dumb playcalls where Bevell is trying so hard to be unpredictable that he just gets dumb.

This isn't like the mid-level manager taking heat over stats, it's more like a mid-level manager taking heat because he got witnessed verbally abusing employees or putting people on projects they're terrible at.

And as Kearly said...even if you can ignore all that stuff, Russell Wilson needs better than an average OC. He probably needs one of the league's best, someone with real creativity.

P.S. If Russ needs a better-than-average OC to be effective, why did we hand him $88M? Cam Newton is carrying his team on his back right now, and Carolina definitely isn't doing it by out-coaching anyone on offense. At some point, a QB who's making 20x the salary of his OC needs to take ownership of the offense.

Because the size and duration of a contract aren't absolutely tied to intrinsic forward looking performance levels. The contract sausage takes into account market value - something fundamentally dislocated from forward looking performance based on QB talent scarcity. It also takes into account the opportunity cost of acquiring a new QB talent and integrating them into your system.

Because you give RW a large contract doesn't mean you can reasonably expect him to perform like Rodgers or Brady. Well maybe you CAN expect it but disappointment looms large with that expectation.

Pricing in the NFL is wacky but I just seem all the "expects" and "needs" and I wonder.

What does Cam Newton have to show for carrying his team right now? Nothing worth celebrating.

I'm not talking about expecting a huge jump in forward looking performance levels. I'm talking about performing at a level that is commensurate or exceeds the value that could be obtained by using the same resources on alternatives. For example, Seattle could have spent $15M on its OL, on attracting a "elite" playcaller, and spent the rest to sign a QB like Josh McCown or Ryan Fitzpatrick. Whether or not you think this alternative approach provides the same value or whether you think Wilson falls into the category of "scarce great QBs" is your own value judgment.

Getting excellent performance from Wilson during his rookie deal was a windfall resulting partly from the structure of the CBA. The only question back then was whether or not he was worth the 3rd round pick, which he obviously was. His current salary is the first to incorporate true economic/market realities. And now the expectation is that he continues to perform at a level that matches these new economic terms, because alternative approaches were available.

It isn't accurate to say anyone is expecting Wilson to play 20x better than he did under his rookie deal. I think everyone recognizes we obtained a windfall during that stretch and he outplayed the resources expended significantly. However, that is the past. The reality now is that he is making $22M/year, and the expectation is that the team benefits at least as much as it would have if it spent the money elsewhere. To do that, he must perform individually at a level that is equal to what a less expensive QB could do with more expensive player/coaching talent around him. Otherwise, Seattle would've been better served going with the alternative approach. If your $22M QB needs to be coddled as much as a $3M QB, meaning he needs an excellent playcaller to be effective, you cannot justify paying that premium.

 

[mrt144]

The opportunity cost of letting your above average QB go is too great in the GM calculus, no matter who it is.

Looking at sportrac Wilson is highly paid but not even top 10 in cap hit until 2018. Comparing his cost adjusted performance across all QBs, he's still not an albatross.

2018!!!

And not to be a wet blanket or cut things short but the question is

"Will Wilson be a Seahawk after 2018".

We'll go around in circles about how Wilson can improve and where he can improve but the bottom line is - 2017 do the Hawks extend again or go fish?

It's what all this speculation boils down to because I find it to be highly unlikely that Wilson regresses to the point where he's cut. I find it highly unlikely they will trade him for picks.

 

[chris98251]

The situation is the league has had three seasons of watching Wilson, they have seen the same usage of the offense with little change, They have a worse line then ever to take advantage of. If you don't change things up or adopt new looks to get the ball to people it's not hard to recognize whats coming, having a very basic offense without decoys, rub formations etc makes it easier.

 

[hawkfan68]

The situation is the league has had three seasons of watching Wilson, they have seen the same usage of the offense with little change, They have a worse line then ever to take advantage of. If you don't change things up or adopt new looks to get the ball to people it's not hard to recognize whats coming, having a very basic offense without decoys, rub formations etc makes it easier.

I hear the hammer hitting the nail on the head...quite loudly so even Derrick Coleman can hear it. Great point and post!