Random Thoughts™ on the Giants game

[Sarlacc83]

So we're only allowed to blame everything or nothing on someone? We can't just isolate an area or two we'd like to see improve?

In that respect, there's room for improvement everywhere, but blaming Bevell for the loss in Atlanta is like blaming Sherman for tripping or Lynch for fumbling, Bradley for playing prevent, Wilson for taking the sack or Carroll for choosing not to kick on 4th and 1. Bevell didn't force Wilson to throw the ball into double coverage yesterday did he? Maybe it's time we improve at QB.

Once again, would you care to find 5 offensive coordinators who you'd like better than Bevell? You said you wouldn't because you didn't want to continue arguing the point, but since you're back at it in this thread, it's time to pony up.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Once again, would you care to find 5 offensive coordinators who you'd like better than Bevell? You said you wouldn't because you didn't want to continue arguing the point, but since you're back at it in this thread, it's time to pony up.

Please do not misrepresent what I said. I said I couldn't. I don't know enough about other offensive coordinators or potential offensive coordinator candidates to make a list of guys I think would be better-suited to calling our offense with the personnel we have, and Pete's preferred style, etc.

Are you trying to say there's no way I can justify disliking Bevell because I can't make a list of guys I'd rank above him? That seems to be your implication.

 

[Sarlacc83]

Once again, would you care to find 5 offensive coordinators who you'd like better than Bevell? You said you wouldn't because you didn't want to continue arguing the point, but since you're back at it in this thread, it's time to pony up.

Please do not misrepresent what I said. I said I couldn't. I don't know enough about other offensive coordinators or potential offensive coordinator candidates to make a list of guys I think would be better-suited to calling our offense with the personnel we have, and Pete's preferred style, etc.

Are you trying to say there's no way I can justify disliking Bevell because I can't make a list of guys I'd rank above him? That seems to be your implication.

No, I'm pointing out that you said you were done with the debate, and then you started it back up. I was willing to let the challenge from the time when you said someone else COULD do better slide until you started in on the battle a second time. So now the reaper's here to make good on the previous comment if you're going to keep laying the majority blame at Bevell's feet (which was the reason Zeb was fighting your comments.)

 

[RolandDeschain]

No, I'm pointing out that you said you were done with the debate, and then you started it back up. I was willing to let the challenge from the time when you said someone else COULD do better slide until you started in on the battle a second time. So now the reaper's here to make good on the previous comment if you're going to keep laying the majority blame at Bevell's feet (which was the reason Zeb was fighting your comments.)

Here, I'm going to show you how full of it you are. Are you ready? Have you mentally prepared yourself to be proven wrong? Good? Ok, here we go.

Step 1) Go back to page 5 of this thread.
Step 2) Look at Pandion's first post on that page.
Step 3) Look at Plyka's first post on that page immediately beneath it.
Step 4) Now look at every reply of mine prior to those in this thread.
Step 5) Realize I did not bring up or start any Bevell, play calling, or OC-related discussion in this thread, and did not say a peep about it until after it was brought up by those guys.
Step 6) Roland profits, not Sarlacc. Oops.
Step 7) Also realize that because I can't name 5 guys that I know would do a better job, it doesn't mean there aren't any. That's a ridiculous assumption you are trying to get away with to back your boy with. What, if I can't name any sports cars that are faster than a Porsche 911 Turbo, there aren't any? Give me a damned break.

Now the reaper's here...What a joke. I have no doubt you see yourself as the reaper of justice when you look in the mirror, but I'm not convinced that matches reality, your majesty.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

I heard it might snow next week. Thanks a lot Pete Carroll.

 

[mistaowen]

My issue with "Bevell's" play calling comes from at home versus on the road differences. At home we are consistently taking aggressive shots downfield, looking to throw early in downs, and running on downs where they don't stack 8 in the box. On the road we are conservative, play to not turn the ball over/lose the game, frequently run on 8 man boxes, and seem content kicking field goals/pinning them deep while burning clock. Obviously this could be coming from PC who wants our defense to win games on the road or RW is scared to take these chances (from PC or personal choice), but the plays we see are very uncreative compared to the ones at home.

I was very happy with a few of Bevell's games this year but they were all at home. You can't say the plays called were not drastically different in the Saints game compared to the Giants game, who IMO have similar defenses. Maybe the brain trust feels the home field advantage can keep us in games with the risk of turnovers? It is a good problem to have I guess since we are 12-2, I just think there is a level of handicapping on our offense on the road.

 

[Sarlacc83]

No, I'm pointing out that you said you were done with the debate, and then you started it back up. I was willing to let the challenge from the time when you said someone else COULD do better slide until you started in on the battle a second time. So now the reaper's here to make good on the previous comment if you're going to keep laying the majority blame at Bevell's feet (which was the reason Zeb was fighting your comments.)

Here, I'm going to show you how full of it you are. Are you ready? Have you mentally prepared yourself to be proven wrong? Good? Ok, here we go.

Step 1) Go back to page 5 of this thread.
Step 2) Look at Pandion's first post on that page.
Step 3) Look at Plyka's first post on that page immediately beneath it.
Step 4) Now look at every reply of mine prior to those in this thread.
Step 5) Realize I did not bring up or start any Bevell, play calling, or OC-related discussion in this thread, and did not say a peep about it until after it was brought up by those guys.
Step 6) Roland profits, not Sarlacc. Oops.
Step 7) Also realize that because I can't name 5 guys that I know would do a better job, it doesn't mean there aren't any. That's a ridiculous assumption you are trying to get away with to back your boy with. What, if I can't name any sports cars that are faster than a Porsche 911 Turbo, there aren't any? Give me a damned break.

Now the reaper's here...What a joke. I have no doubt you see yourself as the reaper of justice when you look in the mirror, but I'm not convinced that matches reality, your majesty.

I never said you started the conversation. I said you started IN on it. In other words, you couldn't help yourself.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

My issue with "Bevell's" play calling comes from at home versus on the road differences. At home we are consistently taking aggressive shots downfield, looking to throw early in downs, and running on downs where they don't stack 8 in the box. On the road we are conservative, play to not turn the ball over/lose the game, frequently run on 8 man boxes, and seem content kicking field goals/pinning them deep while burning clock. Obviously this could be coming from PC who wants our defense to win games on the road or RW is scared to take these chances (from PC or personal choice), but the plays we see are very uncreative compared to the ones at home.

But this isn't true. Russell takes shots down field in every game, not just home games. We beat Carolina because of a 50 yard shot downfield to Kearse. Luke Wilson caught TWO long passes in the SF game, one for a 40 yard TD. Last week Tate would have had a 40 yard TD if not for stepping out of bounds first. All Russell did in the Arizona game was throw bombs and ran a bunch of dangerous read option plays for big yards.

You don't have the most explosive plays in the entire league over teams like Denver, NO and NE without taking shots downfield EVERY SINGLE WEEK.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Sarlacc, you are factually wrong. Look at your own quote: "and then you started it back up."

But this isn't true. Russell takes shots down field in every game, not just home games.

You don't have the most explosive plays in the entire league over teams like Denver, NO and NE without taking shots downfield EVERY SINGLE WEEK.

Can you point out where we went deep in San Francisco before the final play of the game?

 

[Sarlacc83]

You are factually wrong. Look at your own quote: "and then you started it back up."

I saw something else for some reason. My mistake. Either way, you could've let it go, and instead, you prolonged it. You have to argue about it.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Now that I won't argue with, because it's true.

 

[hawk45]

I doubt anyone had 5 candidates in mind to replace Bradley last year, but the let-Pete-find-someone strategy worked out pretty well. So I disagree that we can't criticize Bevell without researching a candidate list of replacements. I think criticism can be entirely separated from building a list of candidates, in fact.

Even though the offense has struggled the last couple of games I've been okay with the play selection. In SF we were limiting turnovers on the road and letting our defense keep it close. I thought we were past that strategy at the end of last year, but I get that it is just Pete's DNA on the road, and with this defense it's worked great this year (understatement) and will probably continue to work. Against the Giants I felt like penalties and just being off in general were more responsible than play calling.

TBH, and this brings me full circle to the OP, I think if our run game is a tick better these last 2 games we are having fewer arguments about the offense. We're used to Lynch getting stupid yards after contact and right now he's only getting human yards after contact.

This might be a preview of what things will look like behind this OL once Lynch is gone and a normal running back is back there. But for this year I think we'll be okay. Beat AZ then let Lynch sit in a whirlpool for 3 weeks next to Harvin. I am beyond sure Lynch has enough beast mode left to surge for a ring.

 

[Sarlacc83]

Now that I won't argue with, because it's true.

Also, started back at it doesn't mean "started it up". It means you went back to your well and started talking about it again. So there's that.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I doubt anyone had 5 candidates in mind to replace Bradley last year, but the let-Pete-find-someone strategy worked out pretty well. So I disagree that we can't criticize Bevell without researching a candidate list of replacements. I think criticism can be entirely separated from building a list of candidates, in fact.

:thirishdrinkers:

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Sarlacc, you are factually wrong. Look at your own quote: "and then you started it back up."

But this isn't true. Russell takes shots down field in every game, not just home games.

You don't have the most explosive plays in the entire league over teams like Denver, NO and NE without taking shots downfield EVERY SINGLE WEEK.

Can you point out where we went deep in San Francisco before the final play of the game?

Go through the play by play box score of the game, there were plenty of long pass attempts by Wilson, just as many as any other game. They may not have been successful as much as other games, but that doesn't mean Bevell and Wilson weren't trying.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameI ... 5&period=1

1st Qtr:
16 yard pass to Tate
Deep pass to Baldwin (incomplete)
Deep pass to Tate (complete but Tate called for PI)

2nd Qtr:
29 yard deep pass to Wilson
Deep pass to Miller (incomplete)
25 yard pass to Tate
Deep pass to Wilson for 39 yards, TD

3rd Qtr:
Nothing

4th Qtr:
Deep pass to Kearse (incomplete)
Deep pass to Kearse (intercepted)

 

[mistaowen]

My issue with "Bevell's" play calling comes from at home versus on the road differences. At home we are consistently taking aggressive shots downfield, looking to throw early in downs, and running on downs where they don't stack 8 in the box. On the road we are conservative, play to not turn the ball over/lose the game, frequently run on 8 man boxes, and seem content kicking field goals/pinning them deep while burning clock. Obviously this could be coming from PC who wants our defense to win games on the road or RW is scared to take these chances (from PC or personal choice), but the plays we see are very uncreative compared to the ones at home.

But this isn't true. Russell takes shots down field in every game, not just home games. We beat Carolina because of a 50 yard shot downfield to Kearse. Luke Wilson caught TWO long passes in the SF game, one for a 40 yard TD. Last week Tate would have had a 40 yard TD if not for stepping out of bounds first. All Russell did in the Arizona game was throw bombs and ran a bunch of dangerous read option plays for big yards.

You don't have the most explosive plays in the entire league over teams like Denver, NO and NE without taking shots downfield EVERY SINGLE WEEK.

So you honestly feel that our offense looks similar at home versus away? Feel like I NEVER SAID WE HAVE TO TAKE HUGE SHOTS DOWN FIELD EVERY WEEK (sorry caps lock broke). Yes we destroyed Arizona, every play worked that day. We barely beat Carolina in a conservative game (good defense, first game, 10 am, etc etc). 49ers game was conservative, sure Luke was naked one long TD. Rams game sure was conservative coupled with the worst offensive line performance ever. We didn't let the Giants get past the 50 until the end of the game but the only real big play attempt was a terrible INT into double coverage.

Again, if you looked at the paragraph you cut out, I'm not complaining it's nitpicking/observations from my perspective. We are 12-2 and I am very happy with our offense. I just feel that we are more conservative on the road compared to at home. RW has a beautiful medium to long ball and we see it a lot more at home.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

My issue with "Bevell's" play calling comes from at home versus on the road differences. At home we are consistently taking aggressive shots downfield, looking to throw early in downs, and running on downs where they don't stack 8 in the box. On the road we are conservative, play to not turn the ball over/lose the game, frequently run on 8 man boxes, and seem content kicking field goals/pinning them deep while burning clock. Obviously this could be coming from PC who wants our defense to win games on the road or RW is scared to take these chances (from PC or personal choice), but the plays we see are very uncreative compared to the ones at home.

But this isn't true. Russell takes shots down field in every game, not just home games. We beat Carolina because of a 50 yard shot downfield to Kearse. Luke Wilson caught TWO long passes in the SF game, one for a 40 yard TD. Last week Tate would have had a 40 yard TD if not for stepping out of bounds first. All Russell did in the Arizona game was throw bombs and ran a bunch of dangerous read option plays for big yards.

You don't have the most explosive plays in the entire league over teams like Denver, NO and NE without taking shots downfield EVERY SINGLE WEEK.

So you honestly feel that our offense looks similar at home versus away? Feel like I NEVER SAID WE HAVE TO TAKE HUGE SHOTS DOWN FIELD EVERY WEEK (sorry caps lock broke). Yes we destroyed Arizona, every play worked that day. We barely beat Carolina in a conservative game (good defense, first game, 10 am, etc etc). 49ers game was conservative, sure Luke was naked one long TD. Rams game sure was conservative coupled with the worst offensive line performance ever. We didn't let the Giants get past the 50 until the end of the game but the only real big play attempt was a terrible INT into double coverage.

Again, if you looked at the paragraph you cut out, I'm not complaining it's nitpicking/observations from my perspective. We are 12-2 and I am very happy with our offense. I just feel that we are more conservative on the road compared to at home. RW has a beautiful medium to long ball and we see it a lot more at home.

I'll quote Pete when people ask him about the lack of run game or when the offense isn't clicking as well as some would like. He says "well there's a pretty good defense on the other side trying to stop us."

Of course our offense isn't going to look as dynamic against good defenses like Carolina and SF then they do against bad defenses at home like NO or Minnesota.

 

[Anthony!]

Pretty good recap, I disagree on the Tate drops as relooking at them they were not that hard they hit him in his hands he just dropped them, it happens, CJ dropped a few last night, it happens. The Int by Wilson was not a great throw but the WR who fell, was bumped out of position or he might have had a play, but still not a great throw. Still think the play calling was very conservative, almost like they were playing not to loose. Other than that pretty much agree.

 

[Anthony!]

That athletic ability to get in position for the deep catch almost no matter what is spoiling Wilson, and it showed on his interception targeting Ricardo Lockette. Lockette barely even tries to get back to the football, but that is a play (in terms of defender/receiver body position) that ends up an interception 9 times out of 10 targeting anyone other than Tate.

I've also noticed he's been getting greedy with the jump ball. He had one pick today, had one last week, and almost had another one against NO the week before that (it was dropped) on those types of throws.

The one last week was on a hail marry a little different

 

[RolandDeschain]

Sgt. Largent, ESPN seems to call anything 10+ yards "deep". That is not "deep" by my book. I like how you conveniently stripped out the actual numbers stated on ESPN's game logs.

(Shotgun) R.Wilson pass deep right to G.Tate to SF 48 for 16 yards (E.Wright). PENALTY on SEA-G.Tate, Offensive Pass Interference, 10 yards, enforced at SEA 36 - No Play.

16 yards is deep? Well, let me define what I consider to be deep, then. 30+ yards in the air. I know most metrics define it as 20+ in the air, but I am referring to REAL deep balls.

Even the Willson TD catch was 19 yards in the air.