What do Pete/John see in Bevell to keep him?

[SeahawksFanForever]

I might be wrong but I don't remember the last time Carroll fired a coach (including USC days) other than OC Jeremy Bates.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Pete's talked many times about what he likes about Bevell.

Bevell is one of the more open minded progressive playcallers in the league. Unlike other O-coordinators who only have THEIR rigid system, Bevell has no problem being a fluid playcaller.

He also works well with Russell and Cable, which is very important with any coordinator.

Lastly, Pete and John have forgot more football than any of your knucklehead Bevell haters have in your football forum rudimentary brain.............so sorry if I give them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to Bevell. If the dude wasn't good, he wouldn't be here. Period, end of story. Pete's not the kind of coach and innovative football mind to just employ dumb people who hurt his team.

Top 10 offense, #1 rush offense, #1 in explosive plays. /discussion.

 

[DavidSeven]

Because they're reasonable and have the capacity to think critically.

Bevell is one piece of a big machine, one that's been very successful on both offense and defense for three consecutive years. Give me statistical numbers that say otherwise; you can't, because they don't exist. All the naysayers can do is parrott hack film analysis from amateurs or idiots like Cosell and reiterate misconceptions that flood this forum every week. Suddenly everyone's an expert on route trees until they have to draw one on a piece of paper.

People are afraid to admit their folk heroes, like Russell, Marshawn, Carroll, Schneider, Cable, etc., are capable of mistakes too. Every mistake they've ever made has been principally put on Bevell's shoulders. He's an easy target, and people like shortcuts in analysis. In isolation, I don't know if he's good, great, or bad with any certainty. There's literally no way you can prove that, because there is no way to isolate what's him, what's Carroll, what's Cable, what's Russell, etc. I'd encourage people to work harder to get at the truth, rather than fall back on message board defaults (i.e. "our OC sucks" - 30 other fanbases).

 

[Barthawk]

Bevell was also encouraging Kam to hold-out..

 

[Cartire]

Bevell was also encouraging Kam to hold-out..

:th2thumbs:

 

[bmorepunk]

Because unlike a lot of our fans they don't single out a scapegoat who can be blamed every time anything goes wrong on offense.

Player doesn't execute? Bevell.

Player doesn't get enough catches? Bevell.

Lynch doesn't get a hole in the run game? Bevell.

Forget the HC, QB, WR, OL, TE, assistant HC. It's all Bevell all the time.

The obsession continues.

Maybe, just maybe, Carroll knows what he's doing?

It's called accountability. On Wall Street if a CEO's employees underperform and the company misses its earnings estimates the CEO is held responsible. If this happens for multiple quarters activists investors, like Carl Icahn, will swoop in and make sure the CEO is bounced. Bevell is the CEO of our offense and he hasn't been good enough. Why should deeply invested fans be disparaged as emotional reactionaries when they call for a coaches dismissal when Harvard MBAs are lauded as reasonable for pursuing the same course in ousting CEOs?

Bottom line: Let's please stop treating these football guys like they're always infallible and fans like they're always ignorant. GMs and coaches make catastrophically stupid decisions all the time. Chip Kelly was lauded as a genius when he was hired by the Eagles. I guess Philly fans are stupid for questioning his genius off-season moves. And Chip is only the most recent example. A few years ago many around here had "In Ruskell We Trust" sigs. When some of us started to really question his decisions we got the same treatment. "Timmy is super smart and you're just a fan." How did that work out?

PC and JS deserve our trust but that doesn't mean we turn our brains off. They have blundered from time to time and deserve criticism just as they deserve plaudits for all their successes. Bevell is simply not good enough and the Seahawks deserve better.

Bevell is not the CEO. That would require him to run the equivalent of an independent company and he would have his dictatorship over it. Neither of this these describe the situation. He'd be closer to an executive VP or a division manager. The most likely candidate to call is CEO is Carroll if you say Allen be the majority shareholder. Fans are the customers, not shareholders. The only people Bevell is accountable to is the Seahawks management and ownership, not the fans. The only way fans can make an impact is to not buy the product.

The Seahawks are a business, and the measure of that business is income for the club (which could not be doing better) and success on the field. They're making stupid money, and they have had it as good or better over the previous two seasons than any team in the NFL. Some may say that they've done this in spite of the allegedly terrible OC. Management and ownership seems to think otherwise. These people have proven to be reasonably effective business and football people, and they apparently don't like their other options.

Our opinions do not matter at all. Only our willingness to act as a revenue stream matters. You can certainly complain about it, but saying that there is some sort of "accountability" on the fan side is inaccurate. I doubt anyone is serious enough about this Bevell thing to dump their fandom of the team at such a high point.

 

[FrickinChickens]

My 2 cents on Bevell:
I have been calling for his head for over three years now but not because I think he is bad, we are 1-1 in the SB with him as our OC. My frustration is that he tries to be too cute and tries to hard to outthink the opposing D coordinator rather than just trying to put our players in the best position to succeed. I would prefer that, similar to our current defensive and old Holmgren philosophy, he just line them up and make the opposition beat our players straight up at what they do best. I think about our offense under Holmgren, everyone knew #37 was going to get the ball but instead of trying the cute crap we just kept running him until they proved they could stop him. I don't have a problem with the play called that ended the SB, I just wonder about his reasoning for calling that play. His comment about surprising everyone makes sense but to me but I still believe he outthinks himself or the situation all too often and it has cost the team opportunities. If that play had won us the SB would everyone still want his head? I would simply because he has had me yelling at the TV every game for the last few years. We have a historic defense, we should ride them all the way. The offense, which has more than enough talent, doesn't need to be stellar just steady and it seems he tries to mold the player into his perceived strengths of his game plan rather than mold his gameplan to the strengths of the player.

Footnote: This post is purely my gut feelings, simply how I feel/think after 39 years of Seahawks football. I do not claim to be an expert on NFL football, I do not claim to know Bevell or anyone on or close to the team. I do not care if you agree or disagree. But if you do disagree please provide your thoughts in a civil manner.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Bottom line: Let's please stop treating these football guys like they're always infallible and fans like they're always ignorant. GMs and coaches make catastrophically stupid decisions all the time. Chip Kelly was lauded as a genius when he was hired by the Eagles. I guess Philly fans are stupid for questioning his genius off-season moves. And Chip is only the most recent example. A few years ago many around here had "In Ruskell We Trust" sigs. When some of us started to really question his decisions we got the same treatment. "Timmy is super smart and you're just a fan." How did that work out?

PC and JS deserve our trust but that doesn't mean we turn our brains off. They have blundered from time to time and deserve criticism just as they deserve plaudits for all their successes. Bevell is simply not good enough and the Seahawks deserve better.

Using your business logic, why would you complain about or fire an employee who's help you build an extremely successful company?

Bevell, along with Schneider, Pete and the other past and present coaches has built the most successful franchise in the NFL from the ground up. He is one of many moving parts, so to peg HIM as the problem is naive and shortsighted.

Get on Twitter and follow guys like Davis Hsu, who point out on a WEEKLY basis all the mistakes Russell's made in not recognizing coverages, bad throws or not seeing wide open receivers. Pointing out the literally dozens of times the O-line gets mowed over like they're not even there blowing plays up.

These are successful play calls, but because they were poorly executed they failed. That's on Bevell? C'mon man.

 

[Siouxhawk]

My 2 cents on Bevell:
I have been calling for his head for over three years now but not because I think he is bad, we are 1-1 in the SB with him as our OC. My frustration is that he tries to be too cute and tries to hard to outthink the opposing D coordinator rather than just trying to put our players in the best position to succeed. I would prefer that, similar to our current defensive and old Holmgren philosophy, he just line them up and make the opposition beat our players straight up at what they do best. I think about our offense under Holmgren, everyone knew #37 was going to get the ball but instead of trying the cute crap we just kept running him until they proved they could stop him. I don't have a problem with the play called that ended the SB, I just wonder about his reasoning for calling that play. His comment about surprising everyone makes sense but to me but I still believe he outthinks himself or the situation all too often and it has cost the team opportunities. If that play had won us the SB would everyone still want his head? I would simply because he has had me yelling at the TV every game for the last few years. We have a historic defense, we should ride them all the way. The offense, which has more than enough talent, doesn't need to be stellar just steady and it seems he tries to mold the player into his perceived strengths of his game plan rather than mold his gameplan to the strengths of the player.

Footnote: This post is purely my gut feelings, simply how I feel/think after 39 years of Seahawks football. I do not claim to be an expert on NFL football, I do not claim to know Bevell or anyone on or close to the team. I do not care if you agree or disagree. But if you do disagree please provide your thoughts in a civil manner.

Well-thought out post Frickin Thank you for your insights. We see things differently, but have the same ultimate objective. Go Hawks!

 

[seahawks08]

I think the only reason DB is still here is loyalty. Pete's biggest strength (loyalty) is also his biggest weakness.

Don't forget he fired Jeremy Bates after one year. He's let go of multiple former USC players.

I don't think Pete has any problem moving on when he feels he needs to.

Jeremy Bates wanted to install his offensive mind set that did not meet Pete's philosophy. No OC would be excited to join Seahawks because of that. When you have defensive minded head coach, the Defensive Coordinators are all getting hired as Head coaches in a year or two, that's because how successful we are as defense. I feel Bevell is in a tight spot where he is is not given the reigns to make his plays given the investment in the Oline and the WRs and his job of making RW grow through the process. If Sean payton, or Josh Mcdaniels come here and become OC's and Pete has a foot print of his philosphy, they will not look good either. That is my opinion on how philosophy drives play calling. I am okay with it as long as we win games.

 

[Hawks46]

Because unlike a lot of our fans they don't single out a scapegoat who can be blamed every time anything goes wrong on offense.

Player doesn't execute? Bevell.

Player doesn't get enough catches? Bevell.

Lynch doesn't get a hole in the run game? Bevell.

Forget the HC, QB, WR, OL, TE, assistant HC. It's all Bevell all the time.

The obsession continues.

Maybe, just maybe, Carroll knows what he's doing?

Mmmmmmmm, could be.

I think it's telling that two of our DC's have gotten HC gigs while Bevell hasn't.

I have issues with his usage of personnel, but other than that, I think he's a lot better than a lot of folks here give him credit for, but worse than we'd like him to be. It's somewhere in the middle.

 

[ivotuk]

Name someone that you know is better who is available to replace him.

Bevel's a good OC, he gets back up from some important people like Warren Moon, Brock Huard (although it's not blind support), Dave Wyman, and others here and there.

 

[nanomoz]

Some of the blame, er reason why Bevell is still here, etc....has been put on RW and various members of the offense for bad play execution and poor decision making. Essentially, that is what PC said was the case for the RW int. play in XLIX. We didn't execute the play well, and the other team made the play.

And the Patriots said that they made the play because they recognized it from film as one of the very few goalline concepts the Seahawks had been running all year. The Super Bowl is not the time to stay simple on offense, with Lynch, without any big receiving targets, against one of the league's defensive minds.

Bevell might simply be around because of a) the desire for consistency, an important consideration at all times; b) the right replacement hasn't come along; c) because our personnel are still so underdeveloped that Pete just doesn't see Bevell as the main problem; d) still scarred over the Jeremy Bates thing (fought with the other coaches, didn't use Lynch); e) some of all the above.

I want to call attention to this. Brilliant post. The dialog surrounding anything on this board tends to a binary opposition: Bevell sucks vs. He's not the problem at all.

The truth could be somewhere in the middle, like Montana notes. It could be that Pete does have issues with Bevell, but there's a lot more to this situation than most people want to acknowledge.

 

[LymonHawk]

Nice to see so many here defending Bevell and not giving in to the mob mentality. Bravo!

Let's face it; haters are gonna hate, whiners are gonna whine, and when they can do both at the same time...Nirvana! :les:

 

[Atradees]

Shameless yes man.

 

[rcaido]

I dont like Bevell he is my goat i take my frustration on...That said, im sure his style of calling has been due to our team being a run & pound, dont make mistakes, & let the defense give us field goals.

Its quite frustrating because Wilson can do so much more then this. Now that we have Graham & our defense isn't as good as last 2 years, i expected a change of philosophy in our play calling.

We go into the game with the same predictable offense, we try it for the first half & if its not working, lets do the 2nd half adjustments.

 

[bbsplitter]

I think they keep him because Pete is loyal, and also Pete can control the game plan with Bevell. I honestly think Bevell would call different games if Pete wasn't always in his ear saying run run run protect the ball protect the ball - etc. For example every time people complain about the endless bubble screens - they are safe, controlled plays that usually get at least 3 or 4 yards, with the possibility of a big play. Basically the pass equivalent of a run. That screams Pete all the way.

 

[bandiger]

I think they keep him because Pete is loyal, and also Pete can control the game plan with Bevell. I honestly think Bevell would call different games if Pete wasn't always in his ear saying run run run protect the ball protect the ball - etc. For example every time people complain about the endless bubble screens - they are safe, controlled plays that usually get at least 3 or 4 yards, with the possibility of a big play. Basically the pass equivalent of a run. That screams Pete all the way.

Well you are right about that Pete's vision of offense maybe why Bevell is still here. If he is fine with the slow and boring first half offense, what can one say but accept it as part of the whole scheme. I think he would be replaced by Kiffin or Sarkasian (if available, real possibility) if Bevell was gone anyways. I don't know if I could handle that considering I watched enough USC football.

 

[12thbrah]

I heard Bevell gives a mean handjob.

 

[Siouxhawk]

Oh, a gay joke. How original