Bye Week Poll: Has Bevell seen the light?

Okay, I really liked some of the quick passing game. TE over the middle, Lockett receiving the screen rather than Kearse kind of play calls we saw on Sunday. Wasn't perfect by any stretch but combined with Russ getting the ball out more quickly, I was smiling a lot more than I was crying on Sunday.

So my question is: Has Bevell seen the light?

Laloosh":3dz4l600 said:

Okay, I really liked some of the quick passing game. TE over the middle, Lockett receiving the screen rather than Kearse kind of play calls we saw on Sunday. Wasn't perfect by any stretch but combined with Russ getting the ball out more quickly, I was smiling a lot more than I was crying on Sunday.

So my question is: Has Bevell seen the light?

Click to expand...

It's a good start for sure but there were still a few bad ideas thrown in there and it was situational playcalling thats still 'off'.

I voted "no", but really that is more of a "status quo" type vote. I don't see any changes really coming.


I see almost equal parts of playcalling, offense design, and execution itself as being the fault of why our offense is not doing as well as it should be

Offense design, the plays are pretty simple and it relies on execution. It's not too bad, it's got us to two SBs. I cannot really seeing this changing a lot

Execution, I blame a lot of this on Russell. He only plays up to the level we expect when he's reacting, not thinking. I don't think it has to do with no-huddle. It's just not getting in his own head. This tends to happen as the game gets down to the wire. Second blame goes to the O-line, just lack of experience together. But mostly on Russell.

Playcalling, definitely think there should be a different playcaller. I question a lot more plays this year than I realize. However, I don't think it's as super bad as others think: again some of these are actually really good plays that are executed poorly (a lot of inaccurate throws by Russell for example)

The unfortunate part: I can't really see anything changing with offense design or playcalling. The only thing I see changing is execution, and that is because it will get better with time. With better execution, that will by association also make the playcalling and offensive design not look so bad. It's just whether or not we'll see it soon enough to make the playoffs.

So really my vote, just status quo.

Hopefully, Laloosh, you're already home. :mrgreen:

Here's the way Bevell views play calling: Oh, that worked. Teams will expect it. I best do some crazy $&!t nobody would expect next time.

And if you want to give an example of stupid play calls, the screen to Kearse isn't so bad. It was the screen to Graham that was off the rocker.

I don't think Bevell's seen the light, as much as Russell Wilson's figured out that he has to hit the first open opportunity because he can't hold onto the ball and wait for receivers to get open downfield. He took the first open options in the passing game, took what the defense gave him and didn't get caught trying to force a big play. I didn't really see any significant change in the design of the passing plays though.

HawkGA":1j4fv9ar said:

Here's the way Bevell views play calling: Oh, that worked. Teams will expect it. I best do some crazy $&!t nobody would expect next time.

And if you want to give an example of stupid play calls, the screen to Kearse isn't so bad. It was the screen to Graham that was off the rocker.

Click to expand...

For real. He's only outfoxing himself sometimes.

As long as we are not talking redzone then I think it looked better on the first, second, second to last and last drive

So he has seen the light on four drive failed in the redzone three out of three times (the fourth one was a TD outside the redzone)

Sad to say this is an improvement / back to last year

We scored 13 points, to barely beat the Cowboys, who are hardly a defensive juggernaut.

Barely counts just as much as beating them by a bunch.

What fraction of the plays was Graham deployed wide? That one metric will answer the question. The answer is YES if significantly larger than before. Their are other metrics but I think this one is sufficient. I haven't seen any numbers, but it looked a little better to me.

The next step for Bevel to take is to deploy Graham and Mathews wrote in the red zone, with Lockett zipping around. For me, Reed zone production is the bottom line metric for evaluating the Graham trade.

Typos. wide in the red zone.

Red zone production...

SoulfishHawk":3onlu7j1 said:

Barely counts just as much as beating them by a bunch.

Click to expand...

Only if you're looking at results and not process.

SoulfishHawk":149c339d said:

Barely counts just as much as beating them by a bunch.

Click to expand...

My point is that we scored only 13 points against a crappy team. Our offense is downright anemic.

Laloosh":ytqhrfrt said:

Okay, I really liked some of the quick passing game. TE over the middle, Lockett receiving the screen rather than Kearse kind of play calls we saw on Sunday. Wasn't perfect by any stretch but combined with Russ getting the ball out more quickly, I was smiling a lot more than I was crying on Sunday.

So my question is: Has Bevell seen the light?

Click to expand...

One can only hope.

Fair enough, but play calling is still pretty weak on offense. Extremely predictable.

Bevell does this all the time.. he'll call a good game or two then revert to full potato mode.

Sunday was also maddening that he basically abandoned the running game until the 4th quarter. Amazingly when Lynch started getting the ball everything else opened up. Shocking!

firebee":11hvo9g9 said:

I don't think Bevell's seen the light, as much as Russell Wilson's figured out that he has to hit the first open opportunity because he can't hold onto the ball and wait for receivers to get open downfield. He took the first open options in the passing game, took what the defense gave him and didn't get caught trying to force a big play. I didn't really see any significant change in the design of the passing plays though.

Click to expand...

I agree here. Russell is starting to take what the defense gives him. If Russell can start doing this more consistently the scramble drill will become something that he can use to make a big play when he wants one.

Offense looked like they where trying throw some deep balls to Jimmy G and just throwing to him alot more. I like what they are doing . Passing more than running. Bevell seems like he wants graham as the #1 reciever now instead of a decoy

HawkGA":96tdnsuu said:

Here's the way Bevell views play calling: Oh, that worked. Teams will expect it. I best do some crazy $&!t nobody would expect next time.

Click to expand...

SoulfishHawk":96tdnsuu said:

Fair enough, but play calling is still pretty weak on offense. Extremely predictable.

Click to expand...

I think the above pair of quotes nicely summarizes the state of Bevell discussion on this board. One group of Bevell haters says the problem is that he gets too cute trying to be unpredictable. Another group says he's too predictable.

I mean, come on. This is getting ridiculous.

Obviously, these viewpoints are being expressed by different people, and different people are allowed to have different reasons for not liking Bevell. But still. You can see why those of us who tend to defend him get frustrated. Some of the people on this board just aren't giving out legitimate criticisms, and seem to watch these games with one eye closed. And that's not to say that Bevell defenders think he's good, just that we don't think he's this idiot clown he's made out to be all the time.

Bevell didn't throw the interception to Greg Hardy, block Hauschka's field goal, or misfire to Jimmy Graham on third down in the first half. That's three scoreless drives where it's tough to blame the OC.