This could be a debate and I would like to hear what you guys think.

Bradley left, great for him. Bevell stayed, great for us. Or is it? In your opinion, if you were to lose one, which one would you want to leave? We had a great defensive year, but how many games did we lose on last drives or give up the lead late in the game? How many games did our offense not get going, maybe poor play calling or execution and pull out wins on last minute drives? This is really tough, as the only game we lost was SF by 7 pts, credit to who Defense or Offense?

Something to add, our think about. The offense improved as the year went on, defense, did not.

Bevell got better. Yeah, there were way too many games where the offense was good for a quarter or a half, some dumb headscratchers, but truth be told, there were only a couple of tragic gameplans. Bevell needs more fluidity, we ran into 8 and 9 stubbornly sometimes, there was little need for us to be the highest run split in the league those first 9 games.

But Bevell's bad was not as costly as Bradleys. distilling a coordinator down to a few playcalls is unfair, but the two that canned our season were odd. Soft zone with blitz. blitzing the nickel and keeping suspect linebackers and a rookie safety in coverage?

Yes. Gus was responsible for 3 (almost 4) losses this season. Blew a late lead against detroit and miami, same thing happened at chicago but RW bailed us out big time, and then of course against atlanta. 4 failed opportunities to stop the opponent with a few minutes (or 30 seconds) left. That's not characteristic for the number 1 defense in points allowed. Gus' end game defense philosophy was just not very effective. It's a soft zone that makes it hard for teams to score touchdowns on us, but lures them into field goal range too easily, IMO. This team was so close to being 14-2 or 13-3 and home field throughout the playoffs, it's SCARY.

Still can't believe we blitz Thomas at the end of the atlanta game.... for what? we never touched him all game and you KNEW they were going to throw the ball.

I hope this thread is ready for Roland to insert a 12 paragraph rant against Bevell.

IMO - because of Pete's defensive background I fell it is less harmful that we lost Gus. Also, Wilson himself has said that he doesn't want to lose Bevell.

I would rather keep Bevell. He and Russ seemed to click the last half of the season, and it should carry on into next season.

Scottemojo wrote:Bevell got better. Yeah, there were way too many games where the offense was good for a quarter or a half, some dumb headscratchers, but truth be told, there were only a couple of tragic gameplans. Bevell needs more fluidity, we ran into 8 and 9 stubbornly sometimes, there was little need for us to be the highest run split in the league those first 9 games.

But Bevell's bad was not as costly as Bradleys. distilling a coordinator down to a few playcalls is unfair, but the two that canned our season were odd. Soft zone with blitz. blitzing the nickel and keeping suspect linebackers and a rookie safety in coverage?

I believe those last few plays, where they blitzed a defensive back and left a receiver open were Carroll's calls. Pete often made defensive play calls over Bradley throughout the season. Now, i'm not sure who made the better defensive play calling during the season, Bradley or Pete. But the wrong defensive plays were called and it ended our season.

FargoHawk wrote:I hope this thread is ready for Roland to insert a 12 paragraph rant against Bevell.

IMO - because of Pete's defensive background I fell it is less harmful that we lost Gus. Also, Wilson himself has said that he doesn't want to lose Bevell.

Agree, Bradley might be the better coach, but easier to replace (Quinn) and with Pete's strong influence on the Defense I don't see much of a loss. If we had lost Bevell we didnt have as good a backup plan waiting for a phone call.

Bradley. The big reason IMO is he was easier to replace, as PC was/is an excellent defensive coach as well. My concern also was RW seems to have a good relationship with the OC. Changing them can mess with a QBs development and Wilson along with the entire offense was getting better.

I love Bradley and have spoken with people who played with him and played for him and coached with him. He is universally respected (outside the domain of .NET where many, but not all, posters feel all defensive failings belong to him and all defensive successes belong to players and Pete Carroll) as a teacher, motivator and strategist.

It was also cool and fun to hear stories from people who visited VMAC as guests of Bradley and attended Seahawks functions.

That said, if we HAD TO lose a co-ordinator it would have to be Bradley. Our offensive continuity is vital for our young franchise QB.

I think my above criticisms come across as too harsh. I still think we could win a title with both Bevell and Bradley.

Renohawk wrote:This could be a debate and I would like to hear what you guys think.

Bradley left, great for him. Bevell stayed, great for us. Or is it? In your opinion, if you were to lose one, which one would you want to leave? We had a great defensive year, but how many games did we lose on last drives or give up the lead late in the game? How many games did our offense not get going, maybe poor play calling or execution and pull out wins on last minute drives? This is really tough, as the only game we lost was SF by 7 pts, credit to who Defense or Offense?

Is both an option? If I had to pick one it would have been Bradley to go bye bye.

Scottemojo wrote:I still think we will win a title with both Wilson and Thomas

There.

Bradley was due to move up. His career path has been on an upward trajectory for the last few years. The team was prepared for his leaving, they weren't for Bevell leaving. That is why Bevell got an extension to stay and they had a replacement lined up weeks ago it seems for Gus. I don't think they are happy Gus left, but between the two... it's easier to lose a DC than an OC. Look at Baltimore. How many DC's have they lost over the last 10 years, and yet have stayed consistently good on defense. They've lost Mike Nolan, Rex Ryan, Marvin Lewis and it seems like one or two more, and they are always a good defensive team. Getting a system going and getting players who fit that system is important. Now it's just a matter of Quinn calling a good game, and we've all seen that he is capable of doing so at Florida. Calling a defensive game with a talented defense isn't as hard as pushing all of the right buttons on offense in my opinion. A great defense can play great with even average coaching just by making plays. Offenses have to be really precise.

SharkHawk wrote:Bradley was due to move up. His career path has been on an upward trajectory for the last few years. The team was prepared for his leaving, they weren't for Bevell leaving. That is why Bevell got an extension to stay and they had a replacement lined up weeks ago it seems for Gus. I don't think they are happy Gus left, but between the two... it's easier to lose a DC than an OC. Look at Baltimore. How many DC's have they lost over the last 10 years, and yet have stayed consistently good on defense. They've lost Mike Nolan, Rex Ryan, Marvin Lewis and it seems like one or two more, and they are always a good defensive team. Getting a system going and getting players who fit that system is important. Now it's just a matter of Quinn calling a good game, and we've all seen that he is capable of doing so at Florida. Calling a defensive game with a talented defense isn't as hard as pushing all of the right buttons on offense in my opinion. A great defense can play great with even average coaching just by making plays. Offenses have to be really precise.

Haha! I'm really glad to see you're still around and contributing insights like this one. I thought we lost you to the deep dark days of the post-post-season there for a minute. Glad to see you're hangin around!

I just said I can't watch football anymore, and I'm standing by that. Pehawk is going to force me to attend a game. I can handle it better in person. I just can't watch televised football anymore. I seriously can't.

SharkHawk wrote:I just said I can't watch football anymore, and I'm standing by that. Pehawk is going to force me to attend a game. I can handle it better in person. I just can't watch televised football anymore. I seriously can't.

Much respect though for doing that. If it scares your kids even a little, then you should, and I don't think most people would give up on whatever "addiction" scared their kids. Kudos for that, I hope it helps in the long run Shark.

I agree that I would rather lose Bradley than Bevell, and I haven't even really been much of a Bevell fan. And I actually like Bradley more, truth be told.

Here's why:

1) This is Pete's defense. His style, his players. For this reason, Bradley is more replaceable. Maybe not his personality quite so much, but as a defensive coordinator, yes.

2) Defensive gameplans are much easier to learn than offense, for the most part. If we lost Bevell, and brought in a new coordinator with an entirely new playbook and scheme, it could be a challenging task (though I wouldn't be too worried with Wilson @ the helm). Continuity is key.

3) As mentioned, the defense has been particularly bad at game-ending drives that lose the game in situations that should be easily controllable. Whether this is mostly Gus Bradley's fault or not, I don't know. But I imagine he plays a big part in that.

4) Bevell calls a good game, for the most part. I like his combination of calling both running and passing plays equally. I also like his philosophy in mixing it up and keeping the defense on their toes with an occasional trick play or two. My only gripe is that we don't throw it more earlier in the game. It seems that we only really open up the passing game when we HAVE TO score to catch up. It would be nice to use the passing game to actually put up some points early, so we're not in that situation to begin with.

I am glad Bradley is gone. I think our defensive players made him... not the other way around.

FargoHawk wrote:I hope this thread is ready for Roland to insert a 12 paragraph rant against Bevell.

Not happening. I think my rant against Bevell was misinterpreted a little bit by many. If Bevell can call games in the first half like he did in the second half, I'm glad to have him. If he doesn't change that aspect of his job, he has to go. Time will tell.

It is hard to separate Bradley and Carroll. All I know is, there are problems with how our defense has been handled. Maybe it's Carroll's fault. Maybe it's Bradley's fault. Carroll isn't going anywhere. He's just way too valuable as a visionary, evaluator, motivator, and developer. With Gus leaving, at least we get a 50/50 shot of replacing the one responsible for those problems. If Bradley was holding us back, this is a great move. If Carroll was the one holding us back, then we held serve.

I wasn't impressed with Bradley in 2009. You might recall that he and Mora implemented arguably the very worst pass defense in the history of our franchise. Carroll has turned crappy coaches into valuable collaborators (Nick Holt). That is a reasonable reason to suspect Bradley (who we are told is the one who made the play calls). Maybe Bradley's not the problem. Maybe he is. Either way, taking a 50/50 chance of fixing that problem with no downside is a good thing if you ask me.

There was almost no upside to moving Bevell. He got better as the year went on, and his style, his flexibility, and his college offense mentality seems like such a great fit for Wilson. Wilson seemed rather emphatic that he wanted Bevell to stay. Maybe you could chalk that up to "what else would he say." But if a friend of mine was up for a big job promotion, and I wanted him to turn it down so that we could stay together, I think at the very least that's a major endorsement of how much I like working with him.

The last thing I'll mention: I thought offensive play calling cost us really just one game this year- the Miami game. But even in that game, the offense hurt us less than the defense did. There were probably 4-5 games Seattle lost this year where defensive philosophy and playcalling played a major role in those losses. So to me, I would have viewed offense in a more positive light than our defense this season, despite our defense finishing #1 in scoring.

Renohawk wrote:This could be a debate and I would like to hear what you guys think.

Bradley left, great for him. Bevell stayed, great for us. Or is it? In your opinion, if you were to lose one, which one would you want to leave? We had a great defensive year, but how many games did we lose on last drives or give up the lead late in the game? How many games did our offense not get going, maybe poor play calling or execution and pull out wins on last minute drives? This is really tough, as the only game we lost was SF by 7 pts, credit to who Defense or Offense?

It was a combination of putting up more points than the opponent, (Offense) and protecting the lead (Defense)

I know that sounds oversimplified, but you have to consider that we fielded a Rook QB that did a pretty good job growing his upside, right up and into the playoffs, and he did it better as time went on, in spite of Defenses watching game tape on him.
Defense did a pretty fair job in the beginning, but when other teams saw the mistake of taking Sherman and Browner for granted, they started trying to get the ball downfield without tempting fate.
The Buffalo game was a culmination of Special Teams, Defense, and Offense clicking to perfection, and from that point on in regular Season the whole team was riding a wave.
With Bevel seeing Russell Wilson executing plays like a Vetran QB, he will now be able to draw up some more exotic plays.

I think Quinn will add some new twists to the Defensive sets, and hopefully we nab a Pass Rusher or two in the Draft/FA to expedite his game plans.

You know as far as Bradley is concerned, I've a staunch critic of him because majority of those five losses were on the defense with Arizona, Detroit, Miami, Chicago (even though we won thanks to Russell), and last week Atlanta. The way I saw it on those losses they were just repetitive and just couldn't solve the problem now if those losses were 50/50 (meaning problems in the offensive side) I wouldn't blame Bradley at all but many of those losses just raises alot of red flags! Hopefully next year Dan Quinn can change all that with a more speedier pass rush and better secondary coverages at the end of the game!

Yes. Offense was playing better than defense towards the end

kearly wrote:Carroll has turned crappy coaches into valuable collaborators (Nick Holt).

This is a pretty striking point, especially since Holt had that same "fiery attitude" that the media has played up for Gus. At the end of the day, Gus hasn't really proven anything outside of Carroll's system; Quinn has (at Florida). Here's hoping Seattle sports has struck gold twice with D-coordinators out of the SEC.