Bevell Haters Unite!

[HawKnPeppa]

If you take away Wilson's rushing yards this year, our net total yards falls in between Cleveland and Arizona for #23 in the NFL.

We are also 20th in the redzone for scoring TDs this year. I would assume that with Wilson's legs and Lynch's legs, we should be able to come up with an offensive gameplan to score tds instead of fgs.

Yeah, because he has all if those world beaters at the skill positions and we can't argue with how great that OL has been playing. Pinning it all on one person, who isn't the one executing (or not) the plays is a simple-minded approach at best.

 

[Thunderhawk]

Bevell's offense just wasn't good enough this year.

Did you know that despite losing Zach Miller, Sidney Rice, Golden Tate prior to the season and Percy Harvin midseason (not to mention picking up a replacement fullback midseason), his offense only finished a pathetic SEVENTH in average yards per drive? A pathetic NINTH in points per drive and a downright unacceptable FIRST in turnovers per offensive drive?

I mean come on, he has the best O-Line in the league to work with and arguably the league's best group of 4 centers to help make protection adjustments at the LoS to account for what the defense is doing (not that we played any good defenses this year, come on). He really needs to turn this top 10 offense into a top 1 offense. Anything less just isn't acceptable.

Terrific post.

Also, what would Mike Martz's "Greatest Show on Turf" offense look like if Vermeil demanded low-risk plays emphasizing ball protection?

That said, the empty backfields are maddening...

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Yeah, cuz Bevell rarely gets open. When he does, he gets very little -if any- separation.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

Any of you Bevell supporters want to explain to me his lack of blitz beaters during his entire tenure? And the thought process behind routinely going hurry up, empty set in SD and Dallas, immediately after the defense was just gutted for an extended amount of time? I'm willing to hear the new ideas.

Stats and rankings mean nothing to me. Andy Dalton had comparable stats to Peyton Manning during similar periods. You think that tells the whole story?

People doubting Cables importance should use Google. Start by zeroing in on their title differences and reason behind those differences.

You are simply wrong. Last season, against the blitz, Russell Wilson was the best QB in football according to PFF grading out twice as good as any other QB. This included being second best against the blitz when there is no pressure and best when the blitz created pressure. In other words, it wasn't just Russell's ability to scramble away that helped him beat the blitz - they had clear blitz beaters.

"Russell Wilson was the league’s best against the blitz at +21.5 and he did it with one of the highest times to throw at 3.05 seconds. He faced the second highest percentage of blitzes at 39.2 percent."

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... the-blitz/

The final report for this season isn't out yet but I bet it is close. They clearly had a plan against the blitz last season.

This just goes to show the amount of misinformation and bias about our offense there is.Also goes to show you that focusing on one or two games doesn't tell you the whole story.

Though I will definitely agree with you in saying that Cable has a major influence in this offense and the success of the run game.

Theres no blitz beaters in this offense. None. This stat has nothing to do with our argument. It has all to do with a QB who's elite on the move.

Literally has zero to do with it. If their were blitz beaters they wouldn't be high YPA, by default.

Just stop.

It's RW's job to audible out of a play when he sees a blitz. Not Bevels. We have slant routes and screen plays. I don't know exactly what you are referring to when you say we don't have any blitz beaters. That's just silly. Makes no sense. We have plenty of them. It's Russells job to audible to one of them and the teams job to execute properly.

You've got Baldwin praising him. The numbers saying were a top 10 offense. Were #1 an explosive plays. There's numbers showing that were the best against the blitz. And yet you stubbornly just say no.

Time for you to start posting the evidence and not just your "take" on things. And youre gonna need more then just a few picked plays here and there. Let's see the trend. Let's see the facts you have.

Are you trying to post like Tokadub to honor him or something?

You're right. The audibles are something Bevell never came up with or approved of. Haven't heard anyone say Wilson is a loose cannon that thumbs his nose at the game plan, so that doesn't fit either.. You can't take credit from. Bevell just because a play is successful. [emoji6]

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Bevell's fallible like every other part of this organization (which tends to do things pretty well on just about all fronts). I'll never understand why people like Sports and Roland feel the need to single out his fallibility as though it's the only or most glaring when clearly, and quite simply, there are multiple glaring fallibilities on this team and yet we are, and continue to be, the class of the league.

I understand occasional and situation confusion and/or frustration, that's natural... what I don't understand, and what's not natural... what I will never understand is the undying hatred by guys like Adam and James and probably 3-4 other dudes who aren't relevant enough to remember their names ( :salute: )... their absolute hatred of a man who not only gives us his all on a daily bases but has also helped guide this franchise to its most successful era in the history of its existence and continues to do so.

 

[SomersetHawk]

It seems like it took him too long to bring in a quicker, shorter passing game. Earlier on in the season you would find our O-line under a barrage of pressure (and not just from Blitzes) and we wouldn't have a receiver within 15 yards of Wilson two seconds after he'd taken the snap (even on third downs). Recently though that's rare, our TEs are getting more quick outs, Richardson's working the comebacks and all of our receivers are catching slants.

It feels kind of dumb to say it as we sit at 12-4 on a bye week, but I feel the adjustments made could have come sooner, for Russ especially (who has looked much more comfortable of late). I believe it cost us to some extent in all of our losses this year though more obviously in KC.

More frustrating perhaps is the simplicity of our play calling. We're set up not to fail, but it would be nice to see us try to prosper. The people putting this on Pete's philosophy are likely right to an extent, we play solid fundamental football with a premium on ball protection. However, it's not much of an excuse for the lack of willingness to help our receivers out. We were pretty much hanging Richardson out to dry for the first half of the season and he had one of (if not?) the lowest catch per snap rate in the league.

The first time I really noticed us trying to help him out was his first TD against the 49ers (which was called back). I believe it was Turbin who rubbed the defender on an inside slant, laid hands on him (when he didn't need to) and was flagged. It put P-Rich in enough space for a catch and run into the endzone. I remember us having success with a similar route to Kearse against the Cowboys and I'm kind of surprised we haven't seen more of this type of scheming. With Richardson, simply freezing a defender for a split second gives him a good chance to get open as he's fast enough to exploit it.

I'm not asking for Chip Kelly here, but it'd be nice to see us be a little more creative to help out our receivers instead of leaving most of the creativity to Russ. I'm an amateur, I don't want to be able to name our routes as they're run. I also don't think it's hyperbole when posters on here are commenting on how open other teams' receivers are getting in comparison with ours.

I'm not a Bevell hater, it's just my opinion that there's plenty of people who could do the job he does. Maybe it's a result of the job he's being asked to do? But I don't see the harm in finding out with someone else. In an ideal world it will come as the result of him being hired elsewhere, he doesn't warrant a firing.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

It's only a matter of time before we get somebody else in there. Hopefully they're better, LORD knows we've had worse. It's a stupid thing for us to get passionate about like we do.

 

[DavidSeven]

My sense generally is that if there's something that a poster here doesn't understand about this offense (i.e. why we don't implement more of this, why we don't use more of that, etc.), it is more often than not the case that there is some level of reasoning/strategizing that they just aren't seeing or considering. I guarantee you that things like "quick passing game" or "blitz beaters" or "pros/cons of empty backfield" are not concepts that are novel to this championship coaching staff. I guess I'll just leave it at this: there are generally reasons why this staff does things the way it does. If you find yourself saying, well, that doesn't make sense, there is likely some factor you aren't considering. For example: there are reasons to keep route concepts simple -- both from an overall philosophical point that extends from Carroll (scheme simple; play fast) and from a strategic standpoint depending on the play/situation. Another point: player limitations/skills will often dictate what you are and aren't willing to call on a regular basis. IMO, this staff has done a very good job of scheming around the players' limitations and abilities, especially at the QB position.

That is not too say this staff is infallible. But too often I see people here jump to the conclusion that certain coach's decisions are completely illogical and implemented without thought. That just isn't the case. It doesn't mean that a coach's reasoning is always sound, but at the end of the day, this staff has to be judged on the results, not on a micro-analysis of every single play-call (though those exercises can be fun). This offense led the NFL in fewest turnovers per drive and yet led the NFL in explosive plays and was top-10 in every stat that matters. You don't accomplish that by doing things that don't make sense.

 

[McGruff]

I'm just waiting for the time to come where we do eventually get a new OC and our offense is better by a good margin. The results'll speak for themselves and that'll be that.

Andy Daltons stats are same as Peyton Manning's. True bill.

Dalton....one of the all time great

That's a testimony to Dalton's OC really . . . and he's had a couple of good ones. Jay Gruden and now Hue Jackson. OC's that take challenged personnel and make good offenses. Like an OC that can take a banged up, below average OL and make a top shelf running game. Or a OC that can take third string TE's and a no name group of WR's and make them into an above average passing game. An OC like Bevell.

 

[pehawk]

Would anyone be excited to have Bevell as an OC without Russell Wilson and Marshawn? Would you be geeked for Bevell overseeing an offense with Hass and Alexander? TJack and Turbo? If you say yes, you're lying.

DavidSeven does have a point. A lot of times Bevell gets the blame pinned to him undeservedly. There's been dozens of times this year where I've asked the "what THE bleep was that playcall" and poster explained things clearly and showed it wasn't really on Bevell. THOSE are awesome threads that set this place apart from Twitter and egocentric blogs.

However, that works the other way as well. Coming in spewing stats and pointing to a ring isn't the end all be all. All I can speak for is myself, but I've routinely quoted a poster and said "yup, you're right, not on Bevell, I was wrong". But, that's literally never happened the other way. All you get is generalized hyperbole mostly hiding behind the lame reasoning and general tone "why don't you be the OC then...all fans hate their OC".

 

[pehawk]

I'm just waiting for the time to come where we do eventually get a new OC and our offense is better by a good margin. The results'll speak for themselves and that'll be that.

Andy Daltons stats are same as Peyton Manning's. True bill.

Dalton....one of the all time great

That's a testimony to Dalton's OC really . . . and he's had a couple of good ones. Jay Gruden and now Hue Jackson. OC's that take challenged personnel and make good offenses. Like an OC that can take a banged up, below average OL and make a top shelf running game. Or a OC that can take third string TE's and a no name group of WR's and make them into an above average passing game. An OC like Bevell.

Wait a minute...are you saying that Bengals offense lacked talent or something? You think they we're challenged from a personnel perspective? Especially Dalton's first three years?

I do agree, I love Gruden and Hue. Love both those dudes.

 

[Anonymous]

My sense generally is that if there's something that a poster here doesn't understand about this offense (i.e. why we don't implement more of this, why we don't use more of that, etc.), it is more often than not the case that there is some level of reasoning/strategizing that they just aren't seeing or considering. I guarantee you that things like "quick passing game" or "blitz beaters" or "pros/cons of empty backfield" are not concepts that are novel to this championship coaching staff. I guess I'll just leave it at this: there are generally reasons why this staff does things the way it does. If you find yourself saying, well, that doesn't make sense, there is likely some factor you aren't considering. For example: there are reasons to keep route concepts simple -- both from an overall philosophical point that extends from Carroll (scheme simple; play fast) and from a strategic standpoint depending on the play/situation. Another point: player limitations/skills will often dictate what you are and aren't willing to call on a regular basis. IMO, this staff has done a very good job of scheming around the players' limitations and abilities, especially at the QB position.

That is not too say this staff is infallible. But too often I see people here jump to the conclusion that certain coach's decisions are completely illogical and implemented without thought. That just isn't the case. It doesn't mean that a coach's reasoning is always sound, but at the end of the day, this staff has to be judged on the results, not on a micro-analysis of every single play-call (though those exercises can be fun). This offense led the NFL in fewest turnovers per drive and yet led the NFL in explosive plays and was top-10 in every stat that matters. You don't accomplish that by doing things that don't make sense.

Good post.

We all look for answers, each to our own isms. Placing blame gives us all an easy out and you can blame organized religion for that mindset. But I digress...

I truly believe that Pete and the offensive coaches approach each game, team, and coach differently, and will design an attack specifically to exploit a weakness in that opponent. We can all agree with that, I'm almost certain. The problem is when we see stuff unfolding in front of us and wonder why we are not seeing what worked so well against the last opponent not being tried against the current one. Hence the frustration and speculation.

So, since "Bevell" rhymes with "Devil"...

 

[McGruff]

I'm just waiting for the time to come where we do eventually get a new OC and our offense is better by a good margin. The results'll speak for themselves and that'll be that.

Andy Daltons stats are same as Peyton Manning's. True bill.

Dalton....one of the all time great

That's a testimony to Dalton's OC really . . . and he's had a couple of good ones. Jay Gruden and now Hue Jackson. OC's that take challenged personnel and make good offenses. Like an OC that can take a banged up, below average OL and make a top shelf running game. Or a OC that can take third string TE's and a no name group of WR's and make them into an above average passing game. An OC like Bevell.

Wait a minute...are you saying that Bengals offense lacked talent or something? You think they we're challenged from a personnel perspective? Especially Dalton's first three years?

I do agree, I love Gruden and Hue. Love both those dudes.

I'm saying a good OC can make average or worse personnel (Dalton for the Bengals, the OL, TE's and WR's for Seattle) perform at a high level. The situations are different. In Cincy the OC has to overcome poor QB play, in Seattle the OC has to overcome everything BUT QB play . . . but the result is still the same. Top results.

I don't keep records of wrongs, so I don't know the beef between Cartire, Sac and Davidseven and others on this board. I stopped tracking internet personalities years ago. But the general principle of debate is you always argue from the general to the specific. And the general trajectory of the Seahawks offense under Bevell is up. Its fine to dissect individual plays and playcalls, but those represent specific struggles within a sea of general success . . . and I posted this thread merely to point out that all our hand wringing over specific struggles need to have context within the overall success of the offense.

 

[SomersetHawk]

Would anyone be excited to have Bevell as an OC without Russell Wilson and Marshawn? Would you be geeked for Bevell overseeing an offense with Hass and Alexander? TJack and Turbo? If you say yes, you're lying.

DavidSeven does have a point. A lot of times Bevell gets the blame pinned to him undeservedly. There's been dozens of times this year where I've asked the "what THE bleep was that playcall" and poster explained things clearly and showed it wasn't really on Bevell. THOSE are awesome threads that set this place apart from Twitter and egocentric blogs.

However, that works the other way as well. Coming in spewing stats and pointing to a ring isn't the end all be all. All I can speak for is myself, but I've routinely quoted a poster and said "yup, you're right, not on Bevell, I was wrong". But, that's literally never happened the other way. All you get is generalized hyperbole mostly hiding behind the lame reasoning and general tone "why don't you be the OC then...all fans hate their OC".

Yah, it's those snide, completely lazy remarks that make you roll your eyes and sigh, I'll never not post in fear of this though, ultimately I couldn't give af about those responses because more often than not if you write something with some amount of thought to it there's enough good posters on this board who will respond thoughtfully, whether they agree or not (and if they don't agree you might learn something, or they might).

 

[pehawk]

Well, let's play this thought process through then, shall we? The Seahawks offensive line is above criticisms then, I mean, the trend for the offense is going up, right? The numbers and data should exclude criticisms of the offensive line using this same measure. We're foolish to criticize anyone on the offense using your premise.

I just can't stand generalizing members comments as vague and uneducated. For 16 weeks, a lot of good threads have discussed specifics.

On Cincy, I'm fully capable of determining what's talent and whats schematics. IMO, Dalton had the 2nd easiest QB job in the NFL his first 3 years. Still doesn't mean I cant see the obvious that Hue and Gruden are dynamo's.

I liked Bates. I liked the dude who got fired in Jax. I liked the old SF OC that coordinated a historically bad offense in SF before talking over in GB. Doesn’t mean I'm right about Bevell, but it does mean I'm not some mouth breather spewing rube takes.

 

[pehawk]

Would anyone be excited to have Bevell as an OC without Russell Wilson and Marshawn? Would you be geeked for Bevell overseeing an offense with Hass and Alexander? TJack and Turbo? If you say yes, you're lying.

DavidSeven does have a point. A lot of times Bevell gets the blame pinned to him undeservedly. There's been dozens of times this year where I've asked the "what THE bleep was that playcall" and poster explained things clearly and showed it wasn't really on Bevell. THOSE are awesome threads that set this place apart from Twitter and egocentric blogs.

However, that works the other way as well. Coming in spewing stats and pointing to a ring isn't the end all be all. All I can speak for is myself, but I've routinely quoted a poster and said "yup, you're right, not on Bevell, I was wrong". But, that's literally never happened the other way. All you get is generalized hyperbole mostly hiding behind the lame reasoning and general tone "why don't you be the OC then...all fans hate their OC".

Yah, it's those snide, completely lazy remarks that make you roll your eyes and sigh, I'll never not post in fear of this though, ultimately I couldn't give af about those responses because more often than not if you write something with some amount of thought to it there's enough good posters on this board who will respond thoughtfully, whether they agree or not (and if they don't agree you might learn something, or they might).

Yup. I actually LOVE it when someone explains why I'm wrong on it. Love the learning aspect.

Maybe McGruff, Cartire and crew should've participated in those threads.

 

[Scottemojo]

Let's be honest. This thread wasn't started with honest debate in mind. It we started with the premise that if you disagree with Doug you are a shitty fan. It was a toxic envronment for healthy debate from the first keystroke.

The whole base of Pete's program is competition. As the season went on the offense got better at it, but not the way they hoped. It was a reset to putting offense on the legs of lynch the ability to stretch a d through pure attrition due to length of play. If Baldwin wantted to give credit where credit was due, it was Cable's o line being able to run out ass kicker backups that initiated the run game, and saved a season. Coincidentally, guys who pass block like toreadors.

Somebody referenced the Phoenix blitz beating routes. They were awesome. They were also not the norm, we were half as effective vs blitzes this year as last before that. Literally 8 ypa in 2013, under 4 in 2014. Pe isn't wrong about a lack of blitz beaters. Saying there are no blitz beaters is off base, but contains truth. We have generally done a bad job of targeting areas vacated by blitzers. A flare route by the TE or the rb that will gain 3 on 3rd and 7 is more common as a blitz beater in our scheme. SF doesn't like blitzing, but vs us they blitz more than vs pretty much anyone else. It isn't because we are awesome at killing it.

I loved the Phoenix game. Polar opposite of the Dallas game in philosophy. Bevell took advantage of vacated blitz zones like we had not seen since last season. It was a huge jump in identity. The Dallas game and the San Diego games were the other end of the spectrum, with clock management and Percy centric play calling leaving our core philosophy behind.

Does Bevell deserve credit or blame? I tend to think of Bevell as a play caller only, so neither. I am sure he has input on game plans, but play calling is the only thing he visibly controls. At which he seems to me to be kind of replaceable.

 

[seedhawk]

Would anyone be excited to have Bevell as an OC without Russell Wilson and Marshawn? Would you be geeked for Bevell overseeing an offense with Hass and Alexander? TJack and Turbo? If you say yes, you're lying.

DavidSeven does have a point. A lot of times Bevell gets the blame pinned to him undeservedly. There's been dozens of times this year where I've asked the "what THE bleep was that playcall" and poster explained things clearly and showed it wasn't really on Bevell. THOSE are awesome threads that set this place apart from Twitter and egocentric blogs.

However, that works the other way as well. Coming in spewing stats and pointing to a ring isn't the end all be all. All I can speak for is myself, but I've routinely quoted a poster and said "yup, you're right, not on Bevell, I was wrong". But, that's literally never happened the other way. All you get is generalized hyperbole mostly hiding behind the lame reasoning and general tone "why don't you be the OC then...all fans hate their OC".

Actually, we all got to see this 4 years ago in Bevell's first year. He had TJ and ML and we went 7-9. However, I sure don't remember many fire Bevell threads from then. Have we all become victims of the Hawks success? What I do know is, we have won 47 games and counting with Bevell as our OC. In a parity driven league like the NFL that has to say something. Mainly, we picked up a well above average QB.

 

[pehawk]

Let's be honest. This thread wasn't started with honest debate in mind. It we started with the premise that if you disagree with Doug you are a shitty fan. It was a toxic envronment for healthy debate from the first keystroke.

The whole base of Pete's program is competition. As the season went on the offense got better at it, but not the way they hoped. It was a reset to putting offense on the legs of lynch the ability to stretch a d through pure attrition due to length of play. If Baldwin wantted to give credit where credit was due, it was Cable's o line being able to run out ass kicker backups that initiated the run game, and saved a season. Coincidentally, guys who pass block like toreadors.

Somebody referenced the Phoenix blitz beating routes. They were awesome. They were also not the norm, we were half as effective vs blitzes this year as last before that. Literally 8 ypa in 2013, under 4 in 2014. Pe isn't wrong about a lack of blitz beaters. Saying there are no blitz beaters is off base, but contains truth. We have generally done a bad job of targeting areas vacated by blitzers. A flare route by the TE or the rb that will gain 3 on 3rd and 7 is more common as a blitz beater in our scheme. SF doesn't like blitzing, but vs us they blitz more than vs pretty much anyone else. It isn't because we are awesome at killing it.

Are you implying I'd exaggerate intentionally for the sake of an overall point? I'm offended.

 

[Scottemojo]

Nope. I just know that "no" blitz beaters is a polarizing way to say it, and easy to refute. I know what you meant though. Not much that targets the weakness the d just gift wrapped for you.