Comparing Bevell Week One with Bevell Week 2

[hawk45]

It's easy and lazy to call voicing criticism of an OC easy and lazy.
OP was pretty measured in tone and got some good responses. He isn't pinning the loss on DB just observing that DB didn't call a perfect game.
It's easy to say the words "situational context" and claim that absolves DB without acknowledging there were times in the game we absolutely could run the ball and didn't, for no situational reason whatsoever.
Lack of Quinn threads proves nothing, Bradley got plenty of heat when here. No one blames bevell for not scoring on drives when miller pooped the bed, they do question lack of touches for lynch and harvin and ignoring the run game overall.

 

[Skansi82]

Lots of posts this week about Bevell and the heat. Far fewer posts about how Rivers shot putted a couple of touchdown passes that seemed to hang in the air forever, and neither one of our pro bowl safeties were there to help over the top. How about our linebackers/corners playing "bump and run" coverage, but failing to actually jam the receivers/TEs at the line of scrimmage?

I don't care if it was 140 degrees on the field, Old Man Gates running right by KJ/Cam for touchdowns was embarrassing and contributed more to the loss far more than Bevell and his 7.8 yards per play offense. I'm looking forward to Sunday because I think it will be a great game, and because there will be new things to discuss on this board. Go Hawks!!

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

This constant blame Bevell for everything shtick is getting tiresome and lazy.

So's the "Bevell can do no wrong" schtick.

That schtick doesn't exist. You think defending Bevell from people who constantly shit on him is the same as saying he's perfect and can make no mistakes. It's not.

Agreed. Never mind "schtick," I can't recall a single post by anyone that ever said "Bevell can do no wrong." Weak deflection attempt. :141847_bnono:

 

[Mckinja]

Given how little we had the ball, the results were....well, see for yourself below.

Week 1 Week 2
Total Plays: 66 40
Yards Per Play: 6.0 7.8
Runs: 37 13
Passes: 28 25
Time of poss: 33:20 17:45
Points: 36 21
Drives: 10 10

I love how you explain away our woes with "given how little we had the ball", then post proof that we had the ball the same number of times on offense both weeks. You do see the logical flaw in that analysis now that I've pointed it out at least, I hope? Just as many opportunities...Far fewer of them seized for points.

Bueller?

Bueller?

I explained away nothing by displaying the numbers, nor was I attempting to. I was simply putting up the numbers to show that while our offensive output was not as great as the week before, last week wasn't exactly us screwing the pooch either. You are correct, we had the ball just as many times and scored fewer points with those opportunities. But, to address the main focus of this thread, which is the effectiveness of our offensive coordinator, the output had more to do with our execution (or lack thereof) than it did the play calling IMO.

 

[AgentDib]

Praise and blame for coordinators isn't exactly lazy but it does suffer badly from judging outcomes rather than expected outcomes. Fans talk up coordinators when they roll 6's and trash them when they roll 1's without knowing how the dice are weighted. Even if you knew the expected outcome it would still be hard to attribute credit correctly. How many fans have you seen criticize Bevell this week for the 4th and 2 punt or the 3rd and long rush? How do we know that Marshawn was at 100% when a bunch of our other stars had to come out of the game for periods? Without knowledge it devolves into some who trust a coordinator based on their gut and defend him and others who dislike and attack him, each cherry picking plays that worked or failed to suit their agendas.

In particular, when it comes to rushing attempts and TOP it is easy to get cause and effect mixed up with how well the team is playing. TOP tends to be the effect rather than the cause, and it snowballs on days like Sunday where the heat also introduces it as a cause. Early mistakes compound on themselves throughout the game.

 

[RolandDeschain]

Agreed. Never mind "schtick," I can't recall a single post by anyone that ever said "Bevell can do no wrong." Weak deflection attempt. :141847_bnono:

You know how once in a great while, you'll have a conversation with someone and they drop hints in 72 different ways about something without actually coming out and just stating that something, but it's EXTREMELY obvious that you know exactly what they're saying?

Yeah, no reason I'm bringing that up whatsoever, and I'm certainly not correlating it with pro-Bevell people in any and all Bevell threads.

 

[Skansi82]

Given how little we had the ball, the results were....well, see for yourself below.

Week 1 Week 2
Total Plays: 66 40
Yards Per Play: 6.0 7.8
Runs: 37 13
Passes: 28 25
Time of poss: 33:20 17:45
Points: 36 21
Drives: 10 10

I love how you explain away our woes with "given how little we had the ball", then post proof that we had the ball the same number of times on offense both weeks. You do see the logical flaw in that analysis now that I've pointed it out at least, I hope? Just as many opportunities...Far fewer of them seized for points.

Bueller?

Bueller?

If you really want to evaluate Bevell's play calling we had 9 drives in week one, and 8 drives in week 2. Our 10th drive in week one was us taking a knee three times, and in week 2 Percy fumbled one of our 10 possessions and our last "drive" was the final 16 seconds. So in terms of Bevell's play calling on drives for week 2 the numbers would actually look more like this:

8 drives, 38 plays, 7.2 yards per play, 13 runs/23 passes, TOP= 17.29, 21 points

For the "Marshawn needs the ball more" crowd he touched the ball on 10/38 (26%) of plays, compared to 21/63 (33%) of plays in week 1.......not really that drastic of a difference.

 

[brimsalabim]

Our offensive line appeared highly aggressive in game 1 but passive (especially the tackles) in game 2. It sure seemed like Okung struggled to move laterally against the quicker pass rushers. Maybe run blocking gets him off his heels and helps the line get into rhythm?

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Our offensive line appeared highly aggressive in game 1 but passive (especially the tackles) in game 2. It sure seemed like Okung struggled to move laterally against the quicker pass rushers. Maybe run blocking gets him off his heels and helps the line get into rhythm?

That makes sense cause we ran for 200 yards in game one and had like six rushes in game two.

Run plays = aggressive looking blocks
Pass plays = passive looking blocks

 

[hawknation2014]

For the "Marshawn needs the ball more" crowd he touched the ball on 10/38 (26%) of plays, compared to 21/63 (33%) of plays in week 1.......not really that drastic of a difference.

Yes, Marshawn should have had more opportunities in both games. I think had he received the ball more in Game Two, the offense might have had more overall plays.