FWIW I'm fine with keeping Bevell if he continues to build off of some of the improvements he's had the past few weeks.
I could be wrong, but my feeling is that Pete has the say with everything on the team and the coordinators are an extension of his will. Tom Cable might be an exception to that, but I think both Richard and Bevell take their orders from Pete in almost every minute detail of what they do. I think this is why Pete has been hesitant to can Bevell, because a lot of what we blame Bevell for may in fact come from Pete. My perception is that both Richard and Bevell are like putty in Pete's hands, molded the way he wants them.
Pete responds very well to criticism. He listens and takes note of good points. This season I've seen a lot of advanced criticisms of the offense, both at .net and from writers like Greg Cosell, finally begin to resonate on Seattle sports talk radio. Guys like Brock and Salk were talking about it, and these guys talk to Pete every monday of the season. I can't help but notice that as these flaws in the offense became better publicised, Pete increased his efforts to address them. It's not quite on the same level as Dave Cameron writing an open letter to Felix Hernandez, but I do think the chatter has gotten to Pete this year and my theory is that he's now working with Bevell to fix some of the flawed tendencies in our offense.
As long as Pete and Bevell are willing to continue adapting to concepts that better fit our QB, I'm okay with Bevell having a couple 'wtf' calls a game. My bigger issue is that for too long the offense tried to force things on our QB and there was very much a square peg round hole dilemma with Harvin (and to a lesser extent, Graham). I think the emergence of Rawls and spreading out the offense to help Wilson have been good changes, not to mention the route combinations. This is stuff that needed to happen, and if it can happen with Bevell, then I'll back off the criticism and see how he does.