Thoughts after rewatching Dallas preseason game - 1st half

OP
OP
kearly

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
MontanaHawk05":33yr9kjo said:
If Wilson weren't able to consistently bail out broken plays, I'm fairly sure Bevell would have been fired a while ago.

I'm not an X's and O's guy but it does feel that way at times.

I wonder how much of the bubble screen thing is Pete. He could put a stop to it any time he wants. Pete has always been obsessed with YAC and speed. It might be as much a Pete thing as it is a Bevell thing.
 
OP
OP
kearly

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
Jville":1hdbi5qk said:
Bevell and Russell, along with many analysts, talk about a play call that sets up a later play. None of the plays are called in isolation from one another. Getting quarterbacks into a rhythm is routinely mentioned. Some plays help in that regard by opening up later plays designed to attack other areas of the field. Play calling it a dynamic endeavor.

The opponent is going to win on some snaps. The goal is to win on the big plays. To push for and win the caustic differential.

True, but that doesn't explain the high number of those calls. At some point a play needs to be effective to justify heavy use. For example, if you're the Washington Redskins or Detroit Lions and you can't run the ball to save your life, it makes sense to run the ball less than other teams would.

I suspect this is as much of a Pete thing than it is a Bevell thing.
 

theENGLISHseahawk

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
If you're trying to stop teams stacking the box, a bubble screen is virtually a dare to keep doing it.
 

brimsalabim

Active member
Joined
Aug 12, 2012
Messages
4,509
Reaction score
3
Maybe Bevel is trying to get a certain look from the defense by running those plays over and over?
 

McGruff

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
5,260
Reaction score
0
Location
Elma, WA
WindCityHawk":2nifx80w said:
MontanaHawk05":2nifx80w said:
If Wilson weren't able to consistently bail out broken plays, I'm fairly sure Bevell would have been fired a while ago.

Bevell is absolutely riding Wilson's coattails. Wilson wouldn't have to be known for making magic out of broken plays if so many of his plays weren't broken.

Exhibit B: While our defensive coordinators are a revolving door of promotions, no one comes calling for Bevell. Other teams know who the real hero is here.

Bevell has interviewed for NFL head coaching jobs in the last few yesrs, and was rumored for several others that weren't patient enough to wait for the playoffs to end.
 
OP
OP
kearly

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
theENGLISHseahawk":hkpdjia0 said:
If you're trying to stop teams stacking the box, a bubble screen is virtually a dare to keep doing it.

They've stacked the box for years against Marshawn, and the play has still sucked. You have to have WRs who can execute their blocks and a runner who can make things happen. You need the right kind of personnel to execute these plays.
 

Thunderhawk

New member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
680
Reaction score
0
When is Kearly going to get a job at SI? This was a pleasure to read. Thanks for the work!

Bad Bevell was in full effect. Hopefully he's just trolling his critics with those bubble screens and they're removed from the play book for the regular season.
 
OP
OP
kearly

kearly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
15,975
Reaction score
0
McGruff":2eha8249 said:
Bevell has interviewed for NFL head coaching jobs in the last few yesrs, and was rumored for several others that weren't patient enough to wait for the playoffs to end.

You can interview before your team season is over, you just can't be hired. That was the case for Bevell who had two interviews (Bills, Raiders) over a 4 day period right around new years 2014. He had three interviews (Titans, Vikings, Redskins) the year before that, also bunched around new years.

Additionally, teams have shown that they are willing to wait to get their guy. As we all know the Falcons ended up waiting until after the SB to hire Quinn.

Bevell hasn't had a HC interview ever since Malcolm Bulter intercepted that slant, despite the fact that the Seahawks offense was a revelation in 2015.
 

Smelly McUgly

New member
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
4,282
Reaction score
0
Location
God's Country AKA Cascadia AKA The Pacific Northwe
I much prefer to run play action to keep defenses honest about the run. We hit explosive plays off PA quite a bit, but even the PA with shorter routes tends to be effective and helps Wilson get the ball out quickly.

What I really want to see more of is play action out of the read option. If Bevell wants to run quick passes to WRs at the line of scrimmage, it seems like running PA out of the read option would slow the defense enough to allow the receiver and blockers to get set. IIRC, we've run play action out of the read option a handful of times with success.
 

Tical21

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
5,479
Reaction score
64
theENGLISHseahawk":obontqgo said:
If you're trying to stop teams stacking the box, a bubble screen is virtually a dare to keep doing it.
I'm going to take this a step further. As a coordinator, if you're watching tape or watching a game unfold from the sidelines, and you see a weakness you can exploit, you try exploiting it. If the play doesn't work, you think its a flukey result. So you try it again. Doesn't work. You do the math again. Yep, it should work, call it again. I could be very stubborn in that way in my coaching days. When we are facing a single safety as often as we do, we should be getting some big plays in the screen game. They're out there. I know it. So does Bevell. It's flukey that we rarely make them happen. I think.
 

chris98251

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 27, 2007
Messages
38,416
Reaction score
77
Location
Renton Wa.
Tical21":3a20zcoc said:
theENGLISHseahawk":3a20zcoc said:
If you're trying to stop teams stacking the box, a bubble screen is virtually a dare to keep doing it.
I'm going to take this a step further. As a coordinator, if you're watching tape or watching a game unfold from the sidelines, and you see a weakness you can exploit, you try exploiting it. If the play doesn't work, you think its a flukey result. So you try it again. Doesn't work. You do the math again. Yep, it should work, call it again. I could be very stubborn in that way in my coaching days. When we are facing a single safety as often as we do, we should be getting some big plays in the screen game. They're out there. I know it. So does Bevell. It's flukey that we rarely make them happen. I think.

It's the type of screens we run. Bevell is still hoping for a Percy Harvin, Sydney Rice combination to happen. The problem is teams have sniffed this out and see it coming or it's so slow to develop teams are already at the point of attack in numbers to overwhelm blockers.
 

NINEster

New member
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
2,007
Reaction score
0
Hey Kearly, would you say that the Cowboys GM drafted on offense many pieces of the puzzle to attack the Seahawk D (just like Baalke is on a 3 year plan to Get To Wilson)?
 

austinslater25

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
4,818
Reaction score
1
kearly":2b91yp2w said:
theENGLISHseahawk":2b91yp2w said:
Yeah I know it’s preseason and all, but Bad Darrell Bevell was back and badder than ever in the first half of this game. These weren’t the calls Bevell was making in the second half of last year when Wilson was roasting everybody.

But why would they be calling those plays in a meaningless pre-season game? Surely they whole point of this game is just to get some time on the field, get people ready for the real thing. If the #1's had scored zero points again I can't say I'd be overly fussed. Throwing bubble screens galore is probably just s symptom of the situation.

This was the tuneup game, it's the game where every team gives a little bit of a preview of how they are going to run things in the real games to come. Hopefully Seattle learns from this game, but given Bevell's long obsession with ineffective horizontal passing, I doubt it's a fluke.

I have nothing against horizontal passing plays in general, however they are plays that live and die by execution. Seattle has smaller WRs that often struggle with blocks. Our receivers are solid, but we lack a YAC monster to hide some warts when others fail to execute their blocks. I honestly can't remember Seattle ever being all that good on these kinds of plays, other than occasionally with Golden Tate. If the personnel changes and Seattle gets good at them, then it's fine.

Bevell has a history of stubbornly calling plays that his personnel aren't ideally equipped to execute. I thought Bevell had put that tendency behind him late last year, but this game has me worried that the old Darrell Bevell is back again.

This is my biggest problem with Bevell and a point I've made numerous times on the board. His SB play to Lockette is exactly that. It wasn't so much the play as the personnel he had in for the play against their personnel. Its almost unexplainable. I'm not bashing Bevell because he does a lot of good things and our offense has been better than people realize. Anyway my question is, has anyone asked him this question publicly? Would love to hear his explanation of it.
 

austinslater25

Active member
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
4,818
Reaction score
1
Tical21":1k93s6m0 said:
theENGLISHseahawk":1k93s6m0 said:
If you're trying to stop teams stacking the box, a bubble screen is virtually a dare to keep doing it.
I'm going to take this a step further. As a coordinator, if you're watching tape or watching a game unfold from the sidelines, and you see a weakness you can exploit, you try exploiting it. If the play doesn't work, you think its a flukey result. So you try it again. Doesn't work. You do the math again. Yep, it should work, call it again. I could be very stubborn in that way in my coaching days. When we are facing a single safety as often as we do, we should be getting some big plays in the screen game. They're out there. I know it. So does Bevell. It's flukey that we rarely make them happen. I think.

It's flukey with the right personnel, its expected when we have smaller wr's trying to set screens against bigger db's while our biggest WR is the one catching the bubble screen which Bevell has done at times. If we are running a bubble screen throw it to Lockett or even Baldwin, not Kearse.
 

pcbball12

New member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
736
Reaction score
0
kearly":108y0tw2 said:
theENGLISHseahawk":108y0tw2 said:
If you're trying to stop teams stacking the box, a bubble screen is virtually a dare to keep doing it.

They've stacked the box for years against Marshawn, and the play has still sucked. You have to have WRs who can execute their blocks and a runner who can make things happen. You need the right kind of personnel to execute these plays.
All a bubble screen is, is a constraint play. It is not an integral part or an identity of an offense, but a play designed to keep the defense from cheating against the run. It isn't necessarily designed to have huge returns, but they still need to be run here and there to keep the defense honest. Constraint plays are vital to a team that wants to run the ball at the rate we do. Usually it helps from a safety being able to cheat too much in the box. So, while we may only see a gain of 1, 2 , or 3 and get frustrated with the call, the bigger picture of the play is keeping the defense disciplined and honest....opening up the run game. A big reason our running game usually gets going in the 2nd half as well.
 

bigskydoc

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
3,153
Reaction score
44
Location
Kalispell, MT
Russell has seemingly struggled with early game accuracy since joining the Hawks. I can see having some staple, safe passing plays to get him into a rhythm early on.

However, I am befuddled why they insist on running this play later in the game when it fails to produce the desired results again and again and again while other options have proved successful in the past.

If Pete wants it as part of the offense, isn't it Darrell Bevell's responsibility to come up with a way to make it work by adjusting things like personnel, timing etc?
 

HawkMeat

New member
Joined
Mar 22, 2013
Messages
967
Reaction score
0
Location
Kidnap County
kearly":2h9vkid0 said:
MontanaHawk05":2h9vkid0 said:
If Wilson weren't able to consistently bail out broken plays, I'm fairly sure Bevell would have been fired a while ago.

I'm not an X's and O's guy but it does feel that way at times.

I wonder how much of the bubble screen thing is Pete. He could put a stop to it any time he wants. Pete has always been obsessed with YAC and speed. It might be as much a Pete thing as it is a Bevell thing.
Did this topic ever come up in interviews? It has been talked about on boards for years. It would be nice to know the thought in bubble screens, the personnel used, and despite success why it is usex. Is it to set up the next play, like a game of chess, or is the belief this is usually a successful play for them.
 

theENGLISHseahawk

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
9,977
Reaction score
0
kearly":2jk9keso said:
They've stacked the box for years against Marshawn, and the play has still sucked.


That's not the point though. If you're showing you're willing to throw it and you're showing that hand to the defense and they have to react, it positively impacts the run game. Maybe all those bubble screens sucked -- and maybe that Beast Mode long TD-drive was a consequence of being prepared to call two bubble screens on the last drive.
 
Top