What does Bevell see in the bubbles?

[Natethegreat]

Tate had a huge play off a bubble screen. A lot of it is our personnel.

 

[Mojambo]

We don't run them incessantly.

It's this kind of hyperbole that makes it hard to take the most severe Bevell criticism seriously.

 

[SeahawksFanForever]

Bevell and his bubbles. Bevell's QB and his nanobubbles.

 

[trharder]

Screens in general seem to work better for other teams than ours. Ours sucked even when we got a decent initial pass into the hands of Percy Harvin. Other teams seem to block it better than we do.

 

[MVP53]

Wasn't there only one run today?

Not only that, but I think it went for 3 or 4 yards. Not terrible, about an average running play.

It's not like every time a bubble screen is run, it goes for a loss of 6 something.

EVERY team runs WR screens and EVERY team's fans hate them, for no other reason than they're boring, I suppose.

 

[grizbob]

This team has spent a lot of time thinking about this play, why we run it, how it affects an opposing defense, and what it reveals about how a defense is playing you.

I think it would be good for people to think about the reasons why this play might be useful rather than assume complete idiocy of not only the OC, but Russell, Pete, and everyone from this huge staff who gives input on the offense. You think we would run it if the entire room said it was pointless?

When a RB gets stuffed for no gain on a run, that play isn't necessarily useless. You get info, you get players to react differently, and you put thoughts into their head. Later on, you can run a counter off the same formation that gets you a huge gain downfield. They've done this with the bubble screen, but it goes unnoticed unless you're paying attention.

But if we assume the coaching staff may actually know what they're doing what ever will we bitch about :stirthepot:

 

[iigakusei]

It helps to have a QB with a quick release and no hesitation as well. Watching the Packers run one in the KC game was amazing - Rodgers barely had the ball in his hands for one second and it was out.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

You mean the one to Kearse, of all the guy to use it on we have Kearse.....why not Lockett

Exactly. The guy that needed 6 inches of YAC with plenty of space for a first down and couldn't get it.

*Didn't. It's not that he couldn't get the extra six inches, it's that he went backward trying to squeak around the edge. If he were to have immediately turned up field, he would have gotten the first down easily with about a yard to spare. That play failed entirely on that execution, not on the play call.

 

[themunn]

They might be boring but we consistently get 4-5 yards from them.

 

[Bigpumpkin]

One reason for these plays is to widen out the defense.

Me thinks that you've been listening to Mr. Bevell.

 

[TheRealDTM]

Its not like he invented them, they are used all around the league. Look at the success GB had with them monday night

 

[Sprfunk]

I used this in another thread, but I works here too.
I hate them, and I don't mean distain, dislike, I actually HATE THEM.
They are an extension of the run game? Really? Sure, just like that, except take away the punishing physical nature of the running attack, taking away the threat of the run on play action, and that our team just plane does not do them well. They just don't work for us. Get rid of them.

I judge a play by results and the results of this play are usually really bad. I can rack my brain and this of a few instances when we made 3-4 yards, and a lot more instances when we lost a few yards.

I don't care about boring. To me they are not boring, they are insufferable because they don't work. Please show me a game when we won a game using screen plays 9-10 times. Greenbay with Harvin in Seattle? Other than that game I an think of a lot more games we lost using them, Dallas at Seattle, Seattle in Greenbay this year come to mind. It seems like the offence takes a jump when we ditch the plays.

 

[MVP53]

I'd love it if someone actually had the data for how many times per game this play is run. I could be misremembering, but I don't recall this play being run all that much against GB either.

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

One bubble screen used vs the Bears.

Also a good way to spread things out if a team is focusing on the inside run.

But yeah, let's have another thread bashing Bevell, who makes all the decisions on offense (not Cable or Carroll, they get locked out of the room on gameplan day as Darrell gets to work using a sock puppet to brainstorm ideas).

 

[Hasselbeck]

Didn't they run their lone bubble screen on Sunday on 1st/2nd and 17?

Not many plays in the playbook to get 17 yards.

For one, I wish he used the same concept GB has been killing teams with this year where the WR's basically block immediately for a WR on a screen. Would love to see plays like that with Lockett. Would also help with our shoddy OL and Russell's tendency to hold onto the ball too long.

 

[keatonisballin]

 

[zifnab32]

You mean the one to Kearse, of all the guy to use it on we have Kearse.....why not Lockett

Could have been a check to it based on the defense

 

[sutz]

I think some of this is on the QB. Wilson also has to see when there are more tacklers than blockers out there and audible out of it. If we go 2/3 wide out there and the D shadows them with equal numbers, the odds of making something happen go way down.

There have to be check downs we could use out of those sets.

 

[Seahawkfan80]

Although it is a minor possibility, it still is one that he is setting the other teams up for a deep fall. Set up for the Bubbles and then go for the long ball. We have the one to get out there in a timing pattern with NO-E. Maybe that is why Kearse or ADB have been the main Bubble boys.

 

[Largent80]

[youtube]t45DKmtzTHo[/youtube]