Schottenheimer hired as OC

Official Seahawks Forum, for the 12th man, by the 12th man.

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed Jan 17, 2018 1:41 am

RiverDog wrote:I wouldn't go into Kansas City trumpeting Marty Shchottenheimer's coaching record. You'd get more disgusting looks that you would if Rosie O'Donnell appeared in a string bikini. You can make as many excuses as you want, crap teams he's had to work with and so on, but the fact is that Brian Schottenheimer does not have a lot of feathers in his cap.

And ASF, I'd have to do some research into coaching hires before I could agree or disagree with your assertation that most coaches do the same thing Pete has done, ie always hire within a narrow school of thought that aligns almost perfectly with his overall strategy, but my sense is that there have been head coaches that have not been as insistent on towing the HC's general philosophy and have strayed away from it.

Like I said, I don't necessarily agree with this take, especially the part about Pete coasting into retirement. He's made enough money to where if he didn't have his heart in it, he could easily punch out and sell books or appear as a sports analyst. But the rest of it, sticking with his yes men, is something to think about. If the next couple of seasons turn out to be carbon copies of the past few, you can bet that people will be re-visiting these hires. He's not going to be able to throw these guys under the bus as he's done with Bevell, Cable, and Richard.


Throwing his coaches under the bus? How much rope do you give them? He gave Cable five years plus to build a high functioning O-line. He kept Bevell around equally long. Richard he gave a shot and the defense regressed. Richard was on a shorter rope than his other coaches likely because he can assess defense better than offense. This isn't what I would call throwing coaches under the bus, not sure why you would interpret it that way. I think he was admirable for sticking by Bevell after his egregiously bad Super Bowl call. He stuck by Cable as his run game fell into the toilet after Marshawn lost it. He more than gave those guys a chance.

You like to word things in a way that doesn't mirror the truth sometimes RD. Bevell and Cable hung themselves by failing at their jobs, Cable more than Bevell. That in essence means failing to make Pete's offensive vision succeed. He's giving new guys a shot. If you failed at your job when a guy hired you to manage a certain part of the place you worked, would you tell your boss he was throwing you under the bus when you failed? I guess I could see it since it's hard to accept when you haven't done a good job. If I fail at my job, that's my fault. Pete shouldn't have to do Bevell and Cable's job for them. He hired them to do a job.

I seriously wonder how happy you'll be if we get a schleb of a coach or even another Holmgren where we don't have playoffs every year and we fail quite often. You literally have one coach named Belichick (Maybe Coughlin with two Super Bowl wins, but fewer playoff years) that has done better than Pete Carroll in the past decade, one coach. Who do you want if our current coach is basically the second best coach of the past decade? I'm not sure what kind of results your looking for, but I guarantee you will be crying much worse when Pete is gone unless we get very, very, very lucky with a new coach. Not sure why you want change. I'd live with Pete for the next ten years than look forward to possibly ending up as a soso team with much Super Bowl hope again.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:29 am

Aseahawkfan wrote:Throwing his coaches under the bus? How much rope do you give them? He gave Cable five years plus to build a high functioning O-line. He kept Bevell around equally long. Richard he gave a shot and the defense regressed. Richard was on a shorter rope than his other coaches likely because he can assess defense better than offense. This isn't what I would call throwing coaches under the bus, not sure why you would interpret it that way. I think he was admirable for sticking by Bevell after his egregiously bad Super Bowl call. He stuck by Cable as his run game fell into the toilet after Marshawn lost it. He more than gave those guys a chance.

You like to word things in a way that doesn't mirror the truth sometimes RD. Bevell and Cable hung themselves by failing at their jobs, Cable more than Bevell. That in essence means failing to make Pete's offensive vision succeed. He's giving new guys a shot. If you failed at your job when a guy hired you to manage a certain part of the place you worked, would you tell your boss he was throwing you under the bus when you failed? I guess I could see it since it's hard to accept when you haven't done a good job. If I fail at my job, that's my fault. Pete shouldn't have to do Bevell and Cable's job for them. He hired them to do a job.

I seriously wonder how happy you'll be if we get a schleb of a coach or even another Holmgren where we don't have playoffs every year and we fail quite often. You literally have one coach named Belichick (Maybe Coughlin with two Super Bowl wins, but fewer playoff years) that has done better than Pete Carroll in the past decade, one coach. Who do you want if our current coach is basically the second best coach of the past decade? I'm not sure what kind of results your looking for, but I guarantee you will be crying much worse when Pete is gone unless we get very, very, very lucky with a new coach. Not sure why you want change. I'd live with Pete for the next ten years than look forward to possibly ending up as a soso team with much Super Bowl hope again.


OK, I'll admit that using the term "throwing them under the bus" wasn't the most accurate way to describe the firing of Pete's staff. And I agree with you, they did deserve it. But the rest of my post is factual. Pete did stick with the same run first philosophy, stuck with is "good ole boy" network of coaches rather than going off the reservation for some new ideas, so it's apparent that he's attributing our failures more to the specific coaches he let go than he is his overall philosophy. And like I said, there's a good chance he's right, and I can't say that I blame him, at least not at this point. Personally, I thought he should have let Bevell and Cable go much earlier than he did.

This argument has nothing to do with my personal wants or desires. Personally I am still on the bandwagon, a Pete supporter. Just by virtue of his two straight SB appearances and our only Lombardi he's earned himself the benefit of the doubt. All I am saying is that with the manner in which he's turning over his coaching staff, he's making a statement. Right now, all it amounts to is some raising of the eyebrows. Only if we are no better off in a year or two than we are today will it become an issue.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby c_hawkbob » Wed Jan 17, 2018 5:37 am

He stuck with these guys for seven years, gave them every chance in the world and didn't blame any of our losses or even the reasons for making changes on them or their coaching. Pete threw no one under the bus here.
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 3274
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: K-evil Kentucky, 42053

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:27 am

c_hawkbob wrote:He stuck with these guys for seven years, gave them every chance in the world and didn't blame any of our losses or even the reasons for making changes on them or their coaching. Pete threw no one under the bus here.


Perhaps you didn't see it in time before commenting, but I would like to point out that I retracted the "thrown under the bus" characterization of these firings.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:36 am

RiverDog wrote:
He's firing one set of coaches and exchanging them for a very like minded second set. That would indicate that Pete doesn't see anything wrong with his run first offensive philosophy, that he feels that it was the execution of that philosophy that has led us off course. That suggests to me that he's attributing the team's woes solely to the performance of the assistant coaches, ie throwing them under the bus.

And there's a good chance that Pete's right, that his run first philosophy is still as effective as it's always been and that Bevell and Cable were underperforming and holding our team back, in which case one could expect this team to start realizing expectations again.


RD its not just the plays as you well know. Its when you call them and how you execute them. Look no further than 2nd and goal from the 1 in 49 where both factors were in play, especially the first one.

That's the problem with Bevell.Second halves prove there were tools in the box that were effective to the tune of a NFL record for TD passes in the 4th quarter and the highest scoring second half offense in the league.Although the scramble drill and russ running seemed like the most effective play this year. First half of almost every game proves its the coaches preparation and game of wits with their counterparts on the other sideline they are losing. Brutally so, mind numbingly stupidly so.Its like the opposing team was in the huddle.
Yes players play. but I've been fascinated to watch Marrone develop Bortles from a choking bust to a pretty darn efficient QB. Their playbook gashed the Steelers after they had come all the way back. They had the perfect play called it seemed.Sean McVeigh unleashed a turgid offense from worst to first.

I just see that so seldom from seattle. Its always hard.

I hope its the timing and execution and not the wrong approach for the current NFL. Really if you look at whose left everyone has backs that can run the ball.I think its about coaching decisions and execution.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby NorthHawk » Wed Jan 17, 2018 7:56 am

Austin Davis recently said that for some reason our Offense couldn't get the screen pass down.
That's a big weapon against Defenses that aren't thinking run and are blitzing and it's more than probable that it's both Bevell and Cable's fault that they couldn't get it together.
Maybe it was the relationship between the two with one coach wanting to do one way and the other didn't.
It was, in hind sight, kind of dumb to have an OC who is subservient to the OL coach and have that OL coach responsible for the run game in a run first Offense. Game strategy,
coaching focuses, blocking schemes, not to mention egos are all impacted by competing priorities in each's mind.
Production can't help but be impacted in the long term.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 4648
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:09 am

Hawktawk wrote:RD its not just the plays as you well know. Its when you call them and how you execute them. Look no further than 2nd and goal from the 1 in 49 where both factors were in play, especially the first one.

That's the problem with Bevell.Second halves prove there were tools in the box that were effective to the tune of a NFL record for TD passes in the 4th quarter and the highest scoring second half offense in the league.Although the scramble drill and russ running seemed like the most effective play this year. First half of almost every game proves its the coaches preparation and game of wits with their counterparts on the other sideline they are losing. Brutally so, mind numbingly stupidly so.Its like the opposing team was in the huddle.
Yes players play. but I've been fascinated to watch Marrone develop Bortles from a choking bust to a pretty darn efficient QB. Their playbook gashed the Steelers after they had come all the way back. They had the perfect play called it seemed.Sean McVeigh unleashed a turgid offense from worst to first.

I just see that so seldom from seattle. Its always hard.

I hope its the timing and execution and not the wrong approach for the current NFL. Really if you look at whose left everyone has backs that can run the ball.I think its about coaching decisions and execution.


I agree with you 100%. The fact that we usually script the first 12-16 plays coupled with our typical slow starts is some pretty good evidence of your 2nd paragraph. There's a lot of truth in what you are saying.

Your last paragraph states my argument. By firing Bevell and bringing in Schottenheimer, who judged simply on his merits does not have an outstanding resume, Pete is saying that his run first offensive philosphy is not the wrong approach for today's NFL, and indeed, there's some evidence that suggests that Pete is right: Nine of the top 10 rushing teams made the playoffs. That doesn't necessarily mean that they are all what you could consider "run first", but it does support the premise.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby mykc14 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:33 am

c_hawkbob wrote:He stuck with these guys for seven years, gave them every chance in the world and didn't blame any of our losses or even the reasons for making changes on them or their coaching. Pete threw no one under the bus here.


If PC ever wanted to throw a coach under the bus it would have been Bevell after the INT from the 1. He didn't. He took the blame as much as anybody else. The easy thing to do in that situation would have been to fire Bevell (which is what many wanted). If anything he has been too loyal to his coaches.
mykc14
Legacy
 
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:45 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby mykc14 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:48 am

Hawktalk wrote:
That's the problem with Bevell.Second halves prove there were tools in the box that were effective to the tune of a NFL record for TD passes in the 4th quarter and the highest scoring second half offense in the league.Although the scramble drill and russ running seemed like the most effective play this year. First half of almost every game proves its the coaches preparation and game of wits with their counterparts on the other sideline they are losing. Brutally so, mind numbingly stupidly so.Its like the opposing team was in the huddle.
Yes players play. but I've been fascinated to watch Marrone develop Bortles from a choking bust to a pretty darn efficient QB. Their playbook gashed the Steelers after they had come all the way back. They had the perfect play called it seemed.Sean McVeigh unleashed a turgid offense from worst to first.

.



Although I completely agree that our O lacked imagination you are talking about a couple of guys who have done it for a year or less (Bortles was crap the first half of the year). McVay and Goff have had 1 good year and everything points to the fact that they will continue in that direction, but IMO they need to do it for multiple years before I am willing to toot their horn too loud. Bevell actually was on a very good trajectory with our Offense before we completely fell apart along the OL... Here are the Hawks offensive yards and pts/game under Bevell and RW...

2012 Yards: 17 Points: 9
2013 Yards: 18 Points: 8
2014 Yards: 9 Points: 10
2015 Yards: 4 Points: 4
2016 Yards: 12 Points: 18
2017 Yards: 15 Points: 11

Nothing to write home about but if the Hawks would have given him a decent OL the last 2 years there is every reason to believe that they could have finished in the top 10 in both scoring and total yards. I don't think people realize how hard it would be to call an offense with that OL.
mykc14
Legacy
 
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:45 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby NorthHawk » Wed Jan 17, 2018 10:39 am

Apparently Bevell is interviewing for the Bears OC position. He might be OK if he controls the blocking schemes and run game.
It will be interesting to see how he does elsewhere with full control and maybe different Offensive philosophy.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 4648
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Aseahawkfan » Wed Jan 17, 2018 4:22 pm

RiverDog wrote:OK, I'll admit that using the term "throwing them under the bus" wasn't the most accurate way to describe the firing of Pete's staff. And I agree with you, they did deserve it. But the rest of my post is factual. Pete did stick with the same run first philosophy, stuck with is "good ole boy" network of coaches rather than going off the reservation for some new ideas, so it's apparent that he's attributing our failures more to the specific coaches he let go than he is his overall philosophy. And like I said, there's a good chance he's right, and I can't say that I blame him, at least not at this point. Personally, I thought he should have let Bevell and Cable go much earlier than he did.

This argument has nothing to do with my personal wants or desires. Personally I am still on the bandwagon, a Pete supporter. Just by virtue of his two straight SB appearances and our only Lombardi he's earned himself the benefit of the doubt. All I am saying is that with the manner in which he's turning over his coaching staff, he's making a statement. Right now, all it amounts to is some raising of the eyebrows. Only if we are no better off in a year or two than we are today will it become an issue.


I'm glad you backtracked on the bus comment. If he had fired Bevell and Cable after the Super Bowl, I would have agreed with you. He took the blame and stood by them. Commendable, but I wanted them both gone at that time.

As far as good old boy coaches, not sure what that even means. From what I read that is more Schneider picking than Pete or Schneider recommending and Pete agreeing. Ken Norton Jr. should have been DC before Richard as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad Pete fixed that. Schottenheimer is fairly young for an OC. Solari is a seasoned O-line coach that brings a different scheme to our offense that hopefully fits with Schott's scheme. I'm not excited about Schott and Solari, but I am willing to give both a chance. I know they do bring something different to the table. Schott is more TE oriented and I like that. Bevell was bad at using TEs. If John can pick the right talent on O-line and at RB, Solari can put them in a position to win. I'm glad he's not assistant head coach. I think with the hiring of Schott, we'll try to retain Jimmy and maybe draft a more physical TE to build our offense around more two TE sets. I believe with Solari we'll move from a zone scheme to a power blocking scheme.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Wed Jan 17, 2018 6:32 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:I'm glad you backtracked on the bus comment. If he had fired Bevell and Cable after the Super Bowl, I would have agreed with you. He took the blame and stood by them. Commendable, but I wanted them both gone at that time.

As far as good old boy coaches, not sure what that even means. From what I read that is more Schneider picking than Pete or Schneider recommending and Pete agreeing. Ken Norton Jr. should have been DC before Richard as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad Pete fixed that. Schottenheimer is fairly young for an OC. Solari is a seasoned O-line coach that brings a different scheme to our offense that hopefully fits with Schott's scheme. I'm not excited about Schott and Solari, but I am willing to give both a chance. I know they do bring something different to the table. Schott is more TE oriented and I like that. Bevell was bad at using TEs. If John can pick the right talent on O-line and at RB, Solari can put them in a position to win. I'm glad he's not assistant head coach. I think with the hiring of Schott, we'll try to retain Jimmy and maybe draft a more physical TE to build our offense around more two TE sets. I believe with Solari we'll move from a zone scheme to a power blocking scheme.


The "good ole boy" network in general refers to a within group bias, in this case, I was using it as Schott's old man is buddies with Pete, thus making Brian a "good ole boy."

Brian Schottenheimer is 44 years old. That's certainly not ancient, but in a league where you have a head coach that is 30 years old, I wouldn't be calling a 44 year old OC young.

I do agree that we need to give these guys a chance. I am merely pointing out some of the criticisms that I've been hearing.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby chris98251 » Wed Jan 17, 2018 8:16 pm

If you ever had kids or been married you learn how to tune out stuff, knowing what to focus on keeps the divorce lawyers at bay, but things can get stale, call it the 7 year itch in marriages, but the same could be said on a football team, we have had some turnover on defense but the Offense has been pretty damn consistent, no new blood there as far as staff goes. You start hearing the blah blah blah more then the details or experience tells you something else.

Many just want the Greatest show on turf for their fantasy leagues, but running the football wins Championships, the guys he brought in have years of proven track records in different organizations. Pete cut the cord on things because he had to, another year of what we had and changes would have been made that he may not had control of, Allen has shown with both the Seahawks and the Blazers patience but also his Representatives have his ear that manage the teams from Vulcan, they will cut the cord no matter who it is if things slide to badly and are not recovered quickly.
User avatar
chris98251
Legacy
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 11:15 pm
Location: Renton

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby c_hawkbob » Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:33 am

c_hawkbob wrote:He stuck with these guys for seven years, gave them every chance in the world and didn't blame any of our losses or even the reasons for making changes on them or their coaching. Pete threw no one under the bus here.

RiverDog wrote:Perhaps you didn't see it in time before commenting, but I would like to point out that I retracted the "thrown under the bus" characterization of these firings.


I do tend to post a reply as it becomes timely in my perusal as opposed to saving it till having finished the thread, so no, I hadn't seen that retraction, but I have now so I thought it best to acknowledge it so as not to leave a brother hanging ...
User avatar
c_hawkbob
Legacy
 
Posts: 3274
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 3:34 pm
Location: K-evil Kentucky, 42053

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Thu Jan 18, 2018 1:52 pm

It’s nice that Bevfool didn’t get thrown under the bus after 49 but he sure as hell threw Lockett under the bus saying “ he could have gone harder for the ball”.


It was ridiculous to say it. I had to be a guest on a local talk radio show called sports talk the day after Seahawks Armageddon .
I sobered up and watched that play 100 times, all-nighter .


I blame Bevell for the call , particularly with the personell he’s expecting Kearse to get a free release to pick off butler when he was being pressed by goon Brandon Browner .

Butler had made every play possible in the second half getting his hand on several passes .

The ball is snapped and browner locks up Kearse in his tracks so solidly he is able to just hook a tiny piece of Locks Jersey as he breaks inside which slowed him slightly .

Butler reads the play pre snap and breaks across the top from 8 yards deep. The worst execution was by Russ aiming a soft high pass out in front making Lockett leave his feet and lunge for a ball he still hasnt gotten to.

If Russ just puts it on his hip and throws him under the carpet it’s a td anyway despite a horrible call. Still
It was a horrible play decision that will haunt this franchise forever .


Yeah Bevfool should have been gone the next day.
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:02 pm

Hawktawk wrote:It’s nice that Bevfool didn’t get thrown under the bus after 49 but he sure as hell threw Lockett under the bus saying “ he could have gone harder for the ball”.


It was ridiculous to say it. I had to be a guest on a local talk radio show called sports talk the day after Seahawks Armageddon .
I sobered up and watched that play 100 times, all-nighter .


I blame Bevell for the call , particularly with the personell he’s expecting Kearse to get a free release to pick off butler when he was being pressed by goon Brandon Browner .

Butler had made every play possible in the second half getting his hand on several passes .

The ball is snapped and browner locks up Kearse in his tracks so solidly he is able to just hook a tiny piece of Locks Jersey as he breaks inside which slowed him slightly .

Butler reads the play pre snap and breaks across the top from 8 yards deep. The worst execution was by Russ aiming a soft high pass out in front making Lockett leave his feet and lunge for a ball he still hasnt gotten to.

If Russ just puts it on his hip and throws him under the carpet it’s a td anyway despite a horrible call. Still
It was a horrible play decision that will haunt this franchise forever .


Yeah Bevfool should have been gone the next day.


I called for Bevell's head the next day, too. There are some mistakes in some very special situations that are simply unforgivable that require immediate termination, and that was one (Like the guy that hit the wrong button in Hawaii). Sure, it would have been throwing him under the bus and Pete would have taken a lot of grief over it, but had he fired Bevell in the immediate aftermath, he would have saved the team from alot of second guessing and recrimination. The team never recovered from that play, and it's been all downhill since.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby NorthHawk » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:15 pm

Worst. Call. Ever.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 4648
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby mykc14 » Thu Jan 18, 2018 2:36 pm

Hawktawk wrote:It’s nice that Bevfool didn’t get thrown under the bus after 49 but he sure as hell threw Lockett under the bus saying “ he could have gone harder for the ball”.


It was ridiculous to say it. I had to be a guest on a local talk radio show called sports talk the day after Seahawks Armageddon .
I sobered up and watched that play 100 times, all-nighter .


I blame Bevell for the call , particularly with the personell he’s expecting Kearse to get a free release to pick off butler when he was being pressed by goon Brandon Browner .

Butler had made every play possible in the second half getting his hand on several passes .

The ball is snapped and browner locks up Kearse in his tracks so solidly he is able to just hook a tiny piece of Locks Jersey as he breaks inside which slowed him slightly .

Butler reads the play pre snap and breaks across the top from 8 yards deep. The worst execution was by Russ aiming a soft high pass out in front making Lockett leave his feet and lunge for a ball he still hasnt gotten to.

If Russ just puts it on his hip and throws him under the carpet it’s a td anyway despite a horrible call. Still
It was a horrible play decision that will haunt this franchise forever .


Yeah Bevfool should have been gone the next day.


There's a lot that goes into that play. Personally I think Lockett could have gone a little harder. Russ should have thrown the ball a bit lower and a bit more inside (although that might have been mitigated by Lockette going harder).

How is Bevell supposed to know who lines up where? There's a chance that Browner stays outside on Lockette and Bulter lines up inside as the slot corner (a position he played many plays in that SB). In fact, Butler comes out late on that play. Its a decently designed play. Everything works out perfectly for Bulter to make that int.

There were things I didn't love about the play call, though. Having Lockette run the route was a mistake, IMO. Not having Matthews out there was a mistake (clearly you would have know who was matching up with who if he was out there), although I assume that they never had Matthews run that play and it was specifically designed with the personnel that they ended up using.

The fact of the matter is that anything that happens after the ball is snapped is not Bevell's fault. He called a play with a decent design. He can't control who lines up where.

Kearse not pushing Browner enough: not Bevell's fault
Lockette not going hard enough: not Bevell's fault
RW's throw: not Bevell's fault
Where the Pat's lined up: Not Bevell's fault
Bulter compltely selling out to stop one play (if Lockette runs a slu-go he is WIDE OPEN): not Bevell's fault
The decision to run or pass: not Bevell's call

Here's what Bevell controlled
The Play (this was Bevell's 1st or 2nd pass play for that situation). Probably second. The TD to ADB earlier in the game seemed like a better design. Again I didn't love this play. Something going to the outside or getting RW on the move would have been ideal IMO. That being said it wasn't a terrible play design
Personnel: Bevell had to be in charge of who was running what route on that play. IMO, this is the biggest argument against this play. It was designed for Lockette. I don't like this. I understand that Baldwin was being shutdown by Revis and Matthews had been shutdown by Browner most of the 2nd half while Kearse was being blanketed by Butler. If the knew Matthews was going to be that big of a play maker in the SB there is no doubt that route would have been run to hiim. As it was he probably didn't ever practice that play. Taking all of that into account I can see why it was called to Lockette, but again, I don't like giving the ball to my 6th best option in a situation like that.
mykc14
Legacy
 
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:45 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby NorthHawk » Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:27 pm

It was a quick pass which necessarily takes the ball out of the most creative player on the field. That's just dumb.
A pass play is fine, but let the Russ who can run, pass, or just throw it away if no options are there do his thing.
Even a swing pass to Lynch might have worked, but there were no options for Wilson with that call.
It was plain and simple stupid.
The better choice would be a roll out to the wide side of the field which would put pressure on the edge of the Defense and give a number of options to get into the end zone.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 4648
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Aseahawkfan » Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:02 pm

mykc14 wrote:There's a lot that goes into that play. Personally I think Lockett could have gone a little harder. Russ should have thrown the ball a bit lower and a bit more inside (although that might have been mitigated by Lockette going harder).


Let me make this more accurate for you.

Kearse not pushing Browner enough: Bevell's Fault. No one picks Browner, at least no one on our team in the receiving corps including the TEs (maybe Zach Miller back in the day). He played for us. He's huge, physical, and no WR is going to beat him on a pick.
Lockette not going hard enough: Bevell's Fault. Lockette had been in the league for years. He has 2 TD passes, both of them over 50 yards with him sprinting on a go route. Reasons why Lockette isn't a starting WR despite off the chart measurables: bad hands, bad route running, and bad receiver instincts like not going strong to the ball or running routes crisply or being able to catch in tight quarters.
RW's throw: not Bevell's fault
Where the Pat's lined up: Not Bevell's fault
Bulter compltely selling out to stop one play (if Lockette runs a slu-go he is WIDE OPEN): not Bevell's fault
The decision to run or pass: This is an unknown.

Here's what Bevell controlled
The Play (this was Bevell's 1st or 2nd pass play for that situation). Probably second. The TD to ADB earlier in the game seemed like a better design. Again I didn't love this play. Something going to the outside or getting RW on the move would have been ideal IMO. That being said it wasn't a terrible play design.
True. Anyone watching Seattle and their mother and the opposing fan's mother knew this, but not Bevell.
Personnel: Bevell had to be in charge of who was running what route on that play. IMO, this is the biggest argument against this play. It was designed for Lockette. I don't like this. I understand that Baldwin was being shutdown by Revis and Matthews had been shutdown by Browner most of the 2nd half while Kearse was being blanketed by Butler. If the knew Matthews was going to be that big of a play maker in the SB there is no doubt that route would have been run to hiim. As it was he probably didn't ever practice that play. Taking all of that into account I can see why it was called to Lockette, but again, I don't like giving the ball to my 6th best option in a situation like that. Exactly
Last edited by Aseahawkfan on Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:19 pm

Well, since everybody else is kicking a dead horse, I might as well, too.

The decision to pass or run on 2nd and goal was Bevell's. He quickly ran it past Pete, something like "we're passing on 2nd down", or something to that effect. Pete could have intervened had he wanted to. The reason given was that they wanted to have enough time for 2 more plays had the passing attempt had fallen incomplete.

As far as the execution of the play, as was stated, it was a horrible choice to make Lockette the primary target on a short slant like that. Secondly, with the ball on the 1 yard line and with all 11 defenders compressed to within a few yards of the LOS, you're asking for trouble by thowing over the middle like that. A much better choice would have been to go to the corner and put the ball so that only the receiver could catch it. Ironically, Beast was completely uncovered in the flat, so had Russell recognized that Butler was breaking on the ball, he could have hit Beast for an easy walk in TD.

I didn't mind passing on 2nd down, but not a shallow slant pass like that and not to Lockette for the reasons mentioned by others. It was a piss poor choice, one of the worst play calls in the history of the Super Bowl.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Aseahawkfan » Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:50 pm

I personally don't know how Pete managed to keep Bevell as long as he did. Whenever I see Bevell now, I want to punch him in his face. I know my dislike of him irrational, but man, I feel like he cost us a back to back Super Bowl dynasty. It drives me insane to think how close we were and that bone-headed play call cost us everything. It cost Pete even more considering he was the head coach. I'm hoping getting rid of Bevell if nothing else will purge the system a bit and help Pete get back on track. I can't help but think that Pete looks at Bevell sometimes and wants to punch him too.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Jan 19, 2018 10:09 am

Watch the play. Browner stuffs kearse completely and grabs locks Jersey for a millisecond with his right hand.
Tough to go hard when someone grabs you. As it was the guy launched off the ground with full extension . I really don’t blame him one bit on the play . I don’t really blame Kearse much for just getting overpowered in a situation where personell matchups should have been obvious pre snap.

Russ stared right just before the snap and looked at one reciever the whole time.

Blame game is 1 Bevell 2 Russ 3 browner. His stoning of Kearse and tiny hook on Lockett was the real key to the possibility of a pick on the play as it was probably less than 6 inches from completion .

It was only made possible by a play call putting a ball in the air in the middle of 11 guys on the goal line with 20 seconds left in the world championship .
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby mykc14 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:06 pm

Hawktawk wrote:Watch the play. Browner stuffs kearse completely and grabs locks Jersey for a millisecond with his right hand.
Tough to go hard when someone grabs you. As it was the guy launched off the ground with full extension . I really don’t blame him one bit on the play . I don’t really blame Kearse much for just getting overpowered in a situation where personell matchups should have been obvious pre snap.

Russ stared right just before the snap and looked at one reciever the whole time.

Blame game is 1 Bevell 2 Russ 3 browner. His stoning of Kearse and tiny hook on Lockett was the real key to the possibility of a pick on the play as it was probably less than 6 inches from completion .

It was only made possible by a play call putting a ball in the air in the middle of 11 guys on the goal line with 20 seconds left in the world championship .



I think you do Butler a disservice by not including him in your ‘blame’ sequence. He made an amazing play from his play recognition to his break on the ball and acceleration, not to mention the catch he made was extremely difficult.

As far as RW starring down his receiver. It’s a one read play. See what you want and then throw. Where he looks has nothing to do with the outcome of that play. Butler was going to be at that spot as soon as Lockette cut. That’s when Butler broke, it had nothing to do with where RW was looking. RW gets the ball sees exactly what he wants to see and let’s it fly. His only mistake on that play was his accuracy. Lockette doesn’t appear to break hard in his initial cut, before he even comes close to Browner...
mykc14
Legacy
 
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:45 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:24 pm

Butler made one of the greatest plays in super bowl history . Im only saying the 3 guys listed above made it even possible .


As was revealed later belichick made UDFARookie butler practice getting over the top on that little pick play over and over in the 2 weeks leading to the game.

He never got home once in practice but coach had him as ready as possible for a play Seattle had called 3 times all year in goal to go with perfect results 3 tds.

That’s coaching by the goat . Yeah and Rd is correct it’s on Carroll as much as anyone . The year before I recall him handing off twice to lynch on the goal line” I say we give it to the big fella” if I recall.
Lynch was having twice the game in 49 averaging 5 ypc and had nearly scored from the 5 the play before.

Love me some Pete but the hormonal moments haunt his otherwise stellar career...
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby NorthHawk » Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:57 pm

Our coaching staff tried to be too cute and it cost them (and us) a 2nd consecutive SB.
The worst call in Seattle Seahawks history.
NorthHawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 4648
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 11:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Largent80 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 1:27 pm

If Browner wasn't lined up against Kearse that is a touchdown.

Regardless of that. Why in the hell do you call that play at that time?

Bevell should have been fired one hour after that game.
User avatar
Largent80
Legacy
 
Posts: 1485
Joined: Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:38 pm
Location: Magnolia, Texas

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby mykc14 » Fri Jan 19, 2018 2:13 pm

NorthHawk wrote:The worst call in Seattle Seahawks history.


This I completely agree with.
mykc14
Legacy
 
Posts: 1410
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2013 8:45 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Aseahawkfan » Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:05 pm

mykc14 wrote:I think you do Butler a disservice by not including him in your ‘blame’ sequence. He made an amazing play from his play recognition to his break on the ball and acceleration, not to mention the catch he made was extremely difficult.

As far as RW starring down his receiver. It’s a one read play. See what you want and then throw. Where he looks has nothing to do with the outcome of that play. Butler was going to be at that spot as soon as Lockette cut. That’s when Butler broke, it had nothing to do with where RW was looking. RW gets the ball sees exactly what he wants to see and let’s it fly. His only mistake on that play was his accuracy. Lockette doesn’t appear to break hard in his initial cut, before he even comes close to Browner...


A play Butler shouldn't even have had a chance to make.

When an OC gets clever and doesn't go wit his bread and butter roll out to the right with a run-pass option using Marshawn and Russell, he's dumb as dumb gets.

If I'm in that position, I call a run option to the right. I say Marshawn, drive a hole to the end zone and Russ will follow with a receiver heading that way making the DB choose to come forward stop the run or stay with the receiver.

This was a no brainer call. If an interception gets called running that played, no one would be complaining about Bevell or Pete. They went with our strengths against a team with no means to stop us. Instead Bevell calls something we do not run with Lockette. That was playing to our weaknesses.

It is an unforgivable mistake as far as I'm concerned in the most important moment in Seahawks football history. I will despise Bevell for all time for calling it. I hope I never see him near a Seahawks team again. I see fans making excuses for that call. When there are no excuses. I watched Lockette try to play receiver for years. I heard about his speed and size. He couldn't put it together here or anywhere else. He was a great gunner because of his speed and size. His hands were bricks without space. He had one type of play he could do well running forward and catching in open....let me emphasize that again...in open space. He had almost never, in fact I cannot recall him making catches in tight quarters tightly covered.

Someone wrote that he had caught passes on that play in prior games. I looked for those plays. Sure enough he had. But the thing that person didn't mention was he did it in OPEN SPACE in the middle of the field or far away from the red zone where he was a later option. He would run that little crossing thing away from DBs and LBs crowding the space. He had never caught a TD pass that way or run that play in tight space because he's pretty much a straight-line runner without much ability to evade or move around.

It was an unforgivably stupid play by an OC with a plain oatmeal personality that thought he was being clever.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Oly » Sat Jan 20, 2018 4:56 pm

Aseahawkfan wrote:A play Butler shouldn't even have had a chance to make.

When an OC gets clever and doesn't go wit his bread and butter roll out to the right with a run-pass option using Marshawn and Russell, he's dumb as dumb gets.

If I'm in that position, I call a run option to the right. I say Marshawn, drive a hole to the end zone and Russ will follow with a receiver heading that way making the DB choose to come forward stop the run or stay with the receiver.

This was a no brainer call. If an interception gets called running that played, no one would be complaining about Bevell or Pete. They went with our strengths against a team with no means to stop us. Instead Bevell calls something we do not run with Lockette. That was playing to our weaknesses.

It is an unforgivable mistake as far as I'm concerned in the most important moment in Seahawks football history. I will despise Bevell for all time for calling it. I hope I never see him near a Seahawks team again. I see fans making excuses for that call. When there are no excuses. I watched Lockette try to play receiver for years. I heard about his speed and size. He couldn't put it together here or anywhere else. He was a great gunner because of his speed and size. His hands were bricks without space. He had one type of play he could do well running forward and catching in open....let me emphasize that again...in open space. He had almost never, in fact I cannot recall him making catches in tight quarters tightly covered.

Someone wrote that he had caught passes on that play in prior games. I looked for those plays. Sure enough he had. But the thing that person didn't mention was he did it in OPEN SPACE in the middle of the field or far away from the red zone where he was a later option. He would run that little crossing thing away from DBs and LBs crowding the space. He had never caught a TD pass that way or run that play in tight space because he's pretty much a straight-line runner without much ability to evade or move around.

It was an unforgivably stupid play by an OC with a plain oatmeal personality that thought he was being clever.


With the right personnel, I would have no problem with the call. If the Hawks had Gronk, or Fitzgerald, or Boldin to catch that ball, and had some middle-of-the-road RB, then I think it would be fine. But you hit the nail on the head. When a TD wins a ring, you just do not pass up Marshawn in favor of Ricardo Lockette. That last yard is about toughness more than anything else, and when you take the ball away from the toughest skill player on offense to throw it to the weakest, you're rarely going to end up with a good result.
User avatar
Oly
Legacy
 
Posts: 495
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:01 pm
Location: Podunk, IN

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:10 pm

My problem with that play is more generic and generalized. You do not want to throw a quick slant into the middle of an extremely compressed field. Too many bad things can happen, ie a deflected pass. There's just too many bodies in such a tight space, especially when it's only 2nd down and you have two more tries. If we had to pass, I would have much rather seen a pattern to the back or corner of the end zone so that the only player with a chance to catch it would have been wearing blue and green.

I think it was Brock Huard that said "if a skunk of a play comes in from the sidelines, it's the QB's job to not let it stink." Russell was still a little bit of a novice, but when he received a command like that, he should have been very wary of it and thrown it away and live for another down at the first hint of trouble. So sorry, Anthony, your "Russell is 100% blameless" theory just doesn't fly.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Aseahawkfan » Sat Jan 20, 2018 10:34 pm

RiverDog wrote:My problem with that play is more generic and generalized. You do not want to throw a quick slant into the middle of an extremely compressed field. Too many bad things can happen, ie a deflected pass. There's just too many bodies in such a tight space, especially when it's only 2nd down and you have two more tries. If we had to pass, I would have much rather seen a pattern to the back or corner of the end zone so that the only player with a chance to catch it would have been wearing blue and green.

I think it was Brock Huard that said "if a skunk of a play comes in from the sidelines, it's the QB's job to not let it stink." Russell was still a little bit of a novice, but when he received a command like that, he should have been very wary of it and thrown it away and live for another down at the first hint of trouble. So sorry, Anthony, your "Russell is 100% blameless" theory just doesn't fly.


I disagree. Russell is not blameless for the poor throw, but the play he doesn't call and isn't allowed to change. Some coaches give the QB rope, some don't. I've heard even Brady say he does the play that is called in from the sideline. He doesn't Cowboy the play. If Russell doesn't have rope to cowboy the play, he executes as he's told with what options are part of the play. That is not all anything I would question Russell on. Russell is very much a team player that will execute in the best fashion he is able what the coaches call. I won't ever hold that against him or any other QB.
Aseahawkfan
Legacy
 
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 12:38 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:12 am

Seahawks offensive hires may be work of John Schneider, not Pete Carroll - Field Gulls
Interesting take on all these hires . I’ve felt all along that this is a bit of a power struggle with so much wholesale turnover .
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:12 am

Aseahawkfan wrote:I disagree. Russell is not blameless for the poor throw, but the play he doesn't call and isn't allowed to change. Some coaches give the QB rope, some don't. I've heard even Brady say he does the play that is called in from the sideline. He doesn't Cowboy the play. If Russell doesn't have rope to cowboy the play, he executes as he's told with what options are part of the play. That is not all anything I would question Russell on. Russell is very much a team player that will execute in the best fashion he is able what the coaches call. I won't ever hold that against him or any other QB.


According to Brock Huard, the moment Browner stuffed Kearse at the LOS, the entire play was dead. Russell had to have been, or should have been, watching that matchup when he made the decision to pull the trigger on that pass.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHD4qjgEOvs

And yes, it was a poor throw, he should have made Lockette go down for it. But in that situation, 2nd and goal from the one with one timeout remaining and thus not do-or-die, Russell has to be 100% sure that the receiver is open before he lets it fly. He makes the decision as to whether or not to pull the trigger, and I think Huard points that out pretty well.
Last edited by RiverDog on Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:13 am

Screwed up the link
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:26 am

Hawktawk wrote:Screwed up the link


Try it again.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHD4qjgEOvs
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:11 am

Nice link I guess :D as I say it was as much about the players on the field matchup wise as the play. Which is why it obviously should never have been called. In other news Bevfool is under consideration as qb coach in Atlanta . Maybe replaced booger eater ?
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby curmudgeon » Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:13 am

User avatar
curmudgeon
Legacy
 
Posts: 447
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 1:15 pm
Location: Kennewick, Washington 99337

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby Hawktawk » Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:04 am

Russ is on sound FX saying “I hate to lose” and Where did he come from”?
Russ never identified the guy who had saved the game for NE the entire second half pre snap.....
He took the blame as he should to his credit but he was very bad on the play obviously .
Hawktawk
Legacy
 
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:57 am

Re: Schottenheimer hired as OC

Postby RiverDog » Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:21 am

Hawktawk wrote:Nice link I guess :D as I say it was as much about the players on the field matchup wise as the play. Which is why it obviously should never have been called. In other news Bevfool is under consideration as qb coach in Atlanta . Maybe replaced booger eater ?


There was another one that had Huard commenting about the infamous SB 49 pick in that "when the sidelines sends in a skunk of a play, it's up to the quarterback to not let it stink", but I couldn't find it.

It's hard to believe how they could have come up with that play. New England had their run stopping defense in (4 DL's, 4 LB's) and we had a passing offense in (1 TE, 1 RB). You would have thought that we could have come up with a play that offered better matchups than one which was totally dependent on one man (Kearse) beating his guy (Browner).

Huard said in that video that we'll be debating that play for 50 years, so just think: We only have 47 more years to go.
Last edited by RiverDog on Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RiverDog
Legacy
 
Posts: 7939
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:52 am
Location: Kennewick, WA, 99338

PreviousNext

Return to Seahawks Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests