Guys..............................

[flyerhawk]

Oh, I agree. There always seems to be something to complain about with Bevell.

I'm not necessarily a "Bevell guy", like some would claim. I want success, which we have had with Bevell, and it really puzzles me when there are calls for the firing of a guy who is having great success for us.

I root for the laundry. If we got rid of Bevell I wouldn't really care. Provided they replaced him with someone better. That's the tricky part.

For me, I prefer continuity in our coaching staff unless there is a clear need for a change. I remember lots of people calling for Holmgren to resign and when he did we had some pretty ugly seasons. Same after Chuck Knox left.

 

[chf]

I root for the laundry. If we got rid of Bevell I wouldn't really care. Provided they replaced him with someone better. That's the tricky part.

For me, I prefer continuity in our coaching staff unless there is a clear need for a change. I remember lots of people calling for Holmgren to resign and when he did we had some pretty ugly seasons. Same after Chuck Knox left.

Have a plan. That's all I ask for. When Steve Sarkisian is the guy floated the most as a Bevell successor, I know that people are just grousing and just want change for change's sake. Meh. Any successor has to be BETTER than Bevell.

Active addicts need not apply.

 

[seattlefan75]

Soooo are we going to ignore that Christine Michael carried the ball 18x for 64 yards avg 3.6 yards a carry? Thats great he scored two TD even though both came at like the 2 yard line but I hope this offense can figure out the run game

 

[Tapey]

Oh boy

 

[Destroydacre]

I root for the laundry. If we got rid of Bevell I wouldn't really care. Provided they replaced him with someone better. That's the tricky part.

For me, I prefer continuity in our coaching staff unless there is a clear need for a change. I remember lots of people calling for Holmgren to resign and when he did we had some pretty ugly seasons. Same after Chuck Knox left.

I have no doubt the Seahawks could do better than Bevell at OC. But I agree, if they made a change there's no guarantee they upgrade. And yes I know there's other things, the O having to learn a new system etc etc.

The thing that bothers me the most about Bevell is that he is either slow at adapting to what is going on in the game, or just flat refuses to. In the Miami game this year for instance I said at halftime that Bevell had to make some adjustment because the Seahawks had Wilson dropping back way too frequently and the plays were always getting blown up because the Miami defensive front was overwhelming the Seahawks O-line. And what happens in the second half? Bevell calls a play for Wilson to drop deep, Suh blows it up and steps on Wilson's foot and he sprains his ankle. Wilson still hasn't recovered from that yet, we see how hesitant he is to run it and how he can't escape some pressures that you knew he'd be able to if he was 100%.

 

[MKHawk]

Soooo are we going to ignore that Christine Michael carried the ball 18x for 64 yards avg 3.6 yards a carry? Thats great he scored two TD even though both came at like the 2 yard line but I hope this offense can figure out the run game

The run game is not operating the way it needs to right now, that's for sure. Michael and the OL share the blame, and at least for the Falcons game, the blame probably slants toward the OL more.

 

[JMR]

The run game isn't a weapon we can use to control the game these last few weeks, but I don't look at it as a liability right now either. They are plugging along and generally picking up the yards we need, save a couple curious decisions by CM on Sunday. As RW's health improves and the line comes together a little better, I think the run game will ramp up a bit with that. There is a list of other things i'm more concerned about than the run game, such as injuries to Kam, Clark, & Bennett, what's holding Lockett back, and cause of our coverage breakdowns.

 

[MrS]

Really tired of michaels weak running style

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Really tired of michaels weak running style

You say that as if there is another, better option right now.

 

[Tech_God]

You say that as if there is another, better option right now.

Agreed. Let's not forget that Michael is running exactly where he's told to run now. The reason he was let go last year was because he was trying to make his own plays. So, when the line makes a hole, he succeeds well. When there is no hole, you get what we are seeing now.

I am in no way being a Michael apologist. Rawls is leaps and bounds way better than Michael. Wish he was playing right now. Bottom line, Michael is a #2 back filling in for a #1 back.

 

[Mitch_Rapp]

Oh boy

You stole my avatar...

 

[Tapey]

You stole my avatar...

Quite the opposite.

 

[MrS]

Agreed. Let's not forget that Michael is running exactly where he's told to run now. The reason he was let go last year was because he was trying to make his own plays. So, when the line makes a hole, he succeeds well. When there is no hole, you get what we are seeing now.

I am in no way being a Michael apologist. Rawls is leaps and bounds way better than Michael. Wish he was playing right now. Bottom line, Michael is a #2 back filling in for a #1 back.

sick of seeing him avoid contact, fall over, run out of bounds.

this is not the running style we are used to and its not what they have told us, for 6 years now, is the style they want. if he tried to gain a few extra yards by staying in bounds i wouldnt complain, but he runs at the sideline like he cant wait to get the eff out of there.

 

[Anointed One]

Soooo are we going to ignore that Christine Michael carried the ball 18x for 64 yards avg 3.6 yards a carry? Thats great he scored two TD even though both came at like the 2 yard line but I hope this offense can figure out the run game

You ignored his good games... I don't see your point...

 

[chf]

I guess this must be what people mean by confirmation bias. I finally got to watch the recording of the last game, and I gotta say, I dunno what people are watching RE: Micheal. Did he run out of bounds on that one play? Sure. He could easily have gotten a few extra yards on that play. Overall though he was putting his nose in there and running hard. And ALSO contributing in the pass game, AND doing what got him in the dog-house early on, picking up blitzers.

The difference in our rushing stats can be laid at one factor - Russ being hobbled. You subtract his rushing totals the last few years, and Seattle is pretty pedestrian.

There really shouldn't be any way that you watch Micheal this year and get a Shaun Alexander or Chris Warren 'I fold at first contact' vibe.

In fact, in a huge bit of irony, it was Micheal SEEKING OUT contact that got Willson injured.

Could Micheal be a more powerful runner? Sure. He's not Lynch. He's not even Thomas Rawls.

But that burst that let him score vs the 9ers is pretty unique. As the O-line continues to develop, those kind of runs are going to come more often.

 

[JMR]

The difference in our rushing stats can be laid at one factor - Russ being hobbled. You subtract his rushing totals the last few years, and Seattle is pretty pedestrian.

And that's why I always thought it was so ridiculous when RW doubters would say he's only good because of the "running game" and defense. He was 30% of running game by sheer stats, and maybe more when you look at how his injuries have made it tougher for everyone else to be productive.

Anyway, I think at some point we may have to acknowledge that RW just isn't going to contribute a whole lot on the ground this year. And if he does, it probably won't be until the 2nd half of the year. The OL is improving, but in all likelihood we are going to have to figure out how to put an effective rushing attack together without Russ being a threat. It's been a struggle so far, but I don't have a problem with CM's performance with everything considered.

 

[Mitch_Rapp]

Quite the opposite.

I took that picture