HawkShack.com

TC is interviewing with the 49ers and KR is interviewing with the Bills. Interesting to say the least.

Not a surprise. Successful coordinators and such always seem to leave for new teams. Everyone wants to be a HC, or make more money.

EmeraldBullet wrote:Not a surprise. Successful coordinators and such always seem to leave for new teams. Everyone wants to be a HC, or make more money.

Tom Cable ("TC") isn't a coordinator. He's the O-Line coach. But he has HC experience.

To tell the truth, I wouldn't miss either one of them. I'm not a huge Tom Cable fan, and our defense, for whatever reason, has regressed under KR.

That's why I said coordinators and such, TC would fall under and such category.

EmeraldBullet wrote:That's why I said coordinators and such, TC would fall under and such category.

OK, I probably should have read your comments a little closer. I know that you're very knowledgeable and wouldn't be subject to such an oversight. Sorry.

Gus... back for a second round if Kris leaves? (i doubt Kris gets the job) --

Richard isn't to blame for losing Earl which changed that defense and I like his more aggressive nature.He would only improve.
The jury's out on Cable. If the line looks like last saturday for 3 more games give him a raise.

I believe Cable had one season as HC with the Raiders which was 8-8, an improvement but was let go after the season. Breaking the jaw of an assistant coach probably didn't help his case.

I will be surprised if either gets hired for HC, particularly Cable, though I think Richard needs more time as a DC before he'd be ready to make that measurable leap.

Of the two, Cable has the better shot...though I don't think either will be hired. Cable coached the Raiders as HC for 2.5 seasons. While the team improved finishing 8-8 in his last year, he had a losing record and the busted face deal. I actually like him a lot and think he'd be good. But SF is the last place I'd want to go...though he was born o few hours away. What a mess that franchise is.

Kris needs more time, IMHO. Ya'll are spoiled though if you think our D has fallen off that much (& it's rishard's fault). We were 3rd in points allowed, 5th in yards and this was with injuries to KEY players (Bennett, Kam, Earl) & an offense that couldn't stay on the field.

Hawktawk wrote:Richard isn't to blame for losing Earl which changed that defense and I like his more aggressive nature.He would only improve.
The jury's out on Cable. If the line looks like last saturday for 3 more games give him a raise.

I know it's crazy, and I'm most definitely not claiming I would prefer Terrell to Thomas, but the point differential with or without ET is .06 while the improvement in getting off the field on third down is drastically better ( yeah that doesn't sound right to me either) 51.2 conversion with ET 32.9 without. The passer rating had remained almost identical, and believe it or not, big plays have dropped TD to INT have not improved, but that isn't something you can necessarily pin on Terrell.

I don't understand it, nor do I feel like they are as good without him, but somehow as a whole they've at least remained "as good" and someone ( not me lol) could make the case for them actually being better.

I might be in the minority, but I wouldn't want to see Gus back in Seattle. We've had good D's ever since Pete arrived, but to me, the swagger really arrived with Dan Quinn. I don't think we're in danger of losing Richard...this year, anyway.

HumanCockroach wrote:
I know it's crazy, and I'm most definitely not claiming I would prefer Terrell to Thomas, but the point differential with or without ET is .06 while the improvement in getting off the field on third down is drastically better ( yeah that doesn't sound right to me either) 51.2 conversion with ET 32.9 without. The passer rating had remained almost identical, and believe it or not, big plays have dropped TD to INT have not improved, but that isn't something you can necessarily pin on Terrell.

I don't understand it, nor do I feel like they are as good without him, but somehow as a whole they've at least remained "as good" and someone ( not me lol) could make the case for them actually being better.

Our defense was 5th ranked before losing Earl, that became 30th ranked for the games without him (before our last game). There may be specific statistical components that did not decline or even that may have improved but we are not nearly as good a defense without Earl as with him.

Hawk Sista wrote:Of the two, Cable has the better shot...though I don't think either will be hired. Cable coached the Raiders as HC for 2.5 seasons. While the team improved finishing 8-8 in his last year, he had a losing record and the busted face deal. I actually like him a lot and think he'd be good. But SF is the last place I'd want to go...though he was born o few hours away. What a mess that franchise is.

Kris needs more time, IMHO. Ya'll are spoiled though if you think our D has fallen off that much (& it's rishard's fault). We were 3rd in points allowed, 5th in yards and this was with injuries to KEY players (Bennett, Kam, Earl) & an offense that couldn't stay on the field.

Cable has some major DV issues in his past, and with the heightened sensitivity to such events, I doubt that any NFL team would take the PR risk of hiring a head coach with that kind of baggage.

Our defense was 5th ranked before losing Earl, that became 30th ranked for the games without him (before our last game). There may be specific statistical components that did not decline or even that may have improved but we are not nearly as good a defense without Earl as with him.

I don't believe at any point I claimed otherwise. I gave statistics that have been provided on what has occurred, nothing more, and went out of my way to clarify how I felt about it ( IE preference for Thomas, and not one to make an argument for Terrell over him).

Points allowed, and third down conversion rates isn't some random stats, they're important, but I'm not about to profess they're the only stats that matter.

"Cable has some major DV issues in his past, and with the heightened sensitivity to such events, I doubt that any NFL team would take the PR risk of hiring a head coach with that kind of baggage"

I didn't know that. Thanks, RD

http://old.seattletimes.com/html/seahaw ... _off-.html

I'm not sure if I had chemo brain or what??? seems like there is extensive history. That certainly changes my thinking

Hawk Sista wrote: I didn't know that. Thanks, RD

http://old.seattletimes.com/html/seahaw ... _off-.html

I'm not sure if I had chemo brain or what??? seems like there is extensive history. That certainly changes my thinking

It was a significant issue that we debated in the old PI forum when Cable was first hired. I raised some questions and as usual, I took some flak for not bellying up to the Kool Aid bar and getting behind the Cable hire.

Personally, I can give a person the benefit of the doubt if it's just one incident or a "he said, she said" situation. But there were a lot of women that came out of the woodwork once accusations against him were made public, which is very typical of DV or sexual harassment situations.

But that's neither here nor there. I don't think that a team, especially one struggling to get some traction in their markets like the Niners and Rams, will be willing to take on a head coach that has that kind of baggage. He's not really someone you want as the face of your franchise.

I am not sure if I was on hiatus from the PI at that time or if it is one of the many things that I just don't remember thanks to 20 weeks of chemo. I do remember not liking him in Oakland and more specifically - I recall not liking the hire...but I have warmed up to him over the years. He gives a good thoughtful interview. I honestly don't know that I would have softened to him had I remembered all of that. And I doubt the Hawks could have hired an assistant HC/O-line coach with that kind of track record and me not flipping out about it. Consider it an unsolved mystery.

I suppose you are right, though RD. Too much baggage - Mr. Cable is likely gonna need to stay on a short horse in a tall posse for the remainder of his career. I hope the things Pete said in the linked 2011 article are true and that Cable got his issues resolved and is a better human being. Sheesh

Zorn76 wrote:I will be surprised if either gets hired for HC, particularly Cable, though I think Richard needs more time as a DC before he'd be ready to make that measurable leap.

I heard on one of the networks that Bevill is up or HC. I do not have a source however!

Hawk Sista wrote:I am not sure if I was on hiatus from the PI at that time or if it is one of the many things that I just don't remember thanks to 20 weeks of chemo. I do remember not liking him in Oakland and more specifically - I recall not liking the hire...but I have warmed up to him over the years. He gives a good thoughtful interview. I honestly don't know that I would have softened to him had I remembered all of that. And I doubt the Hawks could have hired an assistant HC/O-line coach with that kind of track record and me not flipping out about it. Consider it an unsolved mystery.

I suppose you are right, though RD. Too much baggage - Mr. Cable is likely gonna need to stay on a short horse in a tall posse for the remainder of his career. I hope the things Pete said in the linked 2011 article are true and that Cable got his issues resolved and is a better human being. Sheesh

You know, sis, you and I could have some really good arguments about some women's rights issues, but there's one part of that very big (didn't want to say 'broad') category that you could never out-shout me in, and that would be when it comes to us men's mistreatment of women. I didn't like our position regarding the Frank Clark issue, either.

Now that... I remember. No matter when, what, or how oft we disagree - you are one of my cyber brothers.

Rams just hired the best coach in the land Sean McVey and very young too so he will be around winning Super Bowls for 30 years.

On to next years super bowl 2016 season was so meh

I don't know squat about your 'great' new head coach, but your new DC is one of the best in the recent history of the game. And for next year, as for your QB... he'll keep you down to where a 8-8 record seems like a great year. What a joke draft pick and 'give-away' of draft choices that's turning out to be.

So much for the Ram's "big splash" hire. McVey is the youngest head coach in the history of the game and as a player, hasn't so much as had a workout for an NFL team.

It will be interesting to see how this all works out, if the players will respect him or not. The closest example I can think of to this hire is when the Broncos hired 33 year old Josh McDaniels, and we all know how that one turned out. McDaniels had problems with his locker room almost from the get go. But when McDaniels took over the Broncos, they were already contenders and not the complete train wreck that the Rams are today, so McVey may not have as much of a problem winning the locker room like McDaniels did.

Hopefully it's another hair fire so we can watch ramblo trolling around in here because of his pathetic life

I think it is safe to say the Richard, Cable, and Bevell stock value took a major dump yesterday and the bad part we are there only jobs plan for the near future.

Wade Phillips is a 3-4 coach, and the existing Rams Defense is 4-3.
It should mean some changes along their DL and some good talent leaving, but in time, they should be playing pretty well if history is any indication.

Please change that Rams d wade. Please.

Apparently it's between Cable and Kyle Shanahan in SF with Shanny being the favorite (according to Profootballtalk.com).
They are also interviewing some of our player personnel types, too.
There was some conjecture that they might take Cable with some of the Seahawks staff as well.

I wonder what effect losing Cable would have on the OL? Would another guy continue along the same path or would there be wholesale changes again if they aren't the type of players the new OL coach would want?
We could end up back at the starting gate if he does leave.

We would finally get an OL coach again that can teach people how to block, and get good talent to begin with not basketball players. I think Shanny is it. He is the hottest commodity in the NFL right now.

Shanahans game plan and calls sure tore Seattle a new one. Im shocked he would burn his capital on the 9ers dysfunction. If he would and the choice is he or Cable that's a no brainer are you kidding?

I have a feeling that PC will coach another 3 seasons and it is already arranged the job will be Cables. I think there has been a wink and a nod unless Tom can find something really great.

First, I should say I haven't been a fan of Cable and would have liked a different OL coach for this past season's rebuild. He keeps trotting out this line about college players being so bad that he needs to re-teach everything, but amazingly, other teams somehow manage to create good OLs with college O-lineman. It's like they are using magic or something. Meanwhile, Cable seems convinced that playing a position in college means that you are unable to play that position in the NFL. The final OL's college positions from left to right were: basketball player/TE-RG-LT-RT-TE*, and that omits the DL experiments we all know too well. Ugh.

Okay, that said...I'm glad he's coming back next year. This young OL is so patchwork that I fear any change in teaching or scheme--even to a better teacher or scheme--would involve growing pains I just don't want to see. After they become more comfortable in their positions, then yeah, I'd like to see Cable replaced. But right now nothing is more important than continuity, even if it's with Cable.

I would be much better, however, if Schneider just told Cable to F off when it comes to saying which lineman the Hawks should draft. I'm sick of these projects.

(*Yeah, I know that Ifedi had RG experience and Gilliam had T experience, but you get the point.)

Uppercut wrote:I have a feeling that PC will coach another 3 seasons and it is already arranged the job will be Cables. I think there has been a wink and a nod unless Tom can find something really great.

I wonder if the long term is Kris Richard. Pete has said he sees him as a HC one day and is encouraging him to take on more responsibilities. He needs some seasoning however, so maybe 3 years and he'll be ready. And he would keep the same Defensive formula.

Oly, I agree with you about the OL and continuity. To switch coaches would probably be a setback while they learn a new system.

Why the hell is Bevell employed exactly? It tells you something he didn't get a sniff of interest from any team with a vacancy while a first year D coordinator with a mediocre defense and a line coach with a bad line did.


MOF I don't remember him ever being interviewed once as a HC since he got here 6 years ago.

Carroll fired Jeremy Bates a week after he had called one of the most flawless game plans ever in the beastquake takedown outscoring of the potent saints.

This ass clown should have been gone years ago, certainly after the dynasty killing worst call ever in 49.

Vs Atlanta he gave up on a successful run game like all year to play his flyboy whiz bang passing offense .

Meanwhile shanahan with a much more reliable and explosive passing game pounded our front seven over and over with runs throughout the game.
Im mystified . Dude must have compromising photos of someone . He will limit the ceiling of the offense as long as he's around.
Wake up Pete!!!

Bevill is employed because he has nude photos of Pete Carroll and .............................

Overall, Bevell has been a good OC. Some are bigger fans than others - and his supporters can point to some pretty solid offensive rankings (this year being the exception, for several reasons) during his tenure.

People can also make the case that with the OL in its current shape, it becomes blurry when trying to get an accurate assessment of where the offense really is. Either way, I'm not sure how much more there is to be learned from the guy. His adjustments this season seemed more suspect than usual, and I felt he could've done A Lot more in coming up with game plans that emphasize a short passing game. You know, like one that focuses on RW getting the ball out of his hands quickly.

It worked wonders in the 2nd half of last season, but it felt like we got away from it for the most part in '16. Wilson, too, needs to do a better job of getting rid of sooner if he finds himself standing in the pocket too long.

You could look at it any number of ways. The bottom line for me is, I don't think having a new OC is the worst thing that could happen. Pete holds him in high esteem, though, so Darrell stays until we hear otherwise.

Insanity is doing the same over and over and expecting a different result. Other than a 4 game streak in late 2012 and the torrid last 8 in 2015 this offense has been mediocre.
Good run numbers till this year, mediocre passing numbers other than second half of 15.

Beyond stats we watch the games. The Az game costing us the 2 is a good example.
Game end stats of 4 Td passes and 30+ points look great in the box score but the game was lost in the first 3 quarters .

I guess it doesn't help throwing a tantrum but this is a no brainer in my opinion .