Category: Main (Page 22 of 64)

A year ago, nobody was really talking about Sam Darnold. He was a backup quarterback for the 49ers, seemingly settling into a career playing second fiddle to a more established starter.

The Vikings signed him to be a cheap bridge to first round pick JJ McCarthy. Instead he’s led them to a 14-win season with a game to go, possibly the #1 seed in the NFC and who knows what in the playoffs?

Darnold’s cap-hit this year is $5m. He’s provided outstanding value for Minnesota, giving them a chance to splurge on other players in free agency or via trade — including Jonathan Greenard ($19m APY), Andrew Van Ginkel ($10m APY) and TJ Hockenson ($16.5m APY).

There’s a new trend in the NFL — giving quarterbacks a second or third chance. Players who flopped as highly-drafted rookies in difficult locations are being reborn. Baker Mayfield has gone from toiling in Cleveland and Carolina, to landing in Tampa Bay and becoming a big success story. Now there’s Darnold, who had a rough time with the Jets and Panthers.

Should the Seahawks try to find the next reclamation project in the off-season?

Talk about moving on from Geno Smith is often dismissed with the belief it’d be impossible to find anyone better.

Are we really sure about that?

Moving on would certainly carry the risk of regression at quarterback, possibly significantly. But is it a risk worth taking?

Smith’s cap-hit for next year is $38.5m. If he throws for 185 yards against the Rams in week 18, he gets another $2m. If they win the game, he gets another $2m. If he completes 62.2% of his passes in that game, he’ll get another $2m.

All three escalators are well within reach, propelling his cap-hit to $44.5m.

In essence, he would cost $39m more than Darnold has cost the Vikings. He’d cost $40.5m more than Mayfield cost the Buccs in 2023.

Is Smith, who’s thrown for only 17 touchdowns and 15 interceptions this season, really $40m better than trying to find the next Darnold or Mayfield?

Let’s imagine the worst case scenario. You take on a cheap reclamation project next season (we’ll discuss names in a moment), pay them $5m and the Seahawks struggle. What have you actually lost? Is Geno Smith capable of taking this team to a deep playoff run? There’s no evidence of that. In his three years as a starter so far, the Seahawks have been a nine-win team every year. If they became a six or seven-win team instead under a different quarterback, would it be a decision you rue or something you accept is part of a calculated risk?

It’s hardly like the Seahawks would be moving off Joe Burrow is it?

Meanwhile, the benefit would be a huge cap-saving to invest in other areas of your roster and the chance to unearth a younger, more long-term solution — as the Buccs have done with Mayfield and perhaps the Vikings have done with Darnold. Cutting or trading Smith would cost $13.5m in dead money — but if he hits his three escalators on Sunday, you’d save $31m. That’s a lot of money to spend on trying to fix an offensive line or further bolstering a rising defense.

Let’s be clear — future success in Seattle depends on them fixing the offensive line. Actually having money to do that is important and there’s no bigger saving to make in the modern NFL than boxing clever at the quarterback position.

I appreciate a lot of people really rate Geno Smith and I understand why. Physically he is very impressive and there’s no doubt he’s been let down at times by his offensive line and play-calling. Yet there’s no getting away from the fact that since his hot-streak to start 2022, statistically he has been average. This year he’s 19th for touchdowns, 21st for QBR and 18th for QB rating. Prior to week 17, his QB rating under pressure ranked 26th.

He’s now fifth in the NFL for turnover worthy plays and second for interceptions. His time to throw (2.83 seconds) is middle of the pack (14th). He’s only been sacked two more times than Darnold and a large chunk of his league-leading 243 pressures came during an ungodly run with Stone Forysthe and Mike Jerrell playing right tackle, inflating the numbers.

Since the Munich game in 2022, the final game of his hot start, he’s thrown for 52 touchdowns and 32 interceptions (basically a 13:8 ratio) and the Seahawks are 20-19 with Smith under center.

Is all of this worth $44.5m? Are you able to pay Geno Smith that amount and upgrade other areas of the team to a sufficient level whereby he can improve those numbers considerably? Is it really that much of a terrifying prospect to say let’s make a saving here and move on to a younger player?

For me the only way you can argue against this is if you genuinely believe Smith to be a player of such high quality that by saving money elsewhere (eg, trading DK Metcalf and cutting others like Uchenna Nwosu and Dre’Mont Jones) you can improve the team and become a legitimate contender almost immediately. In that instance, it’d be foolish to move on from Smith. I’m just not convinced he’s ‘that’ good. Certainly with the way he’s played in recent weeks, there’s nothing to suggest he’s that kind of player. In all three of his seasons as the starter in Seattle, he’s had a stretch of good and bad games.

Very few other fan bases would covet Smith. There are clearly teams with weaker quarterbacks — but would any fan seriously be pleading with their GM and owner to sign Smith if he became available?

Obviously there’s an alternative to out-right cutting Smith and that’s a compromise contract that allows you to lower his cap-hit in 2025 and retain an annual ‘out’. Smith might be open to this and I think this is probably what will happen. However, Albert Breer also said during the Thursday Night Football broadcast that his representatives are seeking a long-term commitment. I’m pretty sure the Seahawks will want to keep their options open on a player who turns 35 during next season and hasn’t played particularly well in some critical games in the second half of the season.

What even is the right price for Smith? If you can get his cap-hit down to $25m for 2025, what does it mean for dead-money in the future? Is he $20m better than taking a chance on a younger player?

I’ve purposely left ‘names’ out of the article until near the end, simply because people will undoubtedly scoff at the suggestions and write them off immediately. I’d just stress again — a year ago, who thought Darnold would have the kind of year he’s had? Don’t revise history and be honest. He was a bust. What he has achieved this year is a surprise.

It also needs to be acknowledged that just because a player failed in a bad situation doesn’t mean they’ll automatically be the next great reclamation job. Mitchell Trubisky, for example, bombed in Chicago and similarly failed in Pittsburgh. Mac Jones didn’t work out in New England and he hasn’t looked very good in spot-duty for the Jaguars. Justin Fields was quickly shuffled out by the Steelers for Russell Wilson this year.

Darnold has also benefitted from Kevin O’Connell, perhaps the best young coach in the NFL. I think it does Darnold a disservice though to pin it all on O’Connell. I’d also say, given what Liam Coen has done this year with Mayfield, that the McVay tree is clearly universally impressive with one obvious exception.

This would be a calculated risk. Maybe that’s what the Seahawks need, though? Are they better off trying different options at quarterback, to seek something better and more long-term, or are they better off just continuing with Smith — for better or worse — hoping that eventually they’ll find the holy grail in the draft? I think it’s a conversation we should have and not automatically write-off.

Here are the names…

Zach Wilson — in terms of natural arm talent, Wilson tops the group here. He wisely went to a team where he could learn rather than definitely start in Denver. Although he was a titanic flop with the Jets, it’s the Jets. We can all see now that it’s virtually impossible to succeed there. At BYU he was highly impressive and deserved to be a top-five pick. I’m not sure if mentally he has what it takes but he’s only 25. Could he deliver on the draft potential in a non-shambolic environment?

Daniel Jones — he turned one semi-successful season with the Giants into a big contract before failing spectacularly. However, it should be noted that New York has developed into a basket-case franchise. I’m not sure he has the physical tools John Schneider wants but he’s athletic and had the self-awareness to join the Vikings after being cut. He’s now had a few weeks working with the great staff in Minnesota, possessing a front-row seat to witness Darnold’s rebound success. He’s led a team to the playoffs and won a playoff game and he’s only 27.

Malik Willis — In spot-duty for the Packers, Willis impressed and showed that with proper coaching he might be able to get his career going. He’s had problems reading the field and I’m not sure that’ll ever go away — but he’s very athletic and creative and would essentially be the veteran version of rolling the dice on a Jalen Milroe type in the draft. He’s only 25 and with the right kind of coordinator, he could provide some intrigue. He has one year left on his deal so you’d have to trade for him.

Trey Lance — I thought he had draft bust written all over him and his epic failure in San Francisco wasn’t a surprise. He hasn’t played enough football to develop — either in college or the pro’s. That said, he does have enticing physical tools and he’s only 24-years-old. It might be that if you can live through some of the growing pains initially as he settles in, Lance may finally deliver on the potential that at least saw Kyle Shanahan green-light using three first round picks on him.

I appreciate none of these names will get the juices flowing. That’s the thing though — it was the same for Mayfield, Darnold and even Smith in Seattle. In order to find the next great reclamation project, you have to start with a broken quarterback.

Paying any of this group a tiny contract to see if you can develop them, rather than paying a lot more for Smith, should be a consideration — even if ultimately they decide to proceed with the existing starter.

Let me be clear — I’m not saying the Seahawks should do this. I just think it should be a consideration. Every time anyone brings up the topic of change at quarterback, there’s often an auto-pilot response to reject any possibility that anyone could possibly be a good alternative to Geno Smith. With hindsight, creating a better offensive staff and rolling with Sam Darnold probably would’ve been a superior alternative for this season — and yet nobody could’ve predicted that. If nothing else, it suggests keeping an open-mind is worthwhile.

I’d also say, having done national radio on the Vikings game yesterday and studied Darnold closely as a consequence, I think he should be a target for Seattle if he reaches free agency. He’s not flawless but he’s physically excellent, he’s having a season that Smith has never had (35 touchdowns and 14 wins with a game to go) and he’s young enough to build around — provided you pair him with a coach from the Minnesota/McVay tree. Getting the offensive coordinator right for 2025 will be as important as anything — but it’s not impossible to find the right guy.

I don’t believe in the ‘fear of getting worse’ mentality over quarterbacks like Geno Smith. He’s not good enough to fret about in that way and the Seahawks are not close enough to contending to worry about regression at the expense of trying something to get better.

Such fear led to the Giants paying Daniel Jones, the Dolphins paying Tua Tagovailoa and the Jaguars paying Trevor Lawrence incredible contracts.

When you don’t have ‘the guy’ — I think you have to consider how much you want to pay for the bridge to find that individual. As Smith becomes more expensive, he becomes less appealing.

I wrote yesterday that I think the Seahawks need a jolt as a franchise, after winning just two NFC West titles in 10 years and winning one playoff game in eight seasons. That should include everything — from considering changes to the front office, the offensive staff and key positions on the roster.

It should also include reviewing the quarterback options, the cost of the position and how they can free up funds to improve other areas of the team such as the offensive line.

Will it happen? I think John Schneider might be open-minded about looking at alternatives. Mike Macdonald — a young, inexperienced defensive coach — might prefer to stick with veteran familiarity. It’d be interesting to be a fly on the wall if/when they discuss this topic.

I’ll be joined by Jeff Simmons as usual at 2pm PT to discuss Seattle’s elimination from the playoffs and what should happen next. Do join us!

The Seahawks are on the brink of playoff elimination. By the time you read this, it might already be confirmed.

This week I’ve read quite a lot on social media about the great achievement of Mike Macdonald gaining a winning season in year one. I’m not going to diminish that for Macdonald but I suspect if you asked him whether he thinks it means anything, he’d probably say no. I get the impression he has little interest in participation prizes.

When the franchise fired Pete Carroll, it wasn’t with the intention of instigating a rebuild. It’s my belief, and others have voiced this too, that they thought they had a roster that could and should be more competitive than it had shown to be in the final years of the Carroll era.

That doesn’t mean they thought they were Super Bowl contenders. Just that they’d be more competitive and probably make the playoffs.

The reality of this season is they should’ve made the playoffs. The 49ers collapsed. The NFC West isn’t good. The Rams are going to win it a year after losing Aaron Donald and with Matthew Stafford looking close to retirement.

Seattle blew a home game against the hopeless Giants. They are 3-6 at Lumen Field. They cocked-up games against the Rams and Vikings. They were soundly beaten by the Packers, Bills and 49ers in their own backyard. Wins against Arizona (twice), the remaining husk of the 49ers, Atlanta, Chicago, Denver in week one, Miami minus Tua, New England and the New York Jets hardly feels like a statement of intent.

The offense started hot and went cold. The defense started cold and warmed considerably. The end result, though, is the same. They’ll win nine or ten games, miss the playoffs and they’ll remain in a middle ground area they must find a way to break out of.

People say they ‘just need to fix the offense’ and patience is needed. I remember when they only needed to fix the defense a few years ago and that never happened. Fixing the offense means building a proper offensive line and finding a long-term solution at quarterback — the two toughest things to do in the NFL.

It’s going to be one playoff win in eight seasons for Seattle. Their only playoff wins since the Super Bowl run in 2014 came against Minnesota in the Blair Walsh game, the 9-7 Lions and the 9-7 Eagles (minus their starting quarterback). They’ve won the NFC West twice in 10 seasons.

The Seahawks set a standard that is better than this. They constantly talk about competing every year and playing meaningful football. So why are so many people so willing to accept any kind of hollow victory, like a non-playoff season with no memorable or significant victories — just a cluster of ‘should’ve won’ opportunities to get to an unspectacular win total?

Let me be clear, I’m not suggesting rocking up at Lumen Field with pitchforks and torches. Neither is anyone trying to claim that the Seahawks are a bottom-feeder franchise. We all know who they are. Macdonald has done a good job with the defense.

They are still pretty boring and irrelevant though. They aren’t taken seriously nationally. They picked 16th in the draft last year — bang in the middle — and they’re currently slated to pick 18th.

It feels like the franchise needs a jolt. That can come in a number of ways. They can be serious — as in changes to the front office. I doubt that will happen. It can be embracing that significant changes to the roster are required, particularly at key positions. That can happen. It should mean further changes to the staff. That will happen. It also probably means taking some calculated risks.

The Seahawks haven’t been seriously competitive for a long time now. Part of getting back to that is probably at least acknowledging it as a fact.

Let’s start with a positive. Seattle’s defense is trending in the right direction. Pete Carroll couldn’t turn this unit around but Mike Macdonald has. They’ve adjusted personnel during the season and they’re in a good place.

This isn’t a reaction to the win in Chicago. They played a shambolic Bears team. Their 179 total yards of offense for the game was only their fourth worst performance of the season. This is about more than last night. We can clearly see the impact of Macdonald and his defensive staff this season.

The defense isn’t going to take over the league in its current form, earn a trendy nickname or lead the Seahawks to a deep playoff run alone. However, they have good players at every level and they can add more. With a bit of fine-tuning, things can grow further in 2025.

Then there’s the offense, which is in a very different place. Plus the broader fact that the Seahawks as a franchise are 34-34 in the last four seasons and face the prospect of winning the NFC West just twice in the last 10 years.

Fine-tuning isn’t going to be enough here. Far more disruption and change is required. If the defense is capable of being competitive and difficult to play against, the offense currently is letting the side down badly.

A lot of people like to pick one problem — Ryan Grubb, the offensive line, Geno Smith — and say it’s the only issue. The truth is it’s a combination of a number of things. Let’s go through them topic by topic.

Running back investment

It is malpractice at this point for the Seahawks to have used two second round picks on two talented running backs, preach their desire to feature a running game year after year (under two different Head Coaches) and still seemingly have no idea how to get the best out of either player.

Ken Walker has been unfortunate with injuries, raising questions over his ability to stay healthy. Yet even when he’s on the field, you never feel like the Seahawks are anywhere close to maxing out his talent. When Zach Charbonnet plays in relief he often shows flashes of starter-level quality. Against the Bears he had 50 yards in the first half. It should’ve set the table for a +100 yard night, especially in a low-scoring game in difficult conditions. He had just seven yards in the second half.

As someone who rated Walker and Charbonnet highly, and as someone who craves the Seahawks to have a first class running game, I had no problem with either pick. I do have a problem, though, with how they’ve totally squandered the investment.

Now Walker is approaching a contract year and who knows what they should do with him? Can they ever turn this into a two-headed monster? Is Charbonnet better as a lead runner than a change of pace back? Are both players destined to be one-contract types, with the benefit of rookie-salary production flushed away over four years?

How has the team butchered its own draft plan by taking two early round running backs and making the running game such an inconsistent dogs dinner?

And sure, they can speak about ‘improvements’ because the running backs combined for 103 yards yesterday. Be honest with yourself. When you were watching that game in Chicago, did you feel like the Seahawks had fixed their running game? I didn’t. And we’re days removed from the Minnesota game where they had 46 passing situations and ran the ball with their backs 13 times. In a close, one-score game, at home. It makes no sense.

DK Metcalf’s future

This was supposed to be Metcalf’s breakout year. Ryan Grubb was going to feature him and turn him into a true #1. Instead, he’s been reduced to a frustrated bit-part player — on pace to fall short of 1000 receiving yards for the third time in his career with only four touchdown catches.

Metcalf had only three targets against the Bears — two fewer than Noah Fant, the same number as Zach Charbonnet and one fewer than peripheral figure Tyler Lockett. It’s pretty clear at this point that Grubb can’t maximise all of Seattle’s passing options. The assumption is that Lockett is just at the end but I’m starting to wonder if it’s more a case of this offense isn’t good enough to feature three talented receivers.

It’s creating a problem for the Seahawks. Metcalf’s cap-hit next season is $31.9m, the final year of his deal. A decision on his future is necessary one way or another. But what do you do? You can’t pay him like an elite receiver after this season. He isn’t obliged to accept a lesser deal to do you a favour. His trade stock, if you wish to move him, will be as low as it’s ever been.

You end up with three scenarios and none of them are appealing. Either eat the $31.9m and hope he bounces back in a contract year, then risk losing him for nothing anyway. This isn’t ideal given the team is currently $15.3m over the cap for 2025. Give him a massive contract extension and hope a new offense will help him — but there’s an increasingly strong chance he’ll never live up to the salary. Or, you give him away for a price you would’ve scoffed at two years ago.

What on earth do they do here?

If your conclusion is to just trade him away, you also need to remember trading him will cost the Seahawks $21m in dead money. Not only would you be getting less in a deal, you’d also be eating a huge amount of cap space for the privilege.

They set Metcalf’s current contract up with two things in mind. One, that he would develop into a highly productive player. Two, he’d be someone you actively work to extend next off-season. The 2024 season has torched everything and now there are no obvious ‘wins’ for the team, only major risks.

This is a badly handled mess. Somehow they need to sort this out.

The offensive line needs fixing

Everyone knows this to be true. How they go about it, though, is immensely challenging.

You essentially have two options. Spend a lot of money, knowing you might end up paying a premium price for an average or slightly above average player (see: Panthers). Or you invest draft stock into your line and hope they can hit the ground running. In recent seasons, very few highly drafted linemen have succeeded early in their careers.

There’s good and bad news relating to the 2025 off-season. There are decent players eligible for the draft who can help the Seahawks, including with their top pick. If they want their line to be big and powerful and follow the formula the Rams have taken, they can take Tyler Booker in round one. If they want to be more athletic and zone-centric, they can look at players like Josh Conerly Jr and convert him to left guard. These are just two names, there are thankfully several others they could target.

As long as they are actually prepared to take an interior offensive linemen early — and that’s not a given, considering what John Schneider said about them being ‘over-drafted and overpaid’ — they will have options.

That’s just one position though. They likely need to add a center and a right guard too. It’s hard to have any faith in Christian Haynes at this point, seeing as they are actively allowing Sataoa Laumea to live through rookie growing pains instead.

In the draft, multiple quality centers have already declared their intention to return to college. It might be Jake Majors or bust now. For that reason, they might be more inclined to sign a veteran. Are you prepared to spend a lot of money for an ageing Ryan Kelly? Are you prepared to pay a premium price for Josh Myers, a player who retains promise but hasn’t played at the level Green Bay hoped when they used a second round pick on him?

How problematic is it that the Seahawks are still rotating centers annually? Isn’t it high time they tried to put some roots down here?

Do they need to add a veteran guard? Isaac Seumalo or Trey Pipkins if they’re cut? Is Brandon Scherff well past his best? Can James Daniels stay healthy? Do you try and find something in Ben Cleveland, or some other cheaper project? Is that really going to cut it?

If the Chiefs allow Trey Smith to reach free agency, he could be a mega-contract target. How realistic is it, though, that a team like Kansas City lets him walk?

The key way to build an offensive line is to draft cornerstones. The Lions have three. They then filled in their other two sports with grizzled, proven veterans. The Seahawks have neither drafted and developed top performing starers to anchor the line, nor have they signed any. They band-aid multiple positions every year and the offensive line is too often a game of musical chairs.

So yeah — the draft will have some options for them. There will probably be some names they can have a look at in free agency. Are they going to be able to fix their O-line, after years of toil, in one off-season? Probably not if we’re being honest. Although everyone will expect them to try.

There will be a new offensive coordinator

It just hasn’t worked for Ryan Grubb. I don’t fault the Seahawks too much for giving it a go — yet in hindsight, it does feel slightly reckless that they gave Kalen De Boer’s right hand man, someone who’d never coached a day in the NFL previously, the keys to run a pro-offense. How did that come to pass?

There shouldn’t be a year’s grace here. This is the NFL, not a coaching school for trainee coordinators. The Seahawks can’t risk another year of offense like this — with half-field reads, awful or non-existent play-action and a running game that pops up to say hello every now and again but otherwise hides in the shadows. Big name weapons are under-utilised, screen plays are highly predictable and play-calling seems telegraphed too often. I don’t believe you need to be an X’s and O’s savant to say this looks bad enough for change to occur.

I think it seems pretty clear that Mike Macdonald wants to be very hands-on with the defense, while trusting a similar expert for offense to lead that side of the ball. Therefore, this is not a role for a NFL novice. They need someone who understands the league. Someone who can create a base level of offense that is, if nothing else, balanced and better. Ideally it’s someone who has called plays before in the NFL.

This, to me, is of equal importance as trying to fix the offensive line.

Firing season will be worth monitoring. Which of the offensive leaders will lose their jobs — and who will be hoping to get back into the league quickly as a coordinator? Doug Pedersen? Brian Daboll? What about coordinators becoming available? Brian Schottenheimer? Mike Kafka? Klint Kubiak? Is Josh McDaniels too toxic at this point to bring in to run an offense? He succeeded leading the Patriots offense but struggled badly as a Head Coach (twice).

There are candidates waiting for an opportunity, although some won’t have called plays, such as Joe Bleymaier the Chiefs passing game coordinator, highly rated Chargers passing game coordinator Marcus Brady (a Harbaugh-tree coach), Tanner Engstrand who was interviewed last time (although he might be more likely to stay in Detroit and replace Ben Johnson), Josh Grizzard the Buccs passing game coordinator, Scottie Montgomery the Lions running game coordinator and Josh McCown who has been Sam Darnold’s quarterback coach in Minnesota.

Here’s the dilemma. Can you afford to take a chance on a rookie again? Especially an outsider, with everything needing to change schematically and with potential further growing pains? I don’t think you can. Not if Macdonald wants someone to essentially be the Head Coach of the offense.

Therefore, they probably need to find someone experienced or at least someone capable of providing continuity with an internal candidate they trust. A perfect scenario would be for Macdonald to find his Wade Phillips, who partnered with Sean McVay when he joined the Rams. Are candidates like Pedersen and Daboll, though, interested in immediately returning to the coaching ranks if they are fired? Is there another experienced candidate we’re not thinking of?

Or are they destined to promote the highly regarded Jake Peetz, stolen from the Rams a year ago curiously. I wonder if that is most likely — particularly given his roots within the McVay tree — with the benefit of keeping some continuity, while pivoting to someone with more NFL experience, within a system that has consistently produced results (unless you’re Shane Waldron).

If I had to guess who is leading Seattle’s offense next year, it would be Peetz. I’m not sure how that will go — and perhaps in an ideal world, they would appoint someone with a proven track record who is also an experienced NFL play-caller.

The quarterback dilemma

The truth is, Geno Smith simply hasn’t played very well over the last few weeks. We don’t need to make excuses for why that has happened. Let’s just embrace it. He hasn’t played well.

In the last three games he’s thrown three touchdowns and three interceptions. He’s thrown two ‘big time throws’ and six ‘turnover worthy plays’. He’s collapsed in the red zone, his average PFF grade has been a 60.6 and despite having a ‘time to throw’ of 3.03 seconds against Chicago, he received his worst grade of the season (45.1).

It is impossible now to argue he warrants a big extension, like some people have. He has shown to be what many of us always saw him as — a very capable bridge quarterback. The problem for the Seahawks is they don’t have anyone waiting in the wings to bridge to — and this is a significant issue for the franchise.

After three years of Smith, and facing the prospect of paying him between $38-42m in a cap-hit next year, had they developed someone in the background — that player would almost certainly be taking over in 2025. I don’t blame the Seahawks for not having someone waiting in the wings. They have not whiffed on any draftable quarterback since trading Russell Wilson. They were dealt a difficult hand.

Yet they’re now stuck in essentially no-man’s land. If they cut or trade Geno Smith, the alternatives are thin and unattractive. The 2025 quarterback class is poor. If they just crack on, entering a fourth season of Geno starting, still with no bridge, it’ll feel like a drifting franchise with no real plan of action to create a future at the most important position.

I have no problem with Smith returning as the starter in 2025, for what it’s worth — but only if they actively do more at the position. That means identifying someone they do like in the draft, that perhaps most people are overlooking, to at least set up the bridge solution they’re crying out for — or by adding a player that can legitimately challenge Smith to start in 2025.

I’m really struggling with the draft options. I don’t think it would be wise to trade up for Shedeur Sanders or Cam Ward (who I still believe will last a bit longer into the draft than most think). Two players they could’ve invested in — Drew Allar and Garrett Nussemeier — opted not to turn pro. I do think John Schneider sees something in Quinn Ewers — but he’s had such an underwhelming season to date, you’ll struggle to convince most people that he’s the future of the franchise. Is Jalen Milroe capable of being a Lamar Jackson or Jalen Hurts due to his physical upside, or is he simply not enough of an accomplished passer?

In terms of veteran competition, the options are thin here too. There’s no reclamation project as appealing as Darnold or Baker Mayfield this year. I have very little faith in Zach Wilson or Trey Lance treading the same path they did. I can’t imagine the Seahawks taking on Kirk Cousins (and wouldn’t want them to, either). People talk about Justin Fields but the reality is, I’m afraid, he’s not good as a passer. At all.

Darnold is the potential big-ticket free agent and I think his 2024 success is down to far more than just Kevin O’Connell. Darnold was highly talented with massive potential at USC. It’s not his fault his first two stops in the NFL were the Jets and Panthers. In his first realistic shot to be successful with a proper franchise, he’s shone. I would be perfectly comfortable making a bid to sign him, especially if you paired him with a McVay-tree coach.

However, if he leads the Vikings on a deep playoff run, or even to a Super Bowl, they can’t let him walk. They’ll surely extend him, turning JJ McCarthy into a version of Jordan Love — sitting him for a period of time, with an out in Darnold’s deal after two or three years. If the Vikings do allow Darnold to test the market, I think the likes of the Rams may try to sign him as a younger alternative to Matt Stafford, who appears increasingly closer to the end. Returning to LA to play for McVay would probably be impossible for Darnold to turn down.

Overall it’s quite a bleak situation. The Seahawks appear stuck, without much of a plan other than waiting for the right guy to come along. This is problematic. The franchise needs a jolt of energy. There’s very little that is marketable at the moment — and it plays into the recent ticket debates people have been having. There’s a lack of elite stars on the roster. There’s no longer the charismatic star coach on the sideline. Their record over the last four years is 7-10, 9-8, 9-8 and 9-7. To many, I imagine the Seahawks feel like a very uninteresting team these days.

The only real way to change that is to hit the jackpot at quarterback — but it’s also the hardest thing to do. The Ravens won the lottery taking a chance on Lamar Jackson. The Bills and Chiefs benefited from the NFL not realising the potential of Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes, allowing them to fall into trade-up range. The Bengals picked a great year to pick first overall, after Joe Burrow had a totally unpredictable legendary final season at LSU — elevating him from late-round prospect to legit NFL star within a few months.

I don’t know how the Seahawks find this in the near future. Until they do, they’re kind of stuck. They’ll be left wondering whether to spend money on a Darnold type, if he’s even available, or continue with Smith. It’s not a great place to be.

Inevitably it probably means more of Smith, albeit on a compromise agreement. I had a chuckle listening to Albert Breer say on the broadcast yesterday that Smith’s representatives would be seeking a long-term commitment in the off-season from the Seahawks. Good luck with that. The best they can hope for is a compromise deal that produces a higher overall earning opportunity in Seattle. I would imagine his market elsewhere would be similar to 2023 — quite cold. Smith’s best leverage is a lack of obvious alternatives — but is that really going to persuade the Seahawks to commit tens of millions to an ageing quarterback with a touchdown/interception ratio of 17/15 who is ending the season carrying a mystery knee injury and not playing very well?

The wildcard might be, as we’ve consistently said, that Schneider doesn’t appear committed to Smith. And maybe, as part of a need to completely revamp this offense, they’ll just go in a different direction — saving money in the process, taking a calculated risk.

At the end of the day, I’m tempted to say who cares if they do? I’m looking on Twitter today and seeing people celebrate the Seahawks having ‘another winning season’. This is great news, apparently. In Macdonald’s first season, no less!

I couldn’t care less about retaining a place in the middle-ground of the NFL. ‘Not being as bad as the Raiders’ is not something that gets the juices flowing. Preserving Seattle’s status as ‘not bad enough to be terrible, not good enough to be great’ feels more like a curse. There’s an army of people ready and willing to embrace this as achievement. It’s nothing. It’s an 11th place finish in the Premier League. It’s eighth in the 100m race at the Olympics.

The Seahawks didn’t fire Pete Carroll to win nine games. They made that change because they thought the roster was underachieving and the changes would bring about better results. Things about the team may be different — such as the defense — and that’s good news. But the end result is virtually the same — and the team is no closer to being taken seriously as a post-season contender.

Maybe more drastic moves are needed to elevate to the next tier? Perhaps those moves will carry risk of failure? Do you need the courage to risk failing, sometimes? Rather than just going year after year with the end result being very similar?

Maybe it’s time for some risk/reward? New approach to the O-line, new offensive staff, new quarterback. Are we really losing anything by adjusting the scouting approach to linemen and binning off the ‘over-paid and over-drafted’ mantra? A new offensive coordinator feels inevitable — but be ambitious. Are we honestly going to be ruing the decision to swap Geno Smith for someone else if it doesn’t work? It’s hardly the Bengals moving on from Burrow is it?

Consider disruption. Recapture that spirit that saw this franchise have the balls to move on from Pete Carroll and channel it towards an offensive rebuild.

This is a guest article written by Curtis Allen

As hard as it may be to hear, the Bears and Seahawks mirror each other in many ways.

Both teams:

— Give token gestures to the run game and demand their quarterbacks carry their offense (Seahawks are 65/35 pass/run, Bears are 60/40, both in the top 10)

— Have porous Offensive Lines and will very likely be committing to rebuilding them (particularly the interior) this offseason

— Have a stable of receivers, some of which are not being fully utilized

— Have struggled to have an offensive identity and their offensive coordinator has made choices that even armchair coaches know will not be successful

— Have depth on the defensive line, yet rarely does it take over a game

— Have a top young corner who is very hit and miss this year (Woolen and Jaylon Johnson), have a young centerpiece-type linebacker they did not draft (Ernest Jones and T.J. Edwards) and have very expensive edge players who are not having their best season (Dre Jones and Montez Sweat)

— Have failed to beat an NFC North team yet this season

— Will be looking to reshape a chunk of their roster and (likely) bring in a new Offensive Coordinator this offseason

Now granted, they are not exactly the Spiderman pointing meme, with the Seahawks having a four-game advantage in record. But ask yourself — how far apart would these teams be if they switched divisions and the Seahawks had to play Green Bay, Detroit and Minnesota two times this year?

I mention these similarities to highlight the backdrop for this game. The Bears are out of the playoffs this year and the Seahawks do not control their playoff destiny. Therefore, both teams will be playing for pride and with a view towards 2025.

To win this game, the Seahawks will have to win the similarities.

Win The Battle of Leaky Offensive Lines

Caleb Williams (23.1% pressure rate/60 sacks) and Geno Smith (22.1%/45) have both had to throw behind horrendous offensive lines this season and frankly, it is a wonder they have had much success at all.

Let’s start with the Bears on offense.

When I said above that the Bears’ run game is just a token gesture, that wasn’t just unflattering language. They might be one of the worst running teams in the NFL.

Lead rusher D’Andre Swift has the lowest yards per rush (3.8) of any back in the NFL with more than 200 carries, his yards after contact (1.7) is also one of the lowest, he has only broken five tackles all season and he has the worst first-down rate in the NFL.

He is the definition of a replacement-level player. Stopping him in the run game and forcing even more of the game onto Caleb Williams’ shoulders should not be a goal so much as an expectation. If he is allowed to run effectively, the Bears will control this game in a way that will prove very difficult for the Seahawks to combat.

Swift does, however, provide a key element for the offense unrelated to the ground game: He often functions as a dump-off safety valve and a designed point of attack in the screen passing game.

This is the biggest difference between the Seahawks and the Bears in adjusting to their ineffective offensive lines: while the Seahawks ask Geno Smith to regularly make quick reads from a messy pocket and pinpoint throws into tight windows, the Bears design a lot of their plays to get the ball out of Williams’ hands sooner rather than later.

They also love to roll Williams out away from the pocket with a tight end or receiver mirroring him for a nicely comfortable gain.

Those short but easy completions keep him upright, keep the offense on track, and keep the ball out of harm’s way (Williams only has five interceptions and is currently on a streak of 326 consecutive throws without one).

You can see some examples of this working well in last week’s game here at 1:58, 2:10 and 2:20.

How can the Seahawks combat their setup? First off, get pressure with their front four linemen. They can accomplish this with their speed and skill but also with the tricky pre-snap movement and side-overloading that Mike Macdonald likes to deploy.

This allows the back seven to cover zones and areas of the short-front of the field and use their speed to close the gap quickly and bring these dump-offs and screens to a halt with a minimum of gain. They are also on the ready should Williams abandon the pocket and run.

Forcing Williams to throw for his first downs opens him up to being pressured and sacked. It also may take a chunk of the field out of the equation. How?

Watching Williams play, he appears to have developed a comfortable habit: He only throws to his left when it is a set play such as one of those screens or designed rollouts (see the unorthodox-looking but successful screen at 4:50 in the video linked earlier). The only other time he looks to that side is when he has a receiver wide open or in single coverage with good body position.

He is far more comfortable making tight throws under pressure when he is focused on his right.

Look at his laser throw at 5:08 to convert a fourth down. The Lions only rush three, and Williams finds Odunze with four Lion defenders in the area. Keep rolling the tape and you’ll see two more of the simple variety throws, including an easy rollout touchdown pass to Kmet at the goal line (why can’t the Seahawks run this play?).

Now that Williams is in rhythm and has a sense of what kind of protection he’s getting, he uncorks a couple of gorgeous layered throws to his right again (7:08 and 7:20 for a touchdown that makes the Lions defense look like they are standing still). Look at 9:40, 10:06 and 11:53 and you get a sense of why he went #1 overall.

Obviously, this means that Josh Jobe and Devon Witherspoon will have their work cut out for them on that side of the field. But if the defense can stop the run from being effective and limit yardage from the easy throws, they can force Williams to look to that side of the field for success. Julian Love and Coby Bryant could then be timely lurkers over there, waiting for Williams to revert to his habit and then close the gap for a breakup or interception that tips the game.

What about when the Seahawks have the ball?

I think all of us would like to see the team roll out the offense from the Week Fourteen win over Arizona: A solid, committed running game, and quick passes to the flat that got the ball out and opened up some shots.

The Bears are ripe for this kind of exploitation. They are the #26 rushing defense currently, allowing 4.7 yards per carry. They have only kept their opponents under 100 yards rushing twice this season.

Another weakness to be aware of: No team gives up more yards per catch to tight ends than Chicago does. At 12.45 yards per catch, they are at the bottom of the league by a wide margin. Only two other teams top 11 yards per catch. Noah Fant and A.J.Barner should have plenty of opportunities to contribute in this game.

They can open up chances to suck the defenders into the short game and lull them to sleep to take some deeper shots. Look at 4:11 when Goff hits Williams, who has raced past double coverage. Also 9:10 when Goff fake-falls and then hits LaPorta wide open downfield.

This should be a game the Seahawks can easily control with an effective offensive display. They do have a talent advantage and a bit of a continuity advantage. It also appears that the game will be clear of precipitation and not too cold – good signs for a Geno Smith road game.

Win by Limiting Errors

Both of these teams have regularly made errors this year that winning teams do not make. The Bears’ clock management with a chance to upset the Lions was an all-timer that will likely go down as the final footnote of Matt Eberflus’ coaching career.

The more the Seahawks play sound football and put pressure on the Bears, the greater the chance that Chicago will make more epic mistakes like that one.

The Seahawks have not been immune to knucklehead play. Just last week we saw a cornerback who had not played in weeks line up in the neutral zone, defenders inexplicably ignoring the best wide receiver in the league, and two interceptions that were the result of poor communication and execution.

Last year at this time, Pittsburgh was coming to town for a crucial matchup and the run defense and tackling was sinking the team. In an absolutely humiliating display, that game proved to be the final nail in the coffin of the season and Pete Carroll’s coaching career in Seattle.

This year, we know there are problems with balance on offense and it feels almost certain for them to be addressed with a coaching change in the offseason.

However, the one thing they can control the rest of the way are these unforced errors that cost them so dearly in critical moments. An error-free game followed by another one against the Rams would go a long way to locking some things down for this offseason and instill further confidence that the franchise has made a good decision with a change at Head Coach.

I hope you all have a great Christmas. Seahawks Draft Blog started 16 years ago and I’m incredibly grateful to everyone who is a part of this community. I’d like to say a particular thank you to Curtis, Robbie, Adam and Jeff for the work they do with the articles and streams.

Here’s to a busy upcoming four months leading to the draft and hopefully a transformative off-season for the Seahawks (which I’ll be writing plenty about in the coming weeks).

"How much will [Sam Darnold] command on the open market?"@AdamSchefter believes there is going to be "some intriguing scenarios" for Sam Darnold 👀 (🎥 @PatMcAfeeShow) pic.twitter.com/0NBSDk2A1n

— NFL on ESPN (@ESPNNFL) December 23, 2024

“Let me say this, I think there’s going to be some intriguing scenarios out there for Sam Darnold.”

Said with a huge grin on his face in the video above, Adam Schefter let it be known that he already has a good idea what Darnold’s market will be like if/when he reaches free agency next year.

When I listened to this initially, it caught my ear. The way he phrased it, and with his expression, Schefter knows something. There’s nothing ‘intriguing’ for Darnold in New York with the Giants, Tennessee or Las Vegas. This was something juicier, perhaps something people weren’t commonly discussing yet.

I wondered whether the Seahawks might be a team Schefter had in mind. Then I did my Monday live stream with Jeff Simmons and we discussed the Rams. That makes sense. Matt Stafford turns 37 in February and isn’t having a great season. He might retire at the end of the season. Or the Rams might designate him as a post-June 1st cut, to split a $45.3m dead cap charge over two years and move on.

They could then go and sign Darnold. It sounds perfect. He’s played wonderfully for Sean McVay protégé Kevin O’Connell. It’d be ideal to convert that into a longer term arrangement back in LA where he played college football for USC, now with McVay. With the way he’s playing in Minnesota, that could be a scary proposition for the rest of the NFC West.

If I was going to put money on what happens in the off-season with Darnold, that would be my guess. That would be incredibly attractive for the quarterback.

I do just wonder if the Seahawks will try and muscle in on the act. I’ve already written about why John Schneider might have interest in Darnold. I don’t think him playing very well in Seattle’s own stadium did him any harm in the eyes of Schneider.

Especially when you are making plays like this under pressure to win the game:

Darnold making this throw, reading a need to step up in the pocket, knowing he was about to get leveled, is unreal. pic.twitter.com/24v7m6asZC

— Ted (@tlschwerz) December 23, 2024

The Seahawks are currently going year-to-year with Geno Smith and they may continue to do that after this season. It’s hard though, to possess a bridge quarterback without anyone to bridge to. The 2025 draft is thin and is unlikely, I’d say, to produce a quarterback the Seahawks can say ‘this is our future’ about.

I appreciate Smith has to deal with a lot in Seattle, including iffy play-calling and a bad offensive line. In a better environment he would perform better — but not, in my opinion, to a level that would you have you believe he’s capable of getting this franchise to where it needs to go. His propensity to mix between physical brilliance and frustrating turnovers — at his age — means he isn’t the future. It is very difficult to generate excitement within a franchise when the quarterback situation is short-term, lacking commitment and yet annually you don’t have anything in the way of ‘here’s the future, get excited’.

I don’t know whether Sam Darnold on a big contract will be more exciting to many but I do think Schneider could see a quarterback who is seven years younger, who has excelled in his first serious destination where he’s had a chance to start. An investment in him would be a bigger commitment for the future, rather than a year-to-year arrangement. And it would potentially buy some more time to look at alternatives in the draft, rather than reach.

They would have to pull off a home-run hire at offensive coordinator though, and a very attractive financial package, if they end up trying to get into a bidding war with the Rams. How the heck do you win that battle? I’m not sure they can, unless the Rams simply stick with Stafford because they’re unwilling to eat the dead money.

Schefter’s hint at something interesting, to me, screams a future union with Sean McVay. And if that happens, the Seahawks may have little choice to work out a short-term compromise contract with Smith to lower his 2025 cap hit. It’s an uninspiring situation though, especially given what we know about the quarterback class in the draft.

Three years on from the Russell Wilson trade, the Seahawks still don’t have much of a plan at the position.

I just get the sense they need a more disruptive off-season than some people think. This is a team that has gone 7-10, 9-8, 9-8 and is now 8-7 in the last four years. They are a middle of the road franchise, showing little sign of breaking into something else.

I know a lot of fans and media are resorting to the ‘this is OK for a fresh start under a young coach’ line but I agree with the people saying this is not how ownership or the GM envisioned things. I think they thought coaching changes would lead to better, more competitive results. Having the same record as the last two seasons, while entering an off-season where there are question marks about key aspects of the staff and roster, is not where they intended to be.

I don’t think blowing everything up is the answer at all. I do think difficult decisions need to be considered and maybe acted upon. That includes whether you trade DK Metcalf to shift resources to your offensive line. It includes a new offensive coordinator, which I think is inevitable at this point. It also includes making a more significant move at quarterback than simply kicking the can down the road with an older quarterback who lurches between good and bad.

Even if they need to fix the offensive line as the key priority, I don’t think it’s a given they just bring Smith back once they’ve worked to improve the trenches. I think that’s especially the case since Schneider has never felt completely bought into him.

I don’t know whether Darnold would be a marked improvement or whether it would work without a coach like Kevin O’Connell to guide him. I think the Seahawks might be willing to try though — in order to shake some life into the franchise, energise what feels like a flagging mojo around the place, and see if Darnold can recreate what he’s done in Minnesota this year.

But if it comes down to a straight shoot-out between the Rams and Seahawks, I don’t think they’ll win.

That would leave them back at square one, still scratching around looking for a future at the most important position in the sport.

Join us from 2pm PT…

There are two immediate reactions I have from this game.

The first is just a crushing lack of energy at the prospect of another nine-win season, Seattle’s third in a row, with little evidence the Seahawks are driving towards a bigger status within the NFL.

The second is bitter frustration at just how badly they messed this game up. This wasn’t a loss in the manner of the 49ers, Bills and Packers games, or even the Giants debacle. Yet it’s just as irritating because so many factors contributed towards Seattle’s downfall.

I’ll expand on these two issues in reverse order.

Look at everything that went wrong, and the sheer number of different people responsible for this loss. Tre Brown being penalised for off-side then giving up a touchdown on the next play. Tariq Woolen’s coverage, awareness and effort. Byron Murphy’s ill-timed facemask penalty. Ernest Jones dropping an interception that could’ve iced the game. Geno Smith’s interceptions. Geno Smith’s sack that made it very difficult for the Seahawks to kick a game-tying field goal. The play-calling on offense.

Where do you start when all this goes wrong? People will try to pin it on one person but on reflection, so many different people contributed. That’s not a good sign for this team. They have to be cleaner than this and get out of their own way.

I do think, like most people, that the writing is on the wall for Ryan Grubb though. The predictable nature of his offense, the total inability to craft a running game despite the weekly talk of wishing to establish one, the situational decision making. Grubb will likely be replaced in the off-season. The Seahawks need someone who can deliver a proper complementary vision to Macdonald’s defense. They need someone who understands the NFL, how to call plays in this league and can get this thing back on track.

That brings me back to the first point in this article though. It can’t be the only change. The Seahawks badly need a more disruptive off-season. They’re just muddling along — adding a bit here or there but never taking any great stride forwards. They’re an uninteresting team to non-Seahawks fans. They lack stars, they aren’t taken seriously and yet they do enough every year to avoid a ‘bad’ label that would actually provoke some broader, more urgent change.

They need a transformational off-season. Without it, they’ll just carry on being a middling team that fans are happy to sell their season tickets to avoid watching in person. They’ll go on losing games at home (3-6 this season, now 16-18 since fans returned post-Covid). The franchise will continue to feel flat and stuck in a rut. It’s coasting at the moment and needs a jolt.

They’ve got to take some risks. I don’t mean ill-advised trades either. They need to consider everything and follow through with some big calls to further shape this roster and staff.

Otherwise we’ll be back here in 12 months saying the same things.

This is a guest article written by Curtis Allen

The crucible of this NFL season has had its twists and turns and now has deposited the Seahawks here: At 8-6, with playoff aspirations that seemed a lot stronger last week, coming off four straight wins and leading their division. Unfortunately, the Green Bay Packers came to town and exposed this team on a national stage as not ready for the big game.

Now, they are fighting for their playoff lives all of the sudden, and the daunting task of hosting a 12-2 Vikings team that is gunning for the top seed in the NFC looms.

Your 2024 Seattle Seahawks: Welcome to wherever you are.

That is the challenge we are facing right now. None of us have any idea of what to expect for this game today.

It appeared the defense had settled in nicely, and the rushing defense – a major issue early on – had been worked out. Then Josh Jacobs had 83 yards of offense in the first quarter alone on Sunday night. At one point, the Packers gave Jacobs eight straight touches. Then Jordan Love had a run to give Jacobs a breather, then they gave it right back to Jacobs for a touchdown.

The passing defense had developed a reputation for coverage. They got repeatedly burned for big plays and even bigger penalties.

The offensive line had been moving towards league-average status, a massive improvement from their early-season play. Then the Packers – one of the weaker pass-rushing teams this season – sacked the Seahawks quarterbacks seven times and recorded fifteen pressures for about a 35% rate.

A pessimist would say all the progress the team has made has been undone and the team should start focusing on 2025.

An optimist would point out that two of the Seahawks’ more embarrassing losses (Week 6 against San Francisco and Week 9 against the Rams) were followed by two of their best games of the season (going to Atlanta and soundly beating the Falcons, and a trip to San Francisco and a gutty win against the Niners). The pendulum can swing the other way just as easily.

How can the Seahawks make the optimist’s view come true?

Do Not Allow Mistakes to Dictate the Game

This one is obvious but the chance it will make or break the Seahawks today is very, very high. Why?

The Vikings are second in the NFL in takeaways this season. They are very consistent in taking the ball away from the opposing offense. How consistent? They have a takeaway in every single game they have played this season. Forcing turnovers has been the rule, rather than the exception.

It is no wonder they are 12-2 and their offense is thriving. The defense regularly gives them the ball back.

However, making mistakes is one thing. It is a whole other matter for the team to allow the Vikings to take control of the game by compounding the damage. It becomes a force multiplier if the defense cannot hold the Viking offense to a field goal or force a punt. Or by the offense to respond decisively in order to counter the blowback from a mistake.

Case in point: Two weeks ago, the Falcons came to Minnesota and played the Vikings very, very well through three quarters. Kirk Cousins had thrown an interception early in the second quarter but the Falcons defense forced the Vikings to punt with a three & out. The only damage was a missed opportunity and the offense was pushed back about 27 net yards.

After three quarters, the game was tied 21-21. The Falcons had picked up nearly 400 yards of offense, nicely balanced between 138 yards rushing and 257 yards passing. The Vikings had a game on their hands.

Then the wheels fell off for Atlanta.

Jordan Addison burned Clark Phillips for a large gain and then caught a laser by Darnold for a touchdown to make it 28-21.

At the kickoff, Ray-Ray McLoud fumbled the return and the Vikings recovered and scored. 35-21.

On the next drive, Kirk Cousins drove them to just outside the Red Zone but threw an interception at the 2-yard line. The Vikings scored again on the drive making it 42-21 and that was the game.

The Seahawks simply cannot afford to make critical mistakes. They have been a regular feature of their losses (and even some of their wins – the Jets game for instance).

The process begins with running the ball more. Last week, they averaged 5 yards per carry against the Packers. But they only had 16 runs, and two of those were quarterback scrambles, so in reality they only called for the offense to run 14 times.

That is both bad and easy to fix. The Vikings may have one of the NFL’s best run defenses, but the Seahawks need to commit to running the ball and playing the game on their terms.

The other solution is to game plan for the root cause of the Vikings’ turnovers: Brian Flores’ great use of blitzers and packages to disrupt the quarterback.

The Vikings lead the league in blitzing at 38.9%, and as a result weigh in at 26.3% pressure, good for fourth in the NFL.

How does Geno Smith fare against being blitzed? It is a mixed bag. He completes over 71% of his throws for a 9.1 yards per attempt and picks up a first down about 42% of the time. But he also has only two touchdowns versus four interceptions, and has been sacked twelve times.

To combat this ultra-aggressive defense, the Seahawks need to return to the balanced game plan they deployed so effectively in their Week Fourteen win over the Cardinals: make Smith a quick distributor of the ball and keep the offense on schedule with short passes complemented by timely running. The Seahawks executed screen passes to defeat blitzing and pressure masterfully. Smith was patient and quickly delivered the ball all over the field. As a result, he was not sacked – the only game this year that was true – and only was pressured four times.

Ryan Grubb has to make the game easier for Smith, taking away the ‘good process poor result’ type of play that has seemed to consistently risen its ugly head this season.

I mention patience. A rhythm needs to be established to give Smith some room to work. If they can train the defense to constantly react to the short pass, there will be very critical big-time passing opportunities when timed out well.

Have a Balanced Game on Defense

The Vikings offense has been regularly explosive this season, led by Sam Darnold and his surprising accuracy and grace under pressure. Aaron Jones adds balance to the team in the running game and opens spaces for Justin Jefferson, Jordan Addison and T.J. Hockenson to exploit.

Like the offense, the defense needs to be patient and pick their spots. Blitzing can be very effective against Darnold, but it leaves one or more of those receiving monsters in single coverage. Darnold throws for 66% of completions with eight touchdowns against one interception when blitzed. However, he is sacked a high number of times, clocking in at over 16%. The game may be won or lost on when the Seahawks time up their blitzing and how effective it is.

The front four must deliver pressure to the quarterback without regular blitzing help, which is an achievable goal. Darnold has been blitzed only 99 times this season, putting him in the bottom third of quarterbacks. However, he is facing pressure on 25.6% of snaps, placing him in the top five. The defense has to exploit this weakness for all it is worth today.

I mentioned patience. A good chunk of their game plan includes taking the running game away from the Vikings as a resource. Aaron Jones runs primarily between the tackles and it is likely the Vikings watched Josh Jones run so effectively there last Sunday and plan to make that a central part of their offense today.

For their faults in pass protection, the Vikings Offensive Line is adequate in run blocking, giving Jones 2.5 yards before contact in the running game (as a reference point, this is about league average. Zach Charbonnet and Ken Walker are at a poor 1.8 and 1.7 yards before contact this year).

A return to controlling the run game on defense is in order. The line must keep linebackers Ernest Jones and Tyice Knight clean, so they can attack the runner. Stopping or slowing him puts the game on Darnold’s shoulders.

Making Darnold throw to advance the ball opens him up to pressures and mistakes. The backfield (especially Riq Woolen) need to rebound from a very poor showing against the Packers. That critical half-beat of coverage needed to sack the quarterback or making him throw the ball away or check down is an absolute essential ingredient to keeping this offense in check.