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!
