The Seahawks could have scored a TD and still lost the game

Will Mike Macdonald be more aggressive in the future after criticism over field goal try?

Brock Huard laid out 3 problems with this picture:

But instead my eyes went to the new FOX score bug: 17-13 with :40 seconds left and the 49ers have all three timeouts.

Just don’t forget that even if Sam Darnold throws it to Cooper Kupp for a touchdown, the Seahawks could have still lost the game…in regulation! Or overtime, but there was plenty of time left for the 49ers to win without bonus game. If the score is 20-17 with :37 seconds left, that’s no less than saying “maybe the Niners need two good plays to get into field goal range”.

On their previous go-ahead drive, the 49ers drove 68 yards in 1:45 and scored a touchdown (largely thanks to chunk plays like a 45-yard pass to Ricky Pearsall that was starting to look routine) and that was without using any timeouts; from Purdy’s 45-yard pass to Pearsall to touchdown was less than a minute of game time.

Obviously we can’t know how the game would have ended if the Seahawks had scored there, maybe Purdy would have been intercepted for a third time instead, and of course “TOUCHDOWN” is better than “FUMBLE” in all respects. I’m just clarifying that the game wasn’t going to be won on that play and the entire outcome will never boil down to a single decision, a single pass block rep, or reading boundary before field. The Seahawks could have executed that play to perfection and still lost the game.

Remember?

Although I can’t claim to know after 200-something recaps that I’ve never blamed someone after a loss, putting it all the feet of one or a few people is not my intention. If you’re coming to Seaside Joe after a loss to find out which players and coaches I think should be doxxed later, you’re going to be disappointed.

Even if I write something like, “Jaxon Smith-Njigba, the one standout player on offense, is partially to blame for the loss”, as I did on Sunday, I’m merely trying to be factual: The Seahawks had a -1.2 EPA on the fumble, Seattle’s third most-costly play of the game and one of the other two worse than it was the other JSN fumble.

“Well, I don’t even know what EPA is, so why should I care?”

Totally fair point. Just look at it from the most basic football analysis: Instead of third-and-short near field goal territory, the 49ers got the ball back and were able to score on the ensuing drive to tie the game. This is bad, right? Fumbling twice is objectively bad.

I also called JSN the only standout player on the entire offense (which is different than saying he was the only offensive player who did anything good) so I’m obviously giving him credit for making it a close game to begin with.

And if I wanted to blame someone on Sunday, I had a clear shot at Tariq Woolen, a player who I’ve long advocated for being replaced, but I didn’t do that either. Instead, I simply read the room, which was an un-readable novel and every page was “27”. Almost every Seahawks fan had those bad plays burned into their brains, which you can watch again from this quite fair analysis by Top Billin’ after the loss:

I also wrote that Woolen saved a touchdown.

All that being said, the comments are an excellent place to vent your frustrations and blame people after a loss. I don’t want to do anything to disrupt your post-game flow. I’m just trying to be as close to a reality of what happened as I can possibly be in the post-game newsletter, while still being a fan and knowing that at times I’m going to overlook something and/or overstate something.

If I say that Klint Kubiak’s debut was underwhelming, that’s not blame. There was an expectation and Seattle came in somewhere below it. At the same time, if I fail to mention Mike Macdonald’s decision to kick a field goal instead of going for it, that’s not me absolving him or ignoring it. I read the comments after the game and realized, “Oh I really should have emphasized that moment more than I did”.

The Seahawks lost as a team and they will have to figure out why and then attempt to regroup and win as a team against the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday.

Your comments were very helpful in terms of me better understanding what happened against the 49ers, so let’s review some of them together:

(Read the full slate of comments if you haven’t already!)

Some comments were edited down for space and clarity

Travis Barker: Tough first matchup….TE was a non factor. Disappointing considering the hype of Kubiak’s 3 TE sets…Pressure seemed good, but it didn’t feel good considering our offense couldn’t do much to keep our Defense off the field for too long…this felt, on an emotional level, too close to the last 6 years or so…Discouraged that Lucas, of all people, after given the extension, would be unlucky enough to face one of the best rushers in the NFL and get blown up. No shade on Lucas, but it’s unfortunate.

Maybe the most unfair thing about being an offensive lineman (in a sea of unfair things) is that if you have 49 good plays and 1 bad play, we’ll only talk about the bad play. Whereas if you’re a pass rusher, the opposite could be true.

I don’t know if Lucas was good on every single other play, but I can’t recall hearing his name called until the last one and he was going against one of the best in the business.

Lucas said after the game, “I think the key to a good team, not just a good offensive line, is how quick you can pull yourself out of a lull and get going and continue to rock and roll.”

I don’t know how much 13 personnel Kubiak really wanted to run, but as you say A.J. Barner played the majority of the game on his own with Elijah Arroyo getting 16 snaps and Eric Saubert getting 9 snaps.

By the way, the 49ers ran 76 plays (24 more than Seattle) which emphasizes again just how tired the Seahawks defense would have been if they were asked to go out for one more drive…and how bad the Seahawks were at sustaining drives:

• The Seahawks had 1 drive with double-digit plays

• The 49ers had 4 drives with double-digit plays

• The Seahawks had 2 drives that lasted at least 3 minutes

• The 49ers had 5 drives that lasted at least 3 minutes

Did this game feel a lot like the last six years? Yeah, I would agree with that.

James Nowell II: At home, division foe, 13-10, less than yard and you kick it. Then fold up like cheap tent. Gutless coaching move.

Paul G: I’m with you on the first part. As folding, the defense had been on the field all day and was worn down. That’s exactly why you go for the first.

Chris H: Gutless might be a bit harsh. I expect he just didn't have confidence, didn't like what he was seeing as far as movement on the line, and didn't want to come away empty handed. The fact that MacDonald didn't have a high confidence in the offense to go get it, is a bit concerning.

Nicholas Donsky: This loss is on MM. 4TH and less than a yard inside the 9ers 30 and he doesn't show any confidence in the O line and goes for 3 instead of the TD. If they can't get 2 ft. with this line that's supposed to be improved, this could be a long season.

Glassmonkey: It was an awful awful decision. QB sneak gets it.

huevobueno: Right? What happened to that tush-push play from preseason?

Charley Filipek: That's it, We gotta go for it on 4th and Very short. Plus the time ~ if we make a 1st on 4th, we can milk the clock 'n then go for 3 if needed.

Caleb Allen: Frustratingly conservative approach to a home matchup vs. shorthanded division rival.

This is one where I clearly didn’t read the room because there was more frustration centered around this fourth down decision than anything else. And that’s understandable. I do wonder though, is this what all post-game football conversations will boil down to now? It seems like every other NFL game these days is “Why was the coach too conservative in that one moment we pinned down as a go for it decision?”

It doesn’t have to be near the end of the game either. It seems like you can pin a fourth down call at almost any point in the game and bring it back later if they lose.

And maybe that is fair: The game of football is always evolving right in front of your eyes, so as a coach you have to know if you are outdated or not. Pete Carroll did not know that and Mike Macdonald’s decision to kick the field goal absolutely reminded me of the Seahawks team that existed before him. Here’s how Macdonald explained the decision after the game:

“We did (consider going for it). I just felt like, let’s go take a lead and let’s go play ball.”

The 49ers went 2-for-2 on fourth down and the Seahawks went 0-for-0. Both conversions were Brock Purdy passing the ball when San Francisco needed 2 yards.

There does seem to be some lack of confidence in Darnold and company to do the same right now. The Seahawks activated Jalen Milroe and then only used him in the most inane spot imaginable — 2nd and 6 on the second play of the game — and then never brought him back again.

I guess the only question left is “What would fans have said after the game if Macdonald went for it and failed to gain a yard?”

My guess is that then people would take it out on the offense for not being able to pick up one yard. Maybe Macdonald was trying to help the offense save face, but we’ll never know the answer to that question until the Seahawks do decide to be as aggressive as their competition.

What play would you have called on fourth down?

Chuck Turtleman: Where was Cooper Kupp? It seemed to be throw at JSN or nothing. We have other guys who can get open, right?

Paul G: Who here thinks that JS signed Cooper Kupp with the idea that two receptions for 19 yards against a hated rival was fine as long as he mentored a group of marginally talented receivers?

Something you all should know about Cooper Kupp is that outside of one year when both he and Matthew Stafford were healthy, he has always been a hot-and-cold receiver.

I don’t know if Kupp could have had 15 yards because he’s 32 (totally feasible) or if he had 15 yards because he’s Cooper Kupp and next week he will catch 10 passes for 110 yards. Even many of his productive games, Kupp will have 10 yards going into the fourth quarter and then he’ll add 100 more.

He’s just a very hot-and-cold player. He’s also one of the oldest starting receivers in the NFL and it was a risky signing to soften the blow of trading DK Metcalf. But I think the long-term goal in mind still makes sense, which was to avoid paying Metcalf so much money, get the second round pick, and perhaps draft a receiver in 2026.

I’ve been throwing cold water on the Tory Horton thing and he wasn’t targeted. Will that change next week against the Steelers? A lot can change in a week.

James Nowell II: 8-9, 9-8 year folks. Pitt will humble us, say 29-19. Got no pass rush, all day for BP, and now ARod.

Chris H: I watched quite a bit of the Steelers game against the Jets. The Jets had a fair amount of success running the ball. Rogers looked plenty solid. He doesn't throw down the field often, but he can still do it. They'll be a tough second game. We need our DT's to get pressure up the middle.

It is interesting that you mention the Steelers “humbling” the Seahawks because that matchup has long felt like a measuring stick. (The head-to-head series is tied 10-10 all-time, but 11-10 if you unfortunately include the playoffs.)

• In 2007 and 2011, the Steelers shutout the Seahawks

• In 2015 and 2019, the Seahawks won

• In 2021 and 2023, the Steelers won close-ish games

Pittsburgh looked like a different kind of team in Week 1. They couldn’t run the ball or play great defense, but they won 34-32 because of an aerial attack. Having to go on the road for this will be challenging and even if the team doesn’t feel this way, many Seahawks fans will fear that the door is closing on the entire season if Seattle ends up 0-2.

But endings are rarely as simple as that.

Seaside Joe 2380