Reasons why I do and don't think Noah Fant is going to have a career season
If the Seahawks can't use Noah Fant in the passing game this year, will they want to keep him for $13 million next year? Seaside Joe 1979
“You can’t get by just flying under the radar” - the season 2 winner of Survivor
Seaside Jay and I have been watching every season of Survivor since the beginning and I have been writing down meaningful quotes this time around, at least when I can remember to do so, because I think few shows (of any kind) so closely align with the human experience. I’m not asking anyone here to agree with me about Survivor—some of you think it’s a stupid show and are not afraid to tell me in the comments when I bring it up and that’s fine—but hopefully everyone’s okay with using a quote from it now and then.
I thought that one about flying under the radar was an interesting observation by a former winner, although to be fair, quite a few players have made it to the end and won because they flew under the radar.
(I am aware that the second season of Survivor was almost a quarter-century ago, but I still don’t want to spoil who the winner was because you could still choose to watch it on Paramount+ as if it’s a new show!)
I think a player on the Seahawks who could be flying under the radar more than anybody else is tight end Noah Fant.
Though he isn’t named among the “great” tight ends, Fant is only 26 and he plays a position that is known for producing more stars who needed 4-5 years of development than any other position.
However, when you think of Seahawks skill players today, you probably wouldn’t think of Fant in the first three or four or sometimes five names.
Seattle could have told Fant to kick rocks in free agency with a good comp pick coming back in return, but instead gave him a guaranteed $11.5 million to stay. Why do that—and why would Fant agree—unless he was getting an increased role in the passing game?
BUT…The math doesn’t make sense. There are too many mouths to feed and not enough grubb to go around…
It’s fine to fly under the radar in training camp when you’re guaranteed to make the roster and have $11.5 million in the bank for it, if you’re Fant. However, if it’s December and we’ve forgotten about Fant again, it’s just another confusing tight end acquisition by the Seahawks, following in the footsteps of “Why sign Zach Miller if you’re not going to throw him the ball?” and “Why trade a Pro Bowl center and a first for Jimmy Graham if you’re not going to throw him the ball?”
(Miller’s usage certainly less damaging than trading for Graham, given that Miller was actually a good blocker.)
I can understand trading for Fant as a piece of the Russell Wilson trade because he was easily the best veteran player acquired in the deal. I am less sure of why Seattle would then give Fant a $9 million signing bonus to stay, UNLESS the Seahawks really do plan to increase the 43 targets he saw in 2023 (less than half of Jaxon Smith-Njigba), of which only two—OF WHICH ONLY TWO—came in the red zone.
Let me say that again: The Seahawks targeted their 6’4, 250 lb tight end twice in the red zone in 17 games. That’s why Fant hasn’t scored a touchdown since 2022.
Fant has been seen getting red zone targets during training camp, which is why Mike Macdonald was asked last week how much more involved Fant would be in the passing game this season:
“We’re really excited about Noah, and the type of player that he is. I love his attitude everyday. He’s steadfast, positive, sense of urgency about what he’s doing. When he’s out there making plays, you feel that the process is coming to life and you’re excited for him that there’s results on the field. We want that to keep trending in the right direction.”
It would be very easy to assume that because the Seahawks cut Will Dissly and let Colby Parkinson leave in free agency to sign with the Rams, that it would mean there are more opportunities for Noah Fant. And that could certainly turn out to be true.
But it’s not as though Dissly or Parkinson were getting a ton of targets last season either, or that their replacements will get zero targets, or that Seattle can ignore the positive benefits that would come with increasing opportunities for receivers they’ve invested a lot into like Jaxon Smith-Njigba and DK Metcalf…or even one who they invested nothing into yet…
There is SO MUCH LOGIC to increasing Noah Fant’s usage in the passing game and to make the $11.5 million investment worth it for a player who the Seahawks would like to keep around for a long time after this season.
However, there’s also a math problem I can’t figure out: If Ryan Grubb is as successful as he wants to be this season, Seattle will probably pass the ball less often, not more. If the Seahawks want to increase the value of their ROI for their top two receivers (the ones who aren’t 32), they need to dial up more plays for them, not less.
You and I are BOTH saying to ourselves, “Noah Fant has the potential to be great, the Seahawks paid him to be great, of course he will be great.” We’re both saying that, I think. We should also both be asking the Seahawks…
“How?”
That’s what I’m diving into for the rest of today’s Seaside Joe: How will the Seahawks use Noah Fant in 2024, Who he needs to compete with for targets, What facts matter to me and which ones do not matter to me, and Where will Noah Fant be playing in the future if the Seahawks don’t use their tight end like other teams use their high-paid tight ends.
Why should you sign up for Seaside Joe’s premium section to keep reading? It could take a whole month of articles to answer that question, but the simple answer today is to keep reading.