Seahawks have to pass better to run better

Seattle is finally a Super Bowl contender again, but what do they need to do to finish the job?

The Seaside Joe newsletter was founded in the 2019 offseason and I’ve waited more than six and a half years — over 3,000 newsletters — to say this: The Seahawks are a Super Bowl contender. They can WIN the Super Bowl this season. Other Seahawks writers have probably told you some variation of Seattle being a Super Bowl contender every single year, but I was waiting to say it until I really believed it.

I can finally say that I believe it and that patience to hold out for the earned moment was so that you could believe me when I say it. Imperfect and flawed? Sure. But legitimate Super Bowl contenders nonetheless. Especially if the Seahawks can beat the Rams on Thursday to gain an advantage for the number one seed going into the final two weeks.

Every Monday I ask for questions from the Super Joes subscribers and these are the answers, including a ton of information I hope you haven’t seen anywhere else by any other Seahawks sites. Join Super Joes to get the next one.

Don Ellis: The Seahawks run percentage is ranked #2 in the league and yet most of our rushing metrics are in the lower quarter-third. I don’t think we are going to see significant improvements during the remainder of this year so I will ask, what is the focus for next year? What are we lacking? Is it the talent, scheme, execution or just plain seasoning, in your opinion?

I have two surprising answers incoming: Maybe the Seahawks are being unfairly judged as a rushing offense because they’re playing on “HARD” mode compared to other teams and also that Seattle’s answer to the rushing woes is to fix some of their passing woes by adding more weapons next year.

The first thing I would ask is “how do defenses play against the Seahawks?” and the two teams that have run into a stacked box the most this season are also both offenses that insist on running even when they’re struggling to move the ball on the ground: The Seahawks and Eagles.

Seattle is averaging 2.7 yards per carry against a box with 8+ defenders and they have been “stuffed” on 30% of those runs.

We know that Philadelphia has the talent to be the best rushing offense in the league, so why are they struggling so bad? Maybe because teams a) know what to expect and b) don’t fear Jalen Hurts. (Games against the Raiders notwithstanding.)

Flip that to a neutral box and the Seahawks average 4.3 yards per carry (12th) and against a light box they average 4.9 YPC (24th). If teams didn’t feel they could stack the box against Seattle our perception of their rushing acuity wouldn’t be so negative. The fact is that the Seahawks may not be as bad of a rushing team as the numbers/our eyes suggest and Seattle’s ability to draw defenders into the box could also be the reason that the offense is the #1 team on play action. If they start throwing more passes, all of their passes could be less effective.

My answer may shock you:

Help the run game by becoming more potent and dangerous in the passing game.

It’s not so much changing a guard or a running back that would make the Seahawks a better running team. Look at Philadelphia: If defenses are daring Hurts to beat them it’s because they don’t think Hurts is a good passer. Well, I could be wrong but I think Sam Darnold is a better passer than Hurts.

We know that Seattle has found their number one receiver, where are they going to find numbers two, three, and four?

Cooper Kupp’s days are winding down. He’s never had a season with so many games of 2-4 catches and 25-35 yards before.

Is it Shaheed? Is it Tory Horton? Is it A.J. Barner? Even if you’re fond of those players, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to argue that the Seahawks could make a play for a really high-end WR2 in 2026.

Ja’Marr Chase has Tee Higgins. Justin Jefferson has Jordan Addison. Puka Nacua has had Davante Adams. I see it as no disrespect to Horton or Shaheed to say that teams don’t view them the same as they view and respect those players. And even if they did, can you trust Horton stay on the field? Another dangerous receiver means more opportunities for JSN, more production for Darnold, and probably more room to run.

They’re not going to address quarterback. A new OC might only be a matter of necessity if Kubiak leaves. A dramatic change at RB is unlikely. Moving around a couple of interior OL pieces can only do so much in the run game. And I think they have all of their 2026 tight ends on the roster already.

Offensively, I’d shift my attention on how the Seahawks address a potential Kupp release or retirement in 2026, and potentially more if Shaheed leaves in free agency. I know that Elijah Arroyo is viewed as a receiver also, but he’s also got some of his own skeletons in the closet to clear out first.

Beezo: The Colts center always seemed to have a ton of jump off the line on their run plays, it felt like a reverse blitz. And Taylor’s 7-10 yard runs all seemed to come following him up the middle. I’m guessing it’s because the C is clearing the 2nd level. It seemed like it worked more often than not, but there were times JT bottled up for 2-3 yards on the same C push off the line. Did you notice the same thing? And why can’t our guys do that 😂😭? I don’t have a very articulate question, any thoughts are appreciated?

For what it’s worth, Jonathan Taylor’s runs between the tackles were largely unsuccessful, gaining 58 yards on 16 carries (3.6 YPC, -6 rushing yards over expectation, and 1.9 yards after contact per rush) and in some respects this was his worst game of the season. Now I think you can attribute some of that to Indy’s QB issue but Seattle continues to get the job done with a light box.

With 6 or fewer defenders in the box (light), Taylor was held to 3.5 yards per carry. The Seahawks didn’t go heavy a single time (8+ defenders) against Taylor, showing how much confidence Macdonald has in the defense.

Jonathan Taylor was averaging over 7.0 yards per carry against a light box prior to facing Seattle! They held him to below half of his season average.

not a fantasy guy but this sounds good?

Taylor had four carries longer than 5 yards (8, 8, 9, and 11) but none in the final 20 minutes of the game. We’re not just talking about a good running back either, we’re talking about a running back who was in the MVP conversation a few weeks ago. Giving up a few first downs to him seems acceptable.

As to your specific observations about center Tanor Bortolini, if that’s what you saw then I’d trust your eyes. Given that most of Taylor’s yards came in between the tackles, it also lines up.

For what it’s worth, Bortolini was drafted one pick ahead of Tyrice Knight in the fourth round of the 2024 draft; what’s really unfortunate though is that the Seahawks picked Christian Haynes in the third.

Grant: Where do the Seahawks rank in the number/percentage of offensive plays that are designed passes to RBs? I don’t watch a lot of non-Seahawks football these days, but it seems like we do this less often than everyone else. I feel like this could be a really easy adjustment, with the personnel we already have, to make our offense feel less one dimensional.

You asked the right question. According to Next Gen Stats, no team in the NFL has thrown fewer passes to running backs/backfield players than the Seahawks: Just 39 passes and that’s nine fewer than 31st place. Just 19.5 yards per game to running backs, which ranks 30th.

And what do we owe this pleasure to Kenneth Walker and Zach Charbonnet? Seattle’s backs are 31st in yards after the catch. # of routes:

• Walker has run 154 (39th among RBs)

• Charbonnet has run 138 (42nd)

Walker is getting target about once every six routes, whereas Charbonnet is only targeted once every 10 routes. It’s especially strange because I recall Charbonnet’s hands being one of his calling cards as a prospect*; he’s only 61st among all RBs in targets (14). Walker is 38th in targets.

*Lance Zierlein cites a “variety of routes and wide catch radius”

Of course, we must account for offensive balance and the Seahawks are 31st in total passing attempts, not just attempts to the backs. And they get the fourth most yards per pass (7.0) to running backs. So is Seattle in trouble because of their lack of backfield passes?

Klint Kubiak might argue that we’re missing the forest for the trees:

• Seahawks are 2nd on yards per game to WIDE targets (130.3)

• 2nd in yards per play (10.7) to WIDE targets

• 3rd in EPA per pass to WIDE targets

• 4th in yards after catch

• 2nd in YAC over expectation to WIDE targets

In other words, Jaxon Smith-Njigba is an Offensive Player of the Year candidate. On an offense that’s 31st in passing attempts.

Furthermore, Seattle is 4th in yards per pass to slot targets, 7th in yards per pass to in-line targets, and 1st in yards per pass overall. That’s top-7 to all kinds of targets, including running backs.

Now you’re probably saying to yourself, like I am, “that’s for the entire season though, what about recently?” and that’s a good question with fewer passing touchdowns of late. However, JSN isn’t showing signs of slowing down and Rashid Shaheed is speeding up, so the answer for who gets more targets moving forward may be that it’s the new guy and Tory Horton instead of Walker and Charbonnet.

Unless Kubiak is just saving a surprise for home stretch+playoffs.

MTSeahawkFan: Other than the 2nd half of the Atlanta game, our offense has been...pedestrian. What are opposing teams seeing and how can Kubiak counteract the counteraction?

I’d push back a little bit and say that the context and the small sample size changes the description from “pedestrian” to “inconsistent and one-dimensional but that dimension is GREAT”:

• Week 12: Seahawks scored 27 points in the middle two quarters of the game against Titans, is that different than scoring 27 in a half?

• Week 13: Seahawks change gears vs Max Brosmer having one of the worst starts by a QB this century and win 26-0

• Week 14: Seahawks score 31 second half points, proving that they are by far the most explosive scoring team in the NFL when it comes to outbursts of dominance

• Week 15: Drives stall on a dropped pass or an offsides penalty, one drive is stopped short because they run out of time in the first half, small changes could have blown game wide open

This morning, Nate Tice posted a chart for “early down success+explosive rates” for teams, which is first and second down efficiency that does not include garbage time. The Seahawks offense ranks fourth for the entire season (Rams are first) and seventh since Week 9. Seattle and LAR are the only teams to rank exceptionally well on both offense and defense.

Doesn’t data suggest that the offense, while imperfect and in need of adjustments to beat better teams, especially in the red zone (17th in red zone success), is relatively good? From Shane Waldron to Ryan Grubb to Kubiak, the Seahawks are trending towards better play calling.

That being said, I do think Seattle’s offense could be described as a vanilla play action passing attack with a single unguardable threat paired with a bad rushing offense. It’s been said that the Seahawks only have a handful of passing concepts that work…they just work really well. Good defensive coordinators like Colts DC Lou Anarumo could be smart enough to slow them down considerably.

Seattle is the second-most potent play action team in the NFL (+0.42 EPA per pass on play action) behind the Lions and they average 12(!) yards per pass on play action, which is 2.1 yards more than second place. The bad news? The Seahawks are middle-to-below average on non-play action passes.

Only three offenses (Browns, Saints, Titans) have fewer touchdown passes this season that didn’t come on play action. Those are not three offenses to envy.

We already know that Seattle is in a bad way on the ground. The Rams have a good run defense — not as good as the Seahawks run defense, but good — so what’s going to happen against them on Thursday? If the Seahawks don’t turn the ball over four times, I believe good things will happen; Seattle was so dominant for much of the first game in LA (26 first downs to 12) besides the turnovers which led directly to 14 points by the Rams. If that happens again…

Offensively, I’d be a little worried. But with context of the Seahawks as a whole team, I can still picture them winning the Super Bowl because the offense is good enough to support a league-best defense and league-best special teams, as evidenced by Seattle’s six wins of 14+ points and being #1 in point differential.

Cavmax: I didn’t know that Riley Mills even played. What info is there about his first game action?

Barely any but there’s only a couple of days until his second game.

Danno: Do you see the Seahawks offense trying to do things differently when they are failing in the first half of the last two games that they abandoned in the 2nd half that greatly improves the success of the offense?

Tempo seems to be a part of it. Is the huddle and time spent at the line of scrimmage reading the defense and taking the play clock down to under 5 seconds actually helping the defense make better adjustments than the Hawk’s offense?

Does any statistic look at the effectiveness of an offense when the snap occurs at 5 seconds or less vs 10 seconds or more? When the Seahawks play with urgency on offense they seem much more effective to me, although I have nothing to base this on.

We have never really talked about tempo here before so it’s an interesting theory worth discussing. Unfortunately I’m not aware of any stat tracking tempo, but if someone has any ideas please share it in the comments:

“Coach Pap” wrote about the value of changing up tempo for this article on footballxos.com:

“What we found is that even if you are going lightning fast, teams will be able to adjust to one speed and learn how to play at that speed. It is similar to a pitcher that has a great fastball, but nothing else, eventually teams will catch up to it. Different tempos allows you to keep the defense off balance. You can go from Hyper-speed to a huddle to a check with me system. If the defensive coordinator is focused on getting his play call in as fast as possible to keep up with your tempo, it allows you to take some extra time on certain plays. It allows the offense to be a little more complex while keeping the defense vanilla.”

I think this is a great answer and also helps explain why teams don’t just tell themselves that if a fast tempo works at one point in the game, why not do that for the entire game? (aka “Build the whole plane out of the floating devices!”)

“No huddle teams can also struggle to finish off games with a lead. Running a Four Minute Offense goes against everything that is in the DNA of a fast tempo no huddle team. As a coach, I made the mistake of not working on a slower tempo and it cost us in games where we needed to use up clock to secure a win. Using, and practicing a slow down tempo can help you to win those games. It also allows you to shorten the game if you are playing in a game where you think that is the best way to give your team a chance to win.”

The article then goes onto explain various types of tempo like “turtle”, “sugar”, “thunder”, and “lightning”.

And if you go up tempo for the entire game, most offensive linemen would be dead tired by the fourth quarter. I also doubt that many receivers would be happy running a clear out or a post or a fly, then running back to the line of scrimmage, knowing that the majority of routes won’t see a target.

Not saying that you are directly suggesting that the Seahawks must go fast tempo for an entire game, but even I’m just learning more now as I research and write the article. Seattle’s change of tempo may appear to give them a leg-up, but unfortunately Part A is probably necessary for Part B to be successful.

Perhaps then Seattle’s focus just goes back on the fundamentals: Block better, run better, and catch better.

I’m open to all other ideas and thoughts on this from the community that would do a better job of dissecting the Seahawks offensive splits than I could:

Burgdawg: Being at the 3/4 mark of the season, I’m curious on your assessment of how Mafe and Hall are developing in MM’s system. Barring injury, do you expect their usage to remain the same over the rest of the season? Any reason for more optimism next year?

Well, one part of the question seems easy: A “next year” for Boye Mafe seems unlikely. In addition to rumors that Seattle won’t re-sign him, playing time stats reflect an eroding amount of trust in Mafe.

• Mafe played in 61% of the snaps over the first 7 games

• He’s played 44% of the snaps in the last 7 games

And sometimes that number is higher just because the game is a blowout. The only thing clear in Mafe’s two seasons with Macdonald is that he has disappeared more by each game. Mafe has more penalties (3) than sacks (1).

Derick Hall is identical to Mafe in playing time and production, but has an advantage in age and the fact that he’s signed through 2026. Three seasons in, Hall’s career doesn’t stand out in any way that suggests a long-term future in Seattle. I mentioned many times that even the eight sacks he had in 2024 were largely boosted by plays where the sack was a technicality.

In 2023 and 2025, Hall’s two seasons have a combined one sack.

Oftentimes people want to point to pressures when the sacks aren’t there. Well, about 30-40% of Hall’s pressures this season came against Cam Ward. Without the Titans game, Hall wouldn’t have nearly as many pressures and he already doesn’t have that many.

I have more optimism in the two healthy scratches this week (Jared Ivey, Connor O’Toole) than the two players we’re only aware of because they were second round picks. Talking about Mafe and Hall every season feels a lot like times where I had to write that nobody would miss Jordyn Brooks or DK Metcalf when they were gone and sure enough I’ve never heard anyone say they miss those players. And those examples were surely more valuable than these two.

You won’t miss Mafe and Hall when they’re gone. Some people will call that harsh. Maybe what the world is missing lately is a little bit of being harsh when it’s called for.

Seaside Joe 2479