14 Comments
User's avatar
Danno's avatar

“However, I wouldn’t say that it was a different start than what we’ve seen from Sam Darnold most games…” I would argue that there is one HUGE glaring difference from a Darnold start. This is the 3rd game this year with Lock having ZERO turnovers in each one. Lock is playing complementary offensive football. Darnold can’t seem to get through a game without turning the ball over, and has done so in some very inopportune times. Would Sam have had one to two turnovers? Would they have cost us a score or given the Cardinals a score. I have been a Darnold fan. I have expected him to play as he was playing at the end of last year. Sam is playing the polar opposite of complementary football. I know Sam can give you games with 375+ yards and 4 TDs. I know this is not likely for Lock. But with this defense, you just need to play complementary offense. Lock as shown that and we see the result today. After the Commanders game I put out the idea that Sam is the QB Seattle wants. Can have incredibly productive games. Can have 4TD Games. With Lock you get 225 yard games and 1 or maybe 2 TDS. But you get at least ½ the turnovers you get with Darnold. If Lock is capable of playing next week and plays as he had in three games this year, I can’t see how you can go back to someone who has more than twice the turnovers per game as Lock. I’ve waited long enough for playoff Sam to return. With 4 losses that can be laid on turnovers, there’s not any more time so wait for playoff Sam to return.

Paul G's avatar

Plus 2-for-2 in the RZ.

Becharof1's avatar

I’m thinking lock can’t hardly pass more than ten yards. Most passes to jsn were barely 5 yards. Did lock even throw to him in the second half. I do think the combination of Price and Charbs will be a dangerous combination. Price has some awsome moves and Charbs is as tough as they come. We really need a Nu 2 receiver. Hopefully at trade deadline. Otherwise our offense will not be a force in our division!

Maxx's avatar

In my humble opinion it was an average victory against a less than average team. The win today was great and kept the Seahawks on pace with the Rams. However, I don't believe the team the Seahawks fielded today would get the job done against Minnesota, Detroit, even the Packers. Obviously it wasn't good enough versus the Bears. I saw the O-line play very poorly at times today and penalties on the defense extended drives. Yes the Seahawks got the win. Let's see if they can win against better teams in the NFC. I'm not convinced they can. Yet....

IdahoFred's avatar

It was like the Chicago game; our quarterback wasn't 100%. Hard to tell how much of a difference that made.

IdahoFred's avatar

We were 50% on allowing 4th down. Better than what our trend had been.

IdahoFred's avatar

We avoided Minshew Mania as someone else pointed out.

Scott M's avatar

Glad we won. Refs suck. We looked a little more focused. Ran screens better, need more. Charbs looked good. Barner was alive. Defense looked like a better team effort.

michael cadiz's avatar

My thoughts exactly. Who do you think the ‘more’ should come from? Continued safe play from Lock and an improved run game or hero ball from Sam, which often leads to turnovers, but might win us a shootout if needed?

Danno's avatar

There will be no shoot outs with this defense. How many of the points have our opponents scored on turnovers? 3 TDs in the Commanders game alone…

Scott M's avatar

More screens, call more screens, and varying types. I'm not gonna sit here and Bubba Gump a list of screens but let's use them all!!!

Seaside Joe's avatar

From the sounds of it, I expect Lock and Darnold to be questionable all week. Jalen Milroe could start and Adrian Martinez could be backup.

IdahoFred's avatar

Someone at the end of the chat said maybe Lock had an oblique injury.

IdahoFred's avatar

Confirmed by MM.