Geno Smith or Shane Waldron: A look at who may be at fault for the Seahawks struggles

  • O-line issues
  • Where Waldron goes wrong
  • QB1 issue

Steph Chambers/GettyImages
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
4 of 5
Next

The Shane Waldron issue

My biggest caveat with Shane Waldron is his unwillingness to put the ball on the ground and get yards when you need them. For example, if you choose to start a drive with a pass and it falls incomplete, you then need to look for a play that ensures the highest likelihood of yardage, so you don't put yourself in a 3rd and long situation, which makes a punt much more likely than 3rd and 5 or less would. These plays could be screens, RPOs, inside zones, and many more options to choose from. That's just not something Waldron does though, instead, he'll opt for a passing concept outside the numbers, or he'll call a longer developing pass, doing the exact opposite of getting "easy" yardage.

That's a worrisome trait because we all know how bad Seattle is on 3rd down, and this is a big reason why. Too many times are they getting themselves into 3rd and 6 or higher situations, where it allows pass rushers to pin their ears back and attack the QB without having the consideration of a run play. You know how much your offensive line struggles in pass protection, so why make it harder on them by having them go head-to-head with rushers who already know it's a passing down?

In addition, the Seahawks rank 29th in the entire NFL in rushing attempts per game at 23.3, which doesn't make any sense. This is a team that spent 2nd round picks at runningbacks in back-to-back draft classes. What was the point of that if you don't want to utilize them? Especially when you have the contrasting styles of Zach Charbonnet and Kenneth Walker. You can run any type of rushing concept you want. Duo, inside zone, wide zone, power, and yet Waldron chooses to use them less than 28 other teams do.