Assigning blame for a 34-point blowout

The Seahawks do not often get housed under Pete Carroll, but when they do, they get trampled. A look at where to point the finger after Sunday's loss in Baltimore.

Quarterback play was not the Seahawks’ biggest problem on Sunday in Baltimore.

It wasn’t their second-biggest problem or their third-biggest problem, for that matter, and while I know that a significant amount of this week’s discussion will be dedicated to Geno Smith, that is a reflection of how we talk about professional football teams and not the actual mechanics of what decided Sunday’s game.

You could have cross-pollinated Patrick Mahomes with Joe Montana, mixed in a little bit of Tom Brady to produce a marvel of modern science and I’m not sure that would produce a quarterback sufficiently skilled to change the outcome of Seattle’s game on Sunday.

I’m not saying Smith was good. I’m saying that Baltimore was so much better it didn’t really matter how well Smith played. In fact, after careful deliberation and consultation with my super-secret, patent-pending formula for teasing out individual responsibility for collective outcomes, I have determined that Smith’s performance was responsible for exactly 3.8 of the 34 points that Seattle lost by. Move over PFF, which is pronounced pffffffffffffffffffft, it’s time to point some fingers as we tell you who was responsibile for this week’s Seahawks result: