The Seattle Seahawks did not blow up their team this past offseason. It may look to the world outside Seattle like they did, but they did not. They see themselves as a competitive team right now and believe they are better than they were a year ago.

Did Week 1 loss show that Seattle Seahawks miss star power?

This offseason saw a lot of change at the top of the roster. The trades and departures of Geno Smith, DK Metcalf and Tyler Lockett were significant and can’t be minimized. Those three players had veteran experience, years of productivity and a major role in everything the offense did last year.

But that offense was not what this coach wanted.

That offense was too pass-dependent, not physical enough and unreliable in the biggest moments. It simply did not complement that rapidly improving defense that Mike Macdonald wants to be the hallmark of his franchise.

I fully supported those changes. And I stand by that 100%. Yes, those are good players, and two of them (Smith with the Raiders and Metcalf with the Steelers) had excellent debuts in their new uniforms. The Seahawks can be a better team without them. But to do so isn’t automatic. It takes a smart plan and success on two fronts.

1. Leadership.

One of the major issues with Geno, DK and Lockett is that they were truly ingrained in the language, style and philosophy of Pete Carroll. He was the only NFL coach the two receivers had ever known, and he saved the quarterback’s career. Carroll was loyal to them (maybe to a fault), and they appreciated the way he ran the franchise – so much so that Geno would often communicate with Pete when things felt off last season.

To truly build his own team with its own culture, Mike Macdonald needed to remove the three veterans most indoctrinated into someone else’s way of doing business. To do so was a win. But it leaves a vacuum that must be filled.

Sam Darnold, Cooper Kupp, DeMarcus Lawrence and others need to help fill that gap coming from the outside. Returning players like Ernest Jones, Jarran Reed and Julian Love need to rise to the occasion. And Macdonald needs to present a clear vision for what that culture needs to be.

2. Resources.

The strongest argument for making the offseason changes at wide receiver – and to some extent quarterback – is to rearrange the distribution of resources on the roster. A salary cap system forces each franchise to choose where to spend its money, and the best teams do that by spending according to the needs of their chosen identity.

Macdonald has said repeatedly that he wants his offense to play complementary ball. I take that to mean they need to run it a whole lot better than last season when they finished 28th in the league with just 95.7 rushing yards per game. That required a new coordinator with a new scheme, but also an investment into the offensive line.

The first one got done, with Klint Kubiak bringing his Shanahan-style offense and a legion of offensive line coaches to Seattle. But the investment in the offensive line was limited to the drafting of Grey Zabel in the first round and some other small moves late in the draft or on the fringes of free agency. They replaced only one position on the line with a player who was not on the roster last season.

In fact, after saving money at wide receiver and quarterback, the Seahawks still rank 31st in the league in spending along the offensive line. At $23 million, they are spending less than 25% of what the top team spends on its line ($95.3 million). The teams in the middle are spending nearly double what the Seahawks have allotted.

Spending, of course, is not necessarily equivalent to succeeding. But part of my support for spending less on skill positions was based on reallocating that cap space to the line of scrimmage. That has not happened, at least not yet.

Unfortunately, we also have yet to see the success on the field. The team ran 26 times for 84 yards in the opening game. None of those numbers are going to be enough for a team that wants to balance its offense and complement its defense.

In fact, the 3.2 yards per carry was actually below last season’s 4.2. The 49ers may very well have an excellent run defense, and accounting for Fred Warner is a nightmare for any offense. But the Seahawks need to be able to run it more effectively to succeed this season and to justify the moves they made this spring. The lack of a running game was, for me, the biggest cause for concern after the first game.

We are only one game into what will be a key season for Mike Macdonald, John Schneider and the Seahawks. They made some significant changes that could lead to even more significant improvements. But we are a long way from determining how it all plays out.

More on the Seattle Seahawks

• Where was the play-action in Seahawks’ opener?
• IR stint for Seahawks rookie Nick Emmanwori ‘under consideration’
• Bump: Seattle Seahawks’ run game too ‘predictable’ in opening loss
• What Brock Huard saw on Seattle Seahawks’ last-minute fumble
• ‘Not the start that we wanted’ for Seattle Seahawks’ offense

Follow @themikesalk