Grading the Offense: Cardinals/Giants
by Andrew602 on Oct 26, 2009 5:31 PM MDT
in 2009 Season
15 comments
This week we start with the offense, in a segment I'd like to continue throughout the remainder of the season. The Cardinals offense had it's moments last night, but couldn't capitalize on good field position andGiant's turnovers. Kurt Warner was only sacked twice, but the pocket seemed to fold often around him, forcing early throws. The running game was where the unit shined. Beanie Wells was given more opportunities then ever before, and was able to gain 67 rushing yards with a touchdown on the ground.
Kurt Warner - Warner opened the game with a 23 yard pass to Steve Breaston, but struggled to get anything going until the second quarter. Warner often fought through the New York pressure and avoided the blitz, using a quick release. In the end, he led the Cardinals on scoring drives when they needed it, and put points on the board.
Cardinals Offensive Drives
| Drives | 1st | 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th | 10th | 11th | 12th | 13th | 14th |
| Plays | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Yards | 38 | 2 | 23 | 25 | 6 | -2 | 46 | 51 | 55 | -19 | 20 | 2 | 25 | 6 |
| Results | fumble | punt | punt | INT | punt | punt | TD | FG | TD | punt | TD | punt | punt | punt |
Judging from the chart, it's obvious the Cardinals struggled to move the ball at the start of the game. Through the second quarter, they were able to get good field position, and took advantage by scoring 10 points before the half. After their eighth drive, they opened the second half and scored two touchdowns. The obvious stat you never want to see is two turnovers and 4 punts to start the game. The Cardinals are a team that benefits off scoring early, and that's something they'll need to improve on throughout the season.
Running Backs - Wells took advantage of an early fumble by Tim Hightower, and never looked back. He immediately stormed into the game, gaining positive yardage, and using a beautiful stiff arm to get into the end zone. It looked like the Cardinals would use him to drain the clock at the end of the game with his positive gains, but instead passed the ball. Hightower didn't have a big game after fumbling early. He was primarily used on passing downs and scored a touchdown. Jason Wright caught his third pass of the year which happens to be his 2nd touchdown too.
Wide Receivers - Fitzgerald had three drops and was quiet for the first half, but he opened up the second half with some big catches, and nearly had a long touchdown pass from Antrel Rolle had he not dropped it(and had there been a penalty). Surprising as it sounds, Fitzgerald is having a down year for his standards, but going off his numbers so far, he's on pace for 109 catches, 1181 yards, and13 touchdowns. Anquan Boldin suited up to play and made a big 44 yard catch that led to a touchdown. It was obvious he wasn't as explosive, and probably should've rested this game. Aside from them, everyone else had quiet games.
Offensive Line -The offensive line has had it's problems throughout the year, and most of us didn't think they could handle the Giants defensive line. They managed to keep Warner standing for the most part, only allowing 2 sacks. They also generated a decent rush offense, by giving Wells a running lane. Levi Brown continues to struggle, getting beat time in and time out by quicker edge rushers. Justin Tuck blew past Brown to tackle Hightower in the backfield and force the fumble on the opening drive.
My Offensive Grade: C
The Cardinals have a chance to go to 5-2 next week, but in no way shape or form should they take Carolina for granted. They have a young defensive unit and also feature Julius Peppers. It is a game however, that they can use to bring in a variety of plays and try and get their offense back in sync. What did you grade them and why?
0 recs |
15 comments
| Add comment
|
Email
Print
Comments
B
They played one hell of a pass rush and an all around great defense. I’ve heard the argument already that we should have lit them up because New Orleans did it the week before. Well my response to that is simple, that was the week before. The Giants made adjustments, like a good team does, and tries to ensure the weakness that they showed is not exploited in back to back weeks. Also, the Giants defense was playing a Saints team that is very well rounded on offense, meaning the defense had to plan for both a running and throwing game.
The Cardinals are a different team. They throw more passes than anyone else and they run less than anyone else (I believe that’s correct, let me know if it’s not). That means that the Giants could plan a lot better to stop the pass.
With that said, I know they weren’t perfect. Far from it. But they showed a running game against a stout Giants run defense. They made some big plays, even when Fitz dropped some sure things.
Warner stayed pretty clean for the day and was able to make some good throws even if hurried. So the OL played pretty well against some major pressure.
I think that warrants a B, considering their opponent.
Section 102, Row 18
by CardsFan08 on Oct 26, 2009 6:16 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Your trippin
I went F for the lack of a D. Our offense looked like a teenager fumbling with a bra, most the time (they just couldn’t seem to get the damn thing off). Given the gift wrapped field position we were handed throughout the game, how does a team boasting three 1000+ yard receivers and Kurt Warner manage to end a game with no one going over 100 yards against a banged up secondary.
I do like that we were able to successfully run the ball into the endzone. But the overall redzone game needs to improve. The offense needs to capitalize on scorinf situations. And where are the big plays. What good are these tree receivers if you don’t take shots down field. To me this is a BIG consistant problem through the season so far. Im not trying to hate, I love the Cards! I’m just saying if it walks like a duck, throw the freakin ball up????
by badmatty53 on Oct 27, 2009 9:52 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Warner had enough time to find those wide open receivers that would most likely have gone for a long touchdown play. I counted about four or five of those that happened. The run game looked better than it has and that made me happy but the passing game with all those big name receivers and Warner should have put off more than 240 yards and 1 touchdown.
by Pyromnc on Oct 27, 2009 10:07 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
peppers who
where was peppers in the playoffs they have to have the same game plan
The Devil Birds just got cha
by DaCards on Oct 26, 2009 6:48 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
The Cardinals seem to have a way of bringing the best out of players
See Patrick Kerney two weeks ago.
What? I didn't break it, I was just testing its durability, and then I placed it in the woods becuase it's made out of wood and I just thought he should be with his family.
Revenge of the Birds
by Andrew602 on Oct 27, 2009 9:39 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to know.
on all those drives how many were rushes compared to passing? Without knowing i would bet money our better drives half a good amount of both and the crappy drives are mostly passing.
by card-deville on Oct 26, 2009 9:38 PM MDT reply actions 0 recs
Good point
I’ll try to inlcude that next time.
What? I didn't break it, I was just testing its durability, and then I placed it in the woods becuase it's made out of wood and I just thought he should be with his family.
Revenge of the Birds
by Andrew602 on Oct 27, 2009 9:40 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Fitzgerald's struggles are more indicative of the entire passing offense this year thus far
I gave the unit a B this week. How often do three of our running backs each get a touchdown in a game? Overall, the offense could have and should have given us a little more, but they did just enough. I guess that sounds more like a “C” grade, but seeing the run-game continuing to gain momentum is an encouraging feat.
by tw3kr on Oct 27, 2009 12:48 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
I want to give a C+ but...
will settle for a C. Too much reliance on the passing game when our run game had momentum. A couple drops, some mis-reads by Warner, and some turnovers hurt us. Protection was great considering.
I think it speaks volumes about our team that we didn’t play our best on offense and still won. That hasn’t happened in a while.
by Roy Green was here on Oct 27, 2009 8:57 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
good point
What? I didn't break it, I was just testing its durability, and then I placed it in the woods becuase it's made out of wood and I just thought he should be with his family.
Revenge of the Birds
by Andrew602 on Oct 27, 2009 9:41 AM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
c+
We just didn’t seem to be completely in sync offensively. Though we have looked that way in large part for most of this season. We seem to go out and score early, and when the other team makes adjustments….we don’t have the answer. The run game was looking up, but the confidence just isn’t there to stick with it. Overall, good performance, but improvement would be nice to see.
Our D Rocked……A+ for the effort they turned in!!!!!!!!
by TomKatAZ on Oct 27, 2009 10:53 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
B-
There was an up and down feeling for the game this week. Overall the line protected Warner well and he had time to go thru his progressions. It seems that most of our receiver’s routes are on tape now and it’s getting more and more difficult to get Fitz in single or soft zone coverage.
I continue to see great adjustments at halftime which seems to be a strongpoint of Whiz…except for that egg they almost laid against the Texans in the 2nd half while playing with the lead. I imagine it’s hard to make proper adjustments from the first half when things are going well, basically guessing what the opposition is going to do to try to get back in the game?
Short of the INT, Warner had a pretty solid game. I remember after watching him week 1 I called him slow and old. Now he looks like he has that edge back and the game has slowed down for him. THANK YOU whoever got him back in sync. Another sub 300 yard game and a "W".
It should be pointed out that the offensive line pretty much handled the much touted Giant’s defensive line, especially in pass protection. I don’t remember many batted balls or knock downs of Warner. And once Whiz spotted the weak part of their run defense (up the gut) we actually had a running game that produced.
Almost right on cue, NBC showed the record of the Cards under Whiz when they win the turnover battle and then we get the first INT. I never really put much in to that stat as long as it was about even over the season, but it’s becoming more and more evident (especially against the great teams) that you MUST win or at least stay even in the turnover battle if you have any hope of winning.
There are a lot of teams out there that are where the Cards were 5 years ago or so…shambles, no real game plan and no clear direction. I’m local to SoCal and hear about the Chargers all the time and how they underachieve. I don’t see them going too far with their current organization/coaching staff. It’s so nice to be a longtime fan of the Cards and see the change in culture that Whiz and Graves have brought to the organization. Go Cards!
by CaliforniaCardFan on Oct 28, 2009 12:41 AM MDT reply actions 0 recs
There is some good analysis in your post Calicard
I had been waiting to read some where on the site that there is a full year of film on our offense, espcially our strength, the WR’s.
First on Fitz, if he is the best WR in the game as he is being called, then the ability beat coverages whether man, cover 2 cover 3 or zone or whatever shouldn’t be a problem. The Cards passing game is a lot of combination routes with Fitz as the primary read. He doesn’t do it alone.
The lack of a running game combined with a immobile QB (not knocking Warner) allows the LB’s to not have to respect the play-action and drop into underneath zones, and not be concern with running lanes underneath or contain responsibilty. The Safety’s and Cornerback’s can turn and run with our WR’s with safety help over the top. Instead of running deeper routes into coverage they have to break them off shorter impacting the overall passing game negatively (lack of the down field explosive passing plays.)
A new wrinkle has to be developed and that’s a running game with Beanie Wells. Wells explosiveness can force DC’s to be play a less agressive scheme against our WR’s.
The beneficiary of the lack of explosive WR production is the RB position and the check down passes. As long as this is taking place it is a win for the defense.
by Cardsfan81 on Oct 28, 2009 8:26 PM MDT up reply actions 0 recs
Join the community and dive in!
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
