Grading The Offense: Arizona Cardinals vs Minnesota Vikings

by Andrew602 on Dec 8, 2009 4:05 PM MST Comment 24 comments

It was uncertain just how prepared the Cardinals offense would be for a stingy Minnesota Vikings defense Sunday night. Kurt Warner was questionable all week with post-concussion symptoms. Matt Leinart shared reps with Warner in practice and was ready to go if Warner was not. Mike Gandy had been battling a hip injury and back up offensive tackle Jeremy Bridges was preparing to play as well. On game day, it was likely that Gandy wouldn't suit up, but Kurt Warner would refuse to miss anymore action. The Cardinals offense stumbled to start the game with a Tim Hightower fumble that led to a Vikings touchdown. After that however, the Cardinals offense outscored the Vikings 27-10. Let's take a look at how they did.

Kurt Warner: Kurt was surprisingly spot on after reportedly experiencing blurry vision and sensitivity to light. He had also missed the previous 6 quarters of play, so to see him slinging the ball over a 10-1 Vikings team was encouraging. The fact that the 38-year-old quarterback could return from a viscous blow to the head and beat the 2nd best team in the NFC spoke tremendously for his resiliency. Warner made the reads that put the wide receivers in best interest to make plays on the ball(see Anqun Boldin's 39-yard touchdown) and could have very well played a better game had the Cardinals not resorted to conservative play in the second half.

Running backs: Tim Hightower didn't make many plays with his legs to earn recognition, but surprisingly exceeded many expectations in the blocking department. Hightower squared up on just about every defender that decided to blitz and gave Kurt Warner the perfect amount of time to get rid of the ball. Hightower's blocking will be greatly needed come playoff time. Beanie Wells carried the ball more then Hightower, but only amounted to 28 yards. Obviously being in his rookie season means there will be games where he struggles, but it's not helping his cause to become the starting running back on offense.

Wide receivers: Anquan Boldin posted his best game of the season and also played his fourth game in a row in which he's looked like an absolute beast. Boldin set the tone on offense and led the Cardinals to their first two touchdowns of the game. Larry Fitzgerald quietly put together another solid game, catching a season long 35-yard touchdown pass that added to his league-leading total of 10 touchdowns. Steve Breaston didn't do much on the receiving end but added a 64 yard punt return in the 1st quarter that led to the first Cardinal touchdown of the game.

Offensive line: The biggest part of the win came from the trenches, where the Cardinals big five didn't allow a sack on the day. They completed that feat against the Vikings defensive line, a unit that leads the NFL in sacks. Even more impressive was the fact that back up tackle Jeremy Bridges was inserted into the line up, only to face NFL sack-leader Jared Allen. Add that the Cardinals run-blocking led to 113 rushing yards against the 2nd ranked run-defense and the Cardinals offensive line obviously had the best game of the season.

My offensive grade: A

Final thoughts: It's not hard to give the Cardinals an A after their 30-17 defeat of the Vikings on a nationally televised game of Sunday night football. They played their best game of the year on all facets of the game and faced no trouble moving the ball down-field. How did you grade the Cardinals offense and why?

Poll

How would you grade the Cardinals offensive effort on Sunday?

A

327 votes

B

61 votes

C

1 votes

D

5 votes

394 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 24 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

My Feelings are well known...

about this game and both the offense and defense. The offense had one of the best blocking performances I’ve seen from the Cardinals in over 20 years. The receivers made plays and , as is typical, Kurt trusted they would make those plays. It was a spt on performance. That type of play would have beaten any team in the league.

by SundayBlitz on Dec 8, 2009 4:24 PM MST reply actions

I would love to give this an A but...

…the score should have been 42-17. Punch it in boys.

Yes, I’m a half-empty kind of guy.

We all leave footprints in the sands of time, just watch out for the discarded fish hooks!

by Hawkwind on Dec 8, 2009 4:37 PM MST reply actions

I feel ya...

Should’ve certainly been 42-17 but with how the Cardinals were scoring at ease in the first half, I’m assuming they just went conservative in the 2nd.

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 Dec 8, 2009 4:47 PM MST up reply actions

Agreed

but I gave it an “A” because I’m thinking that the big plays in the passing game more than made up for settling for a few late field goals off of turnovers instead of touchdowns.

by Long Beach on Dec 8, 2009 5:10 PM MST up reply actions

Been waiting

all year for this offense to come out guns blazing and this was finally that game. We llok to be in playoff form! WHO DAT SAY THEY BEAT THE CARDINALS! WHO DAT WHO DAT!

by badmatty53 on Dec 9, 2009 10:59 AM MST up reply actions

Correction: 42-10

couldn’t help myself

Section 135, Row 35

by AJ BirdWatcher on Dec 8, 2009 5:38 PM MST up reply actions

Nice

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 Dec 8, 2009 6:11 PM MST up reply actions

::chuckle:: I almost typed that as that last TD was total crap

We all leave footprints in the sands of time, just watch out for the discarded fish hooks!

by Hawkwind on Dec 8, 2009 6:31 PM MST up reply actions

I agree with Hawk

The field goals the entire 2nd half were a subtraction as well as the early fumble and 12 men in the huddle penalty. I voted B as I see A as a near perfect game. If it was an opition I would have gome with A- first half and B second.

by Drullin'OverDaCards on Dec 8, 2009 6:52 PM MST up reply actions

Disagree Hawk

First of all we played a great game against a great defense, from that standpoint alone, this was a superb effort (specially the offensive line), as for the second half, considering the situation, the smart choice was to run down the clock first and get the field goals… we are a great red zone team, but we mostly do it passing, so it was an unnecesary risk to throw in those situations with the big lead… I absolutely think this team has room to improve, but last sunday was very impressive… GO CARDINALS

paco cabrera

by pacocab on Dec 8, 2009 5:34 PM MST reply actions

good points

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 Dec 8, 2009 5:37 PM MST up reply actions

Like I said, I'm a "the glass is half-empty" guy.

We all leave footprints in the sands of time, just watch out for the discarded fish hooks!

by Hawkwind on Dec 8, 2009 6:32 PM MST up reply actions

When my glass gets half empty,

I usually just fill it up again. Just sayin

by badmatty53 on Dec 9, 2009 11:01 AM MST up reply actions

A+

I would give an A to the offence,defence and special teams too..an A+ for a complete team win

by tigg on Dec 8, 2009 6:34 PM MST reply actions

Shout out to ST!

They don’t often get covered but man last few games they have been spectacular. LSH and Gramm Cracker in particular.
Great down field coverage on punts and kickoffs. Often the Viks started in their own red zone. With our O operating as such and our ST forcing teams to start with their backs to the wall, it positions our D to have much more success.

They are who we thought they were!

by Jessesb on Dec 8, 2009 7:39 PM MST reply actions

Gramm Cracker?

Neither “graham cracker” nor “Ben Graham” is spelled that way.

I’m with ya though, ST has been pretty great all year.

by tw3kr on Dec 9, 2009 1:41 AM MST up reply actions

Oh, geez

The fall of the grammar Nazi… tell me what I did…

by tw3kr on Dec 9, 2009 1:58 AM MST up reply actions

I noticed that...

After I posted I realized I had spelled his name wrong. Sadly, you can’t edit posts…
But, still Graham Cracker is pretty funny. Gotta admit that, right?

They are who we thought they were!

by Jessesb on Dec 9, 2009 3:30 PM MST up reply actions

The Cards best game so far!

This was by far the best game the boys have played this year, but in the play offs they are going to have to STOP getting conservative in the 2nd half. 35 point comebacks happen that way.

by Reo Hays on Dec 8, 2009 8:30 PM MST reply actions

A

The only thing that made me consider lowering it is that we didn’t score any TDs in the second half. This has been a problem after we take the lead [besides the Bears game] for most of the season.

Lifelong Arizona Cardinals/Chicago Bears fan.

No band-wagoner fans allowed, pick a team and stick with em, throughout the good and the bad.

by JoeCB1991 on Dec 8, 2009 8:39 PM MST reply actions

Slowing a game down means... slowing a game down

This game is not about running up the score (unless you are playing for Belichick), this is about winning, and if the results are there we can´t complain too much… as for our running game being productive, I understand we have improved, but running on the Vikings is almost impossible, and the last thing you want to do is stop the clock in that situation and give Brett Favre a chance… we were playing a top three defense, whose specialty is stoping the run with the Williams brothers, is not like we were trying to run against the Rams, and that´s why I think Whisenhunt did the smart thing and didn´t take unnecesary risks…

paco cabrera

by pacocab on Dec 9, 2009 10:59 AM MST reply actions

So do we call them

The Berlin Williams wall now…What to soon?

by badmatty53 on Dec 9, 2009 11:05 AM MST up reply actions

Good point pacocab

Whiz has been criticized for not being aggressive with the lead in the second half, then he’s been criticized for throwing the ball more when the Cardinals need to milk the clock.

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 Dec 9, 2009 11:20 AM MST up reply actions

Offensive exploision (almost)

Whisenhunt had a great first half game plan. The players executed the plan very well and
the OL in paticular was great protecting Warner. Bridges played well albeit with help from Hightower or a TE. Levi Brown did not have his name called. When the Vikings DL did get pressure the ball was out except by my count on four plays. Jared Allen had one QB pressure in the entire game. Enough said.

Warner’s courage and willingness to stand in the pocket is why some speak about Warner being a future HOF player. Warner’s performance in this game justifies such conversation. That said, I get uncomfortable when he throws into double and triple coverage.

Hightower was phenominal in this game chiping and on blizt pick-up. I know he put the ball on the carpet but his play the rest of the game more than made up for it. He also showed an acceleration and gear that I did not think he had on that run in the 4th qt. to put the final nail in the coffin of the Vikings. If Beanie is to wrest the starting job away from Hightower he’s going to have to earn it. Boldin did what Bodin can do when given enough looks. Fitz did what Fitz does which is score TD’s.

The restrictor plate offense came out in the second half. Hope that this does not come back to bite the team in the butt moving forward. Field goals will not always get it done against a team that wants to finish (Vikings looked disinterested in 4th qt.).

Whiz out coached Viking DC Fraizer. Vikings never got comfortable on defense.
My grade. B+

by Cardsfan81 on Dec 10, 2009 3:54 PM MST reply actions