Arizona Rebuilding Project On Track

[Cheesebeef]

LB: Stepehen Tulloch signed 1 year deal with Lions

We needed a "thumper" (Bradley) not another 240 lb tackling machine; that's Washington's job

CB: A guy like Nate Clements or Carlos Rogers were available. Don't hate Marshall but when the worst team in the league lets you walk, there is room for concern.

Well, both SF and Washington let those two go, and Marshall turned down a 3 year deal with Carolina a year ago. I like a guy who insists on a 1-year deal to prove himself.

Marshall turned down that deal because he probably thought he'd get more on the open market. Personally, I'd prefer guys who are actually wanted for more than just a one year rental, over a guys who needs to take a 1 year deals because he has to prove something.

that being said, we poached a guy who could be decent from a team that makes BAD decisions, which I like. But, at the same time, the Niners and Washington are also two teams that make awful personnel moves and I would have rather gotten the proven guys from a team who makes bad decisions than getting the riskier guy from a bad team who makes bad decisions.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Marshall turned down that deal because he probably thought he'd get more on the open market. Personally, I'd prefer guys who are actually wanted for more than just a one year rental, over a guys who needs to take a 1 year deals because he has to prove something.

that being said, we poached a guy who could be decent from a team that makes BAD decisions, which I like. But, at the same time, the Niners and Washington are also two teams that make awful personnel moves and I would have rather gotten the proven guys from a team who makes bad decisions than getting the riskier guy from a bad team who makes bad decisions.

My understanding is that the Cards offered Marshall more than one year. He turned it down, preferring to take his chance at proving that he was worthy of more.

 

[Cheesebeef]

My understanding is that the Cards offered Marshall more than one year. He turned it down, preferring to take his chance at proving that he was worthy of more.

hadn't heard that before. where did you hear this?

 

[Crazy Canuck]

hadn't heard that before. where did you hear this?

At the time of the signing.

 

[Cheesebeef]

At the time of the signing.

hmm... don't remember reading that.

even so, I'd rather us have gone with proven guys from teams who made bad decisions as opposed to a guy who had a really bad year (after two admittedly promising ones) from a bad team.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Well, what is it? Bill Davis was the worst coordinator in the NFL and wasn't getting the most out of his talent, or that there isn't any talent on the defensive side of the football (despite that being the place where most of our (remaining) draft picks play and start) to compete at this level? It can't be both.

IMO, Davis was good, but the players weren't good enough. But that doesn't seem to be the prevailing sentiment on the board.

If your offense cannot get first downs, your defense is going to stink. Period. Doesn't matter who the DC or the players are.

 

[AzStevenCal]

If your offense cannot get first downs, your defense is going to stink. Period. Doesn't matter who the DC or the players are.

Quite true. However, what happens when your defense stinks before the offense even takes the field. That's what we had last season. I'm holding out a little hope for the D this season for two reasons. One, maybe we've upgraded enough to make a real difference especially when you consider the change in DC and scheme. And secondly, perhaps the D packed it in long before the season began because practices made it clear to them that we were going to suck no matter what. I'm not sold on either of those possibilities though.

Steve

 

[Cheesebeef]

my problem with "Davis is a good coordinator" thing is even in 2009, when we still had Dansby and a Pro-Bowl caliber DRC, that defense was still pretty mediocre and often played just awful, having HUGE second half let downs, especially against good competition (Indy made us look like a pop warner team, GB put up a gazillion points against us twice, the Saints rang 50 on us, the offense gave the D a 31-0 lead against the Bears and the D collapsed in the second half, we had a 31-0 lead against the Jags and they put up like 17 straight second half points against us to make that game closer than it should have been, we had a 21-0 lead against Houston and they put up 21 straight on us in the second half.) It was sooooo rare that our D could put together an entire game. They were feast or famine.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Quite true. However, what happens when your defense stinks before the offense even takes the field. That's what we had last season. I'm holding out a little hope for the D this season for two reasons. One, maybe we've upgraded enough to make a real difference especially when you consider the change in DC and scheme. And secondly, perhaps the D packed it in long before the season began because practices made it clear to them that we were going to suck no matter what. I'm not sold on either of those possibilities though.

Steve

Anecdotal point, at best. Fact remains that our "D" was on the field 5 minutes more per game.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Anecdotal point, at best. Fact remains that our "D" was on the field 5 minutes more per game.

No way! A lot of people have made this comment and some of us have done so authoritatively - what more could you ask for? But seriously, if you want to move past the anecdotal issue let's go back in time instead. Didn't our defense take the field first in our opening preseason game and let the Texans march down the field for a short range field goal? And, IIRC, they followed that up with a touchdown on their next possession. I know, it was only preseason but IMO it highlighted our defensive weaknesses and we spent the rest of the year duplicating that performance (for the most part).

Steve

 

[kerouac9]

my problem with "Davis is a good coordinator" thing is even in 2009, when we still had Dansby and a Pro-Bowl caliber DRC, that defense was still pretty mediocre and often played just awful, having HUGE second half let downs, especially against good competition (Indy made us look like a pop warner team, GB put up a gazillion points against us twice, the Saints rang 50 on us, the offense gave the D a 31-0 lead against the Bears and the D collapsed in the second half, we had a 31-0 lead against the Jags and they put up like 17 straight second half points against us to make that game closer than it should have been, we had a 21-0 lead against Houston and they put up 21 straight on us in the second half.) It was sooooo rare that our D could put together an entire game. They were feast or famine.

But that's what happens with a defense when you don't have an elite pass rusher on the outside. You forgot the good performances like where Dansby and Wilson stymied Favre when the Vikes came to town, and the same thing with the Giants and Eli Manning.

I think the other thing is that the defense never had the game put on their shoulders. The D knows that they're two turnovers away from winning a game, and that they need to pick their spots where they'll make an impact. It was the same with the Packers in Rodgers' first season--they could (largely) put up points, but they couldn't close out games...

...Until Clay Matthews arrives with his fanny pack full of HGH and their leading the league in offense and defense.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

No way! A lot of people have made this comment and some of us have done so authoritatively - what more could you ask for? But seriously, if you want to move past the anecdotal issue let's go back in time instead. Didn't our defense take the field first in our opening preseason game and let the Texans march down the field for a short range field goal? And, IIRC, they followed that up with a touchdown on their next possession. I know, it was only preseason but IMO it highlighted our defensive weaknesses and we spent the rest of the year duplicating that performance (for the most part).

Steve

Again, an adecdote.

Not saying that it didn't occur. Simply saying that the main problem for the 2010 "D" over the 2009 "D" is the time of possession issue and all of the extra plays they had to face throughout the season.

IMO... the number one way of improving our "D" is competent work from the QB.

 

[Mitch]

Quite true. However, what happens when your defense stinks before the offense even takes the field. That's what we had last season. I'm holding out a little hope for the D this season for two reasons. One, maybe we've upgraded enough to make a real difference especially when you consider the change in DC and scheme. And secondly, perhaps the D packed it in long before the season began because practices made it clear to them that we were going to suck no matter what. I'm not sold on either of those possibilities though.

Steve

I am thinking the same way, Steve. Great points. We need to hope it was everything you said---and that Ray Horton is coaching the bad habits out of this defense as we speak. And hope especially that the players show up and step up play after play, game after game.

 

[Cheesebeef]

But that's what happens with a defense when you don't have an elite pass rusher on the outside. You forgot the good performances like where Dansby and Wilson stymied Favre when the Vikes came to town, and the same thing with the Giants and Eli Manning.

actually, I didn't. i said they were a feast or famine D. They were feasts in those two games (and just flat out dominant against Seattle) but those games seemed like the exception to the rule.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Again, an adecdote.

Not saying that it didn't occur. Simply saying that the main problem for the 2010 "D" over the 2009 "D" is the time of possession issue and all of the extra plays they had to face throughout the season.

IMO... the number one way of improving our "D" is competent work from the QB.

Would you settle for, "again, eventually an anecdote". The only part that was anecdotal was my suggestion that they appeared to play as poorly all season as they did in the first preseason game. There is nothing anecdotal about the Houston comments. I'm not trying to be confrontational here but instead of simply dismissing the comment because you believe some or all of it to be anecdotal - perhaps you could explain why our defense looked outmatched in games even before you could reasonably expect time of possession to enter the picture.

Steve

 

[Cheesebeef]

Would you settle for, "again, eventually an anecdote". The only part that was anecdotal was my suggestion that they appeared to play as poorly all season as they did in the first preseason game. There is nothing anecdotal about the Houston comments. I'm not trying to be confrontational here but instead of simply dismissing the comment because you believe some or all of it to be anecdotal - perhaps you could explain why our defense looked outmatched in games even before you could reasonably expect time of possession to enter the picture.

Steve

there's also nothing anectodal about the way this defense just came out and rolled over and died from the opening kickoff against Atlanta and SD in the first four weeks of the season last year.

 

[kerouac9]

Last year Flacco passed for 3622 yards, with a 62.6% completion rate, had 25 TDs to 10 INTs and a 93.6 QB rating. He may not be elite yet, but he is certainly on the edge of it. His #s were roughly equal to Big Ben and better then Manning (QB rating) last year and it was only his 3rd year. If he progresses any more this year I think you have to consider him as a candidate for that group. And FWIW I think Philip Rivers belongs in that group as well, posting over a 100 QB rating 3 years in a row, having over a 65% completion rate 3 years in a row, throwing 34,28, and 30 TDs in that time, and that was with Vincent Jackson holding out most of the season last year.

From Football Outsiders Annual 2011:

Joe Flacco has a lot in common with his division rival Ben Roethlisberger. Both men are tall and athletic, both men have strong arms, and both men take way too many sacks. J.J. Cooper, formerly of AOL Fanhouse, did a study where he timed every sack during the 2010 season, and he found that Flacco held the ball for three seconds or longer on 25 sacks, five more than any other quarterback. Our game charters tended to agree in their observations, leaving comments like “[Flacco] gets out to the sidelines, then inexplicably decides not to throw it away despite the defender coming right into his face” and “Flacco rolls when no one’s open, then just runs out of bounds instead of throwing it away.” In particular, Flacco will pump fake in the face of pressure without actually getting rid of the ball, or he’ll start to scramble when there’s no room to run. Flacco needs fix the internal clock in his brain if he wants to fully establish himself as a top NFL quarterback, and not merely an above-average one.

Elite.