Maybe he’s a great deal slicker than he’s credited for being.
First a quick aside to Ed B about the repost in a thread below. Thanks for the “genius” reference but you really give me too much credit. I merely made a couple of observations and characterizations based on what was an excellent article I linked end. I thought everyone should be aware of it and it now seems particularly apropos in light of this game. When I’m truly working in genius mode I focus on my own thoughts. I will admit I was frustrated that several people didn’t see Seattle’s offensive change as important. I don’t know that I have ever seen such a dramatic, yet effective, strategy change mid-season.
One thought I’m having is how slick is BA? Surely the Cards must have been aware the Seahawks changed offenses, yet they played primarily the same defensive alignments they played in Seattle. For example, Bucannon shadowed Wilson instead of dropping back in coverage this left the center of the field open. It also meant on running plays, Wilson’s movement actually took Bucannon out of the running lane. It’s hard to image the Cards didn’t alter their strategy for this game unless they simply didn’t intend to show a modified defense to Seattle. At first I thought I must be nuts to think this conspiracy-like theory, but after re-watching the tape the Cards never really adjusted. Well maybe a little in quarter 3. They used only a few of their blitz packages and rarely switched up the coverage. There was no attempt to confuse Wilson. They played almost like it was a pre-season game. So what do you think, did the Cards simply hold back their defensive game plan?
Of course this doesn’t mitigate the special teams disaster. The offense looked bad as well, but again they were very bland in play selection. The Cards attempted few screens, no draws and very little play action. There were almost no misdirection plays. They did throw deep, however, showing very poor execution. Nobody dropped a ball on purpose, they just played with no intensity.
In the end with all the offensive honors at stake, I’m sure BA played the passing game straight. I also know it’s hard to make play action work without an effective running game. The offense played poorly, but clearly didn’t expose all their options. Finally, if the Cards do end up hosting the Seahawks, I don’t think a Cardinal victory is guaranteed, but I suspect Seattle will find itself is a far different game than the one they just enjoyed.
First a quick aside to Ed B about the repost in a thread below. Thanks for the “genius” reference but you really give me too much credit. I merely made a couple of observations and characterizations based on what was an excellent article I linked end. I thought everyone should be aware of it and it now seems particularly apropos in light of this game. When I’m truly working in genius mode I focus on my own thoughts. I will admit I was frustrated that several people didn’t see Seattle’s offensive change as important. I don’t know that I have ever seen such a dramatic, yet effective, strategy change mid-season.
One thought I’m having is how slick is BA? Surely the Cards must have been aware the Seahawks changed offenses, yet they played primarily the same defensive alignments they played in Seattle. For example, Bucannon shadowed Wilson instead of dropping back in coverage this left the center of the field open. It also meant on running plays, Wilson’s movement actually took Bucannon out of the running lane. It’s hard to image the Cards didn’t alter their strategy for this game unless they simply didn’t intend to show a modified defense to Seattle. At first I thought I must be nuts to think this conspiracy-like theory, but after re-watching the tape the Cards never really adjusted. Well maybe a little in quarter 3. They used only a few of their blitz packages and rarely switched up the coverage. There was no attempt to confuse Wilson. They played almost like it was a pre-season game. So what do you think, did the Cards simply hold back their defensive game plan?
Of course this doesn’t mitigate the special teams disaster. The offense looked bad as well, but again they were very bland in play selection. The Cards attempted few screens, no draws and very little play action. There were almost no misdirection plays. They did throw deep, however, showing very poor execution. Nobody dropped a ball on purpose, they just played with no intensity.
In the end with all the offensive honors at stake, I’m sure BA played the passing game straight. I also know it’s hard to make play action work without an effective running game. The offense played poorly, but clearly didn’t expose all their options. Finally, if the Cards do end up hosting the Seahawks, I don’t think a Cardinal victory is guaranteed, but I suspect Seattle will find itself is a far different game than the one they just enjoyed.
& 
