Pft Preseason Power Rankings: No. 18

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
6,120
Reaction score
1,908
Location
Expat in Kuala Lumpur
Every year, there's a team that many of the so-called experts peg as the next perennial postseason outsider to become a playoff contender. With the Cincinnati Bengals finally busting through after several years of being the next rising team to reverse a long stretch of misfortune, the next logical candidate still has a long way to go.

And for now that squad comes in at the top end of the bottom half of the league's teams.

The Arizona Cardinals.

In an age of parity, which has entailed plenty of quick turnarounds and even faster falls from grace (e.g., the Super Bowl loser hasn't made it back to the playoffs in the next season for five straight years), the Cardinals have found a way to avoid playing beyond Week Seventeen since 1998.

That's the longest current drought for any NFL franchise.

How chronically bad have the Cardinals been? But for the 16-team tournament that the league threw together at the end of the strike-shortened 1982 season, the Cards have qualified for the playoffs only once in the last 30 years.

That's pathetic, and it's evidence of a problem that runs all the way to the top of the organization.

The flaws in this franchise have been so deep and profound that not even Denny Green has found a way to turn it around quickly. And we're talking about the same Denny Green that pulled the Vikings out of a two-year funk and thrust the team into consistent playoff contention, taking it to the playoffs in eight of his nine full seasons.

Instead, the Cards have been 6-10 and 5-11 in Green's first two years, and even with the addition of running back Edgerrin James and a brand new stadium that plenty of real, live human beings will be frequenting this year, we still think that a lot needs to be done to erase the stink of all of the years of ineptitude that have plagued one of the oldest franchises in pro football.

For now, the biggest trouble is in the trenches.

Though the guy known as E.J. might think he's on track to don an ugly mustard sports jacket and deliver a ten-minute speech on the temporary dais at Fawcett Stadium in Canton, he should give Ricky Williams a call regarding the realities of trying to gain yards on the ground without, you know, effective blocking.

So what did the Cards do in the offseason to improve an offensive line that paved the way for only 1,138 rushing yards in 2005, nearly 200 yards behind the No. 31 team? They signed a guy that the Texans gave up on. (They also selected Deuce Lutui in the second round of the draft, going with a guard at a time when it might have made more sense to take a tackle.)

On defense, the Cards signed tackle Kendrick Clancy, an underrated nose tackle who overachieved for the Giants in 2005. But Clancy isn't capable of carrying the entire line, and for a franchise that has rented a string of quality defensive ends over the past decade or so there's none of them left right now.

The strangest aspect of all of this is that the Cardinals' defense wasn't all that bad last year. Statistically, they finished in the top ten, allowing fewer yards per game than the Redskins, Colts, Broncos, Seahawks, and Patriots. Thanks to a high-octane passing game, the offense was in the top ten as well.

And yet they still found a way to lose six more games than they won.

Thus, we think the trend will continue, at least for another year, even as more and more league observers will take the position that it's time for the Cards to make the playoffs in a non-strike year for the second time since the Ford administration.

But barring a major injury to one or more key players, the Seahawks will win the division going away. So then the question will be whether the Cards can snag a wild card berth. Even though the NFC has generally become the AFC's eight-beer ******, the numbers don't favor Arizona. With four legitimate contenders in the East and three in the South, the Cardinals will need to rack up plenty of wins in a schedule that includes games against the Broncos, Chiefs, Chargers, Cowboys, and Falcons.

Sorry, Cardinals fans. It'll inevitably happen for you. But not yet.

Next, the fantasy grades.

Quarterback: Kurt Warner still has plenty of name recognition, and with all of the hype surrounding the team this year he's certain to be drafted higher than his remaining ability merits. Don't fall for it -- he hasn't played 16 games since 2001, and this likely will be his last season as the Week One starter. He gets a C. (And it might be a good idea to throw a late-round lasso around Matt Leinart, especially in a keeper league.)

Running back: If Edgerrin James can churn out 1,500 yards behind the Arizona line, he deserves to be put in the Hall of Fame right now. We're skeptical, however. We think he'll get his 1,000 yards, but it won't be easy and he might get hurt. We give him a B-.

Wide receiver: The stats of Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin were virtually identical in 2005. Both had over 100 catches, each had in excess of 1,400 yards. We like Fitzgerald a little bit more than Boldin, so we'll give Larry an A and Boldin an A-.

Tight end: With all of the balls that will be sailing toward the wideouts, there's no chance of this position generating decent numbers.

Defense: Another unit that isn't quite elite, but still a cut above the background noise of the so-so and the poor units out there. B-.

Kicker: Neil Rackers set a league record with 40 field goals in 2005. He gets a B+.
 

HoodieBets

Formerly azcardsfan1616
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
5,748
Reaction score
1,055
Location
Rhode Island
First all negative review ive seen all year. I dont agree with anything he said except for the O-Line. Hopefully we prove him wrong.
 

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
But Clancy isn't capable of carrying the entire line, and for a franchise that has rented a string of quality defensive ends over the past decade or so there's none of them left right now.

:doi: Does this writer not know that Bertrand Berry plays DE for the Cardinals?

a brand new stadium that plenty of real, live human beings will be frequenting this year,

An even bigger plus than the writer and many others imagine. THE #1 reason IMHO that the Cards have been so bad for so long in Arizona. For example think how much difference it will make for the offense to not have to fight crowd noise in their own stadium.
 

moklerman

Rise from the Ashes III
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Posts
5,318
Reaction score
810
Location
Bakersfield, CA
I think it's an all negative review because this guy seems to be getting his information from the stat sheet alone.
 

BigRedRage

Reckless
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Posts
48,274
Reaction score
12,525
Location
SE valley
wow, i checked every post waiting for them to do arizona and they do this stinky pile of crap? lame
 

joeshmo

Kangol Hat Aficionado
Joined
Feb 23, 2004
Posts
17,247
Reaction score
1
So what did the Cards do in the offseason to improve an offensive line that paved the way for only 1,138 rushing yards in 2005, nearly 200 yards behind the No. 31 team? They signed a guy that the Texans gave up on. (They also selected Deuce Lutui in the second round of the draft, going with a guard at a time when it might have made more sense to take a tackle.)

Texans did not give up on M. Brown. Not by a long shot. They went to a new scheme in which they have moved 90% of their remaining OL to new positions and have asked all of them to loss 10-15 LBs. The bigger Mauler types such as Brown were no longer in their plans so he was not a priority to re-sign. And people keep bringing up the Texans OL like its a bad thing. Only in the pass blocking department, not in the run blocking department.

On defense, the Cards signed tackle Kendrick Clancy, an underrated nose tackle who overachieved for the Giants in 2005. But Clancy isn't capable of carrying the entire line, and for a franchise that has rented a string of quality defensive ends over the past decade or so there's none of them left right now.

Berry, Okeafer, Dockett. Not exactly nobodies.

What I find to be the funniest about this article is despite all of the pot shots he takes, and not even mentioning anything positive such as Wilson, Dansby, Berry, barely metions the WR trio, and the such he still gives a lot of good grades, (although a few should be higher then they are). Go figure.
 

SeattleCard

Back in Arizona!!!
Joined
Mar 3, 2003
Posts
3,075
Reaction score
786
Location
Mesa, AZ
Well, give the guy credit for actually NOT picking the cards to make the playoffs. Most pundits are once again picking us for the playoffs.

Cards were the sexy pick last year, and they are again this year.

After last year, I approach this season with a 'wait and see' approach. I won't be fooled again like I was last year.
 

Harry

ASFN Consultant and Senior Writer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Posts
12,389
Reaction score
27,097
Location
Orlando, FL
I’m not sure of the source on this. I’m guessing Pro Football Weekly (PFT?). That would be no surprise, as they haven’t had anyone working there who knew anything about football since Joel Buschbaum died.

Let me start by saying ranked 18th is probably close to right, though I think the Cards make the playoffs and certainly the author’s O-line concerns are well founded. Additionally I have already stated that while I like Clancy, letting Davis go was likely a mistake, though Watson has the talent to go right by Davis’ performance level if Watson is motivated to do so.

After that the author and I totally part company. The give away that this person has no idea what he’s writing about comes when stating, “The strangest aspect of all of this is that the Cardinals' defense wasn't all that bad last year.” There’s nothing strange about it. The presence of extremely talented, unusually athletic players like Wilson and Dansby along with a good defensive line was enough to cover up the loss of likely the best corner on the team (Rolle) and the Cards’ only true middle linebacker (Hayes). The scheme was even better than the personnel and figures to be improved this year by the infusion of more and better personnel overall. The shot at the defensive ends was inane. Berry is one of the best in the league and except for injury might well have been in another Pro Bowl. If the author doesn't understand why a defense works, why is someone paying him to write for them.

As to the offense, Warner’s health is a gamble. James will not benefit from the line unless the coaching improvement is marked. However, he will benefit from the number of quality receivers on the field and he will likely get 1200 yards rushing and a few hundred more receiving.

The tight ends will prove valuable in the second half of the season, especially in red zone situations.

Finally, I have no idea what Rackers would have had to have done to justify giving him an “A.” Apparently having arguably the greatest regular season of any place kicker in history wasn’t enough. At least that part was worth a good laugh.

This article is much like the kid in high school who ends up with nearly the right answer in math class, but does the problem in the wrong way and just gets lucky. No offense to the guy who posted this, but I’m glad you spent your money and not mine if this is typical of their analysis.
 

CardShark

DEAL WITH IT!
Joined
Jan 19, 2004
Posts
2,584
Reaction score
0
Location
Florence, Arizona
Wide receiver: The stats of Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin were virtually identical in 2005. Both had over 100 catches, each had in excess of 1,400 yards. We like Fitzgerald a little bit more than Boldin, so we'll give Larry an A and Boldin an A-.

Boldin missed a couple of games and still had nearly matched Fitz in stats. How could you not give him an A.

Quarterback: Kurt Warner still has plenty of name recognition, and with all of the hype surrounding the team this year he's certain to be drafted higher than his remaining ability merits. Don't fall for it -- he hasn't played 16 games since 2001, and this likely will be his last season as the Week One starter. He gets a C. (And it might be a good idea to throw a late-round lasso around Matt Leinart, especially in a keeper league.)

Granted you still have to be concerned about Warner getting hurt, just as you do with every QB in the league. How many actually played every game last year? Warner showed he still is very capable and will be even better if the line does a better job blocking and opponents respect that James is coming out of the backfield.

So what did the Cards do in the offseason to improve an offensive line that paved the way for only 1,138 rushing yards in 2005, nearly 200 yards behind the No. 31 team? They signed a guy that the Texans gave up on. (They also selected Deuce Lutui in the second round of the draft, going with a guard at a time when it might have made more sense to take a tackle.)

How about changing the line coach to someone who knows what they're doing? That could be the biggest difference maker this year.


How chronically bad have the Cardinals been? But for the 16-team tournament that the league threw together at the end of the strike-shortened 1982 season, the Cards have qualified for the playoffs only once in the last 30 years.

Why do they insist on looking so far back in the past? Why can't they just focus on what's happened in the past 3 years? Ever since Michael has taken control of this team, their moves have been unprecedented for the Cards. First they got hold of their salary cap issues and have become one of the better teams at managing it. Then they hired a legitimate head coach in Green which enabled them to begin purging this team of bad players and an even worse atmosphere of despair. Players on this team and around the league are finally looking at the Cards as legitimate. They've had 3 solid drafts. Their offseason moves for the last 2 years have been the best in the league, with this year topping the last.

On defense, the Cards signed tackle Kendrick Clancy, an underrated nose tackle who overachieved for the Giants in 2005. But Clancy isn't capable of carrying the entire line, and for a franchise that has rented a string of quality defensive ends over the past decade or so there's none of them left right now.

How can you say Clancy is underrated and that he overachieved in the same sentence? Echoing another post; Berry, Okeafor and Dockett are going to be killing QB's for any O-Line that buys into what the author is saying here.
 

Redheart

Stack 'em up!
Joined
Aug 9, 2002
Posts
4,391
Reaction score
3
Location
Mesa
SeattleCard said:
Well, give the guy credit for actually NOT picking the cards to make the playoffs. Most pundits are once again picking us for the playoffs.

Cards were the sexy pick last year, and they are again this year.

After last year, I approach this season with a 'wait and see' approach. I won't be fooled again like I was last year.

I think when you look at last year objectively, you could see why the talk was there. The Red Birds fell flat, but a LOT of that could be traced to a terrible season of injuries on both sides of the ball.

It is easy to look at this year's team and see a marked improvement on paper, know they are healthy, and be on solid ground by saying they have play-off potential.

I would'nt recommend getting carried away with the Kool-aide, but there is a real basis for high expectations.:cheers:
 

Pariah

H.S.
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Posts
35,345
Reaction score
18
Location
The Aventine
CardShark said:
Wide receiver: The stats of Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin were virtually identical in 2005. Both had over 100 catches, each had in excess of 1,400 yards. We like Fitzgerald a little bit more than Boldin, so we'll give Larry an A and Boldin an A-.

Boldin missed a couple of games and still had nearly matched Fitz in stats. How could you not give him an A.
To be fair, it's a fantasy football grade. So, missing a few games could be a ding.
 

gnomepete

Registered
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
325
Reaction score
0
Location
WV
Harry said:
I’m not sure of the source on this. I’m guessing Pro Football Weekly (PFT?). That would be no surprise, as they haven’t had anyone working there who knew anything about football since Joel Buschbaum died.

Harry,

1) PFT is actually Pro Football Talk

2) Although I usually agree about PFW - Pro Football Weekly - generally not having ANY clue about the Cards anyway, they had an article that at least agreed with my thoughts about last year and this: The team will go as far as the O-line takes them . . .

http://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/NFL/NFC/NFC+West/Arizona/Features/2006/arkush062706.htm

3) Rackers sets a league FG record A N D has the strongest leg in the league and STILL gets a B ? ? ? ? Amazingly stupid!

Pete
 
Last edited:

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,497
Reaction score
34,503
Location
Charlotte, NC
Harry said:
I’m not sure of the source on this. I’m guessing Pro Football Weekly (PFT?). That would be no surprise, as they haven’t had anyone working there who knew anything about football since Joel Buschbaum died.

Profootballtalk.com not Pro Football Weekly.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,497
Reaction score
34,503
Location
Charlotte, NC

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
Rackers sets a league FG record A N D has the strongest leg in the league and STILL gets a B ? ? ? ? Amazingly stupid!

Maybe he docked him half a grade for only kicking 20 extra points.:D
 

slanidrac16

ASFN Icon
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
15,876
Reaction score
16,476
Location
Plainfield, Il.
Redheart said:
I think when you look at last year objectively, you could see why the talk was there. The Red Birds fell flat, but a LOT of that could be traced to a terrible season of injuries on both sides of the ball.

It is easy to look at this year's team and see a marked improvement on paper, know they are healthy, and be on solid ground by saying they have play-off potential.

I would'nt recommend getting carried away with the Kool-aide, but there is a real basis for high expectations.:cheers:

When you look at the talk last year I would have to say there was more blind optimism.
1.Last year at rb we had Shipp returning from a terrible injury and a rookie in J.J. Arrington. This year, Edgerrin James.
2.Last year we had Kurt Warner. This year we have Warner , but he,the wr and the entire offense will head into this season with 1 year under their collective belt with the same coordinator.
3.Injuries. Of coarse we had no idea the amount of injuries we were to incur last year, so I would like to think the O-line will improve based on that alone, not to mention we have a real o-line coach.
I see more reasons for optimism this year than ANY year since the Cards flew to Arizona.
 

PortlandCardFan

Registered User
Joined
Oct 1, 2002
Posts
10,206
Reaction score
4
Location
Portland, OR
In an age of parity, which has entailed plenty of quick turnarounds and even faster falls from grace (e.g., the Super Bowl loser hasn't made it back to the playoffs in the next season for five straight years), the Cardinals have found a way to avoid playing beyond Week Seventeen since 1998.

That's the longest current drought for any NFL franchise.
Day late, and a dollar short but...

Doesn't Detroit hold this?
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,291
Reaction score
11,925
In an age of parity, which has entailed plenty of quick turnarounds and even faster falls from grace (e.g., the Super Bowl loser hasn't made it back to the playoffs in the next season for five straight years), the Cardinals have found a way to avoid playing beyond Week Seventeen since 1998.

That's the longest current drought for any NFL franchise.

This is the year that changes though. Seattle is in what may be the weakest division in football, (close to the NFC North) and they could stumble in the playoffs. The only way that they do not make it, is if Alexander misses most of the games.
 

MadCardDisease

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
20,824
Reaction score
14,840
Location
Chandler, Az
Remember these grades are Fantasy Values for this year.

I'm guessing that Rackers got a B+ because the Author thought that he won't be kicking as many Field goals as he did last year. That's because we will be scoring more TDs this year. This is a good thing! We don't want our kicker to be the top fantasy scorer! That would mean we are not scoring TDs again.
 
Last edited:

DakotaCardsFan

Making time travel possible
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Posts
524
Reaction score
39
Location
A few miles north.
MadCardDisease said:
Remember these grades are Fantasy Values for this year.

I'm guessing that Rackers got a B+ because the Author thought that he won't be kicking as many Field goals as he did last year. That's because we will be scoring more TDs this year. This is a good thing! We don't want our kicker to be the top fantasy scorer! That would mean we are not scoring TDs again.

Yes, but the theme for the entire article is how the Cards haven't done enough to fix the problems and how they're destined for a similar year as the last two.
 

MadCardDisease

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
20,824
Reaction score
14,840
Location
Chandler, Az
DakotaCardsFan said:
Yes, but the theme for the entire article is how the Cards haven't done enough to fix the problems and how they're destined for a similar year as the last two.

I disagree. I think the article has some merit. Our offensive line was the weakness of the team last year and we didn't do much to address it.

They clearly state that the Seahawks most likely will win the division. How can anyone argue against that. They also mention that the Cardinals best bet at making the playoffs is with a wild card birth. Which I also agree with. I don't see the Cardinals winning the division this year. I think we are on the bubble of making the playoffs with a wild card birth much like this article suggests.

The only thing I disagree with is some of the coments on the defense. I think they missed the mark on our DEs.
 
Last edited:

DakotaCardsFan

Making time travel possible
Joined
Sep 17, 2004
Posts
524
Reaction score
39
Location
A few miles north.
MadCardDisease said:
I disagree. I think the article has some merit. Our offensive line was the weakness of the team last year and we didn't do much to address it.

They clearly state that the Seahawks most likely will win the division. How can anyone argue against that. They also mention that the Cardinals best bet at making the playoffs is with a wild card birth. Which I also agree with. I don't see the Cardinals winning the division this year. I think we are on the bubble of making the playoffs with a wild card birth much like this article suggests.

The only thing I disagree with is some of the coments on the defense. I think they missed the mark on our DEs.

I agree that they got some things right, specifically the o-line issues (a real shocker there...)

My point is that Rackers kicked a ton of field goals in part due to franchise record accuraccy, but mainly because we were lousy on short-yardage and goal line situations with no running game. The author projects little or no change to this problem:

BACH said:
So what did the Cards do in the offseason to improve an offensive line that paved the way for only 1,138 rushing yards in 2005, nearly 200 yards behind the No. 31 team? They signed a guy that the Texans gave up on. (They also selected Deuce Lutui in the second round of the draft, going with a guard at a time when it might have made more sense to take a tackle.)

....

And yet they still found a way to lose six more games than they won.

Thus, we think the trend will continue, at least for another year...


If the trend continues for another year, Rackers will put up big numbers again.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
556,123
Posts
5,433,567
Members
6,329
Latest member
cardinals2025
Top