Problem on "D"

Cardforlife

Veteran
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Posts
240
Reaction score
0
Location
Oh Canada!
The cards biggest and really only problem last night was there weak linebacking group. Not one of them stuck out as playing well. They were getting killed on coverage. The D line was solid and got some good push our atarting corners weren't really getting beat it was underneath stuff where the lbs need to pick up a back or te. I hope Dansby will be back soon.
 

Duckjake

LEGACY MEMBER
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Jun 10, 2002
Posts
32,190
Reaction score
317
Location
Texas
Cardforlife said:
The cards biggest and really only problem last night was there weak linebacking group. Not one of them stuck out as playing well. They were getting killed on coverage. The D line was solid and got some good push our atarting corners weren't really getting beat it was underneath stuff where the lbs need to pick up a back or te. I hope Dansby will be back soon.

They also still have a bad habit of running into the wrong gap or into blockers.

I wonder if that's something that's been passed down from one generation of Cardinal linebackers to the next?
 

LVCARDFREAK

In the league 20 years!
Joined
Mar 3, 2003
Posts
6,360
Reaction score
1
Location
Vegas
I thought we blitzed from the cb and safety position way too much last night and for the most part it wasn't effective. That puts a lot of pressure on your LB's when they have to play a zone and cover twice as much field as they should have to
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
39,065
Reaction score
31,432
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Did anyone see Lance Mitchell at all in this game, either? That cat better start showing up.
 

AntSports Steve

Cardinals Future GM
Joined
May 16, 2002
Posts
1,119
Reaction score
0
Location
Scottsdale, Arizona
I think the team purposely didn't gameplan for NE and they played off in coverage just as a general purpose. I mean, on 3rd and 1, who plays 10 yards off their man?

I also think the safety and corner blitzes were just so the other teams have more tape to watch. I think things will be a lot different in the real season.
 

slanidrac16

ASFN Icon
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
16,282
Reaction score
17,278
Location
Plainfield, Il.
AntSports Steve said:
I think the team purposely didn't gameplan for NE and they played off in coverage just as a general purpose. I mean, on 3rd and 1, who plays 10 yards off their man?

I also think the safety and corner blitzes were just so the other teams have more tape to watch. I think things will be a lot different in the real season.

Funny, because I was thinking the same thing last night. I was also thinking that the purpose of these games is to evaluate different players and different plays and sometimes not letting the situation dictate, all while trying somewhat to win.
An example would be where we had 3rd and 3. Instead of calling the play where we would normally run behind Big and Wells, the play is called to go right. Yes we are trying to get a first down, no we are not going behind the strength of our line, and we utimately get to see how the right side of the o-line executes.
Another thing I got out of this game was just how good Tom Brady is. It's like Sterling Sharp said," Bradys favorite receiver is the OPEN receiver." He is like a surgeon, always seems to make the right decision and ALWAYS seems to get positive yards. He has the ability to make many defenses look inept.
 

Totally_Red

Air Raid Warning!
Joined
Apr 26, 2005
Posts
8,974
Reaction score
4,990
Location
Iowa
LVCARDFREAK said:
I thought we blitzed from the cb and safety position way too much last night and for the most part it wasn't effective. That puts a lot of pressure on your LB's when they have to play a zone and cover twice as much field as they should have to

Yeah, those blitzes were totally ineffective. For one thing, NE wisely went with long counts in obvious passing situation(since the refs obviously weren't going to call delay-of-game), and the Cardinals telegraphed each every blitz package they came with. The Patriots had no trouble picking them up, once they knew what was coming. Wilson and Rolle couldn't get off blocks. I mean they played patty-cake with the blocking back for 3-5 seconds while Brady had his tea and crumpets back there. The Cardinals need to consider some delayed blitzes IMO. Also, I'd like to think that Karlos Dansby would have been better at getting off the RB's blocks.

The above is just stating facts and not meant to be critical of Pendergast. Obviously, pre-season is meant for experiments and he was experimenting. Rolle may yet turn into a decent blitzer, but he sure didn't show it Saturday night. A successful CB blitz needs to have the element of surprise. Rolle tipped off that he was coming every time.
 

JeffGollin

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
20,472
Reaction score
3,056
Location
Holmdel, NJ
I'm less worried about the defense than I am our run blocking, because our defense has proved they can play aggressively but under control in the past (They just didn't do it vs. NE and part of the Steeler game). The problems can be fixed. More discipline and control. Better tackling mixed in with a continuation of aggressive scheming. It worked before; it should again.

Our run blocking is a different story, because our O-line has never proved that it can do the job and we can have no reason to believe otherwise until it gets its act together (if, in fact, it ever can).
 
Top