"Truly bad Arizona Cardinals..."

[JC_AZ]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/24/SPG112HJ19.DTL

Anyone esle see the irony in the name of the reporter and the location? I'm just sayin... I hope we CRUSH the stinkin SF 49ers

You must be registered for see images attach

Nancy Gay

Archive | E-mail |

You must be registered for see images

Russell, offense still a work in progress


Nancy Gay
Sunday, August 24, 2008

You must be registered for see images attach

Print

You must be registered for see images attach

E-mail

You must be registered for see images

del.icio.us

You must be registered for see images

Digg

You must be registered for see images

Technorati

You must be registered for see images

Reddit

You must be registered for see images

Facebook

You must be registered for see images

Slashdot

You must be registered for see images

Fark

You must be registered for see images

Newsvine

You must be registered for see images

Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Buzz

You must be registered for see images attach

Share

You must be registered for see images attach

Comments (16)

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

Georgia (default)
Verdana
Times New Roman
Arial

You must be registered for see images

Font | Size:

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images attach

You must be registered for see images

(08-23) 22:15 PDT -- JaMarcus Russell and Zach Miller make a pretty good quarterback-tight end combo. We know this now after three exhibition games.



Images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

You must be registered for see images

View More Images

Nancy Gay

• <LI id=col_dropin_/c/a/2008/08/24/SPG112HJ19.DTL style="DISPLAY: none">Russell, offense still a work in progress 08.23.08 <LI id=col_dropin_/c/a/2008/08/22/MN0L12G19T.DTL>Gene Upshaw dies: Raiders' star, Hall of Famer 08.21.08 <LI id=col_dropin_/c/a/2008/08/20/SPK112EIAC.DTL>Snyder injured 08.19.08
• Smith not ready to look ahead 08.19.08

More Nancy Gay »






Problem is, so does the rest of the NFL.
Eventually, the promise of Russell's incredible arm strength and the nimble feet attached to that powerful 6-foot-6, 260-pound frame will come true. We saw glimpses of that potential Saturday night at the Coliseum, despite the really deceiving 24-0 shutout by the truly bad Arizona Cardinals.
How, you might ask, could the Raiders possibly whiff so badly in a game in which Cardinals third-year quarterback Matt Leinart stumbled around and tossed three come-and-get-'em interceptions in the first half?
How could Russell, who completed 50 percent of his passes, throw for 140 yards in three quarters and the Raiders have nothing to show for it?
Simple: This is not a passing offense. It's nowhere close to being one.
Russell tossed an interception under backside pressure. He was sacked four times for 46 yards. His favorite guy, Miller, was smothered all night. He saw at least three balls dropped - one, in the end zone by a veteran.
"Unfortunately, I think that I saw what I already knew," coach Lane Kiffin said, "and that's if we just throw the ball around, you're going to get penalties. You're going to get your quarterback hit. He's going to run around a lot, and we're going to be in trouble."
A pro style passing attack requires solid pass blocking and quality receivers.
More specifically, it requires receivers who can get open, catch the balls that are thrown to them, and then run with the ball once they make a catch.
Kiffin promised we would see a semblance of passing attack in his team's all-important third exhibition contest, a game that would see Russell play beyond halftime.
Kiffin also vowed that embattled wide receiver Javon Walker, the "I'm in-I'm out" $16 million investment, would be the primary target early. Translation - Walker, who tried to walk out of training camp early but was tackled by owner Al Davis, was being commanded to make plays after tallying zero catches and three drops in two games.
For the most part Saturday, Walker complied, catching four passes for 60 yards, including a 27-yarder in the second quarter. That reception produced an anomaly. Walker caught the ball 16 yards downfield and ran for another nine yards.
The first half, the entire Raiders' first-team offense - minus receiver Drew Carter, who was helped off the field early after sustaining what the Raiders say is a season-ending knee injury - combined for 90 passing yards, with 19 of those yards coming after the catch.
Miller has been one of Russell's favorite targets through much of preseason, which has seen a heavy emphasis on utilizing the power backfield of Darren McFadden, Justin Fargas and Michael Bush. But the Cardinals defense doubled up early on Miller, and his two catches for 16 yards were hard-fought.
Russell's passing assignments had primarily been short dump-offs to backup fullback Oren O'Neal, who left the game with a season-ending ankle injury on the opening kickoff. Miller has been big enough to get open on outlet throws.
Saturday night, with O'Neal and Carter gone, the Raiders tried to debut a real passing offense. It failed miserably, producing 111 of the team's sorry total of 165 total yards. But don't blame the quarterback.
Sure, Russell moved around too soon, a little too much. His 5-of-7 passing start dissolved into a scrambling mess at times.
Look at what's around him.
E-mail Nancy Gay at [email protected].

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Tell us all about it Nancy.

You experiences out on the football field when you.......wait sorry.

Well you well known expertise of the gam.......wait sorry.


Just tell your husband that he did a bad job telling you what to write.


:ducksforcoveroversexistremark:

 

[Shane]

Woman or not its good locker room material for game one. The player can read what is written about them in the bay area.

 

[Mulli]

Hey Cards, it is "truly bad" to lose to the 9ers twice in one year.

 

[Pariah]

Can we put a moratorium on getting worked up when the press says something bad about the cardinals until they actually prove on the football field that they're a good football team?

The Cardinals' performance for the past 60 years have implicitly given every beat writer the authority to call them whatever the heck they want...except good.

 

[abomb]

Can we put a moratorium on getting worked up when the press says something bad about the cardinals until they actually prove on the football field that they're a good football team?

The Cardinals' performance for the past 60 years have implicitly given every beat writer the authority to call them whatever the heck they want...except good.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

Nancy needs to learn that 16+9 does not equal 27.

including a 27-yarder in the second quarter. That reception produced an anomaly. Walker caught the ball 16 yards downfield and ran for another nine yards.

 

[Shane]

Can we put a moratorium on getting worked up when the press says something bad about the cardinals until they actually prove on the football field that they're a good football team?

The Cardinals' performance for the past 60 years have implicitly given every beat writer the authority to call them whatever the heck they want...except good.

I usually agree that writers have the leeway to call us whatever they want. I would also agree if she would have worded it from a historical viewpoint.

But to call us truly terrible as of right now is a tad over the top IMO. Dont hurt my feelings none. But is always good for week one locker material IMHO.

 

[Pariah]

When the starting QB throws 3 picks in a little more than a half of football, I think it's fair.

 

[Shane]

When the starting QB throws 3 picks in a little more than a half of football, I think it's fair.

Matt Leinart doesnt make us a truly bad team. That makes one truly bad QB

 

[football karma]

Can we put a moratorium on getting worked up when the press says something bad about the cardinals until they actually prove on the football field that they're a good football team?

The Cardinals' performance for the past 60 years have implicitly given every beat writer the authority to call them whatever the heck they want...except good.

here, here


notice that nobody call Tampa Bay the "yuk-a-neers" anymore?

three winning seasons and a Superbowl win can erase a lot of bad history pretty quickly

 

[jefftheshark]

I'm taking it that she said "bad" in the good way, like when Michael Jackson sang, "I'm Bad!!!" but it really meant that he was great.


:crickets:


Okaaaaayyyyy, perhaps that wasn't the best example, but you know what I mean.


JTS

 

[blindseyed]

I'm taking it that she said "bad" in the good way, like when Michael Jackson sang, "I'm Bad!!!" but it really meant that he was great.


:crickets:


Okaaaaayyyyy, perhaps that wasn't the best example, but you know what I mean.


JTS

The scary things is that I understood your entire post....

 

[Lloydian]

You know, in the wake of the game, I explained to friends that 1) it's preseason, and 2) the Raiders are dreadful. I just find it humorous that a reporter for the Raiders can seriously write that any other team is "truly bad." Maybe describing the Raiders as dreadful has been overly complimentary.

 

[Linderbee]

Tell us all about it Nancy.

You experiences out on the football field when you.......wait sorry.

Well you well known expertise of the gam.......wait sorry.


Just tell your husband that he did a bad job telling you what to write.


:ducksforcoveroversexistremark:

Oh, REALLY???


You should hear me rant about damn women reporters on the sidelines. It's a man's sport. Stupid women need to shut up & report on tennis or WNBA or something.


I think JG may hit me for that one, but it's how I feel. Don't want to see no damn woman commenting...don't want to read no stupid woman's opinion.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

If actual football experience was a requirement to report on football, we would be missing a ton of quality male journalism as well. Being a bad reporter isn't a sex based thing.

 

[Duckjake]

If actual football experience was a requirement to report on football, we would be missing a ton of quality male journalism as well. Being a bad reporter isn't a sex based thing.

Not too many males who haven't played at least some form of football, back yard, Pop Warner, Middle School, High School, Rec league flag, table top with a folded napkin, etc. You can't say that for most women.

On the other hand I wouldn't have any problem with a woman's take on football despite their never having actually played if they were selected for their knowledge of the game instead of just their looks.

But I'll take a beautiful dumb woman over a smart ugly one any day. That's why we have radio.

 

[CardsFan88]

lol 'truly bad'

True Leinart stunk it up, true we lost to the niners the year before

But...

We did beat the niners twice the year before it 2006, and also twice in 2005.

Either way we were 8-8 last year, 8-6 against teams not from SF. I don't think anyone can say a team with that recent background, which just floored the Raiders in a (meaningless) preseason game is 'truly bad'.

I guess it was our 'truly bad' defense that stopped them in the redzone time and time again. I guess it was the 'truly bad' pick by Dansby, or the 'truly bad' hit by AW. Or maybe it was the 'truly bad' ol and rb play that shredded their defense. Among many others 'truly bad' plays made by our 'truly bad' players.

Of course I agree that we have to actually win, and don't want to be the perennial team that should rise preseason prediction that doesn't rise, but given the recent metrics to judge this team by, a 'truly bad' team it is not.

We've been a bad team many years, and a 'truly bad' team only a handful. Truly bad is 3-13, 2-14, or less imo (some may say 4-12), and/or a team that has no talent, no rising stars, no hope for the future whatsoever.

I don't think anyone with a decent level of football knowledge can state a case that we fall into that category. But somehow this writer thinks so. Even then shouldn't she have to look at the raiders coming off of a 4-12 season in 2007? (also 2-14 in 2006, 4-12 in 2005, 5-11 in 2004, and 4-12 in 2003?)

Of course I feel this is the best team we've had talent wise compared to the rest of the NFL since I started following NFL football when the Cards moved here 20 years ago. But I don't expect others to notice that so much. But we were 8-8, and it is almost just as laughable to say were are 'truly bad' considering we were 8-8 as being 'superbowl favorites' considering we were 8-8. Both extremes are just as laughable.

The only thing 'truly bad' is her football analysis IQ.

Great BB material, as she pulled the same trick shoddy reporters a breath away from the unemployment line cling to time and time again. When your team sucks, bash the other team and make it appear they are even worse than you.

We've been an easy mark over the years so here's to making the Niners stop one in the organization perception realignment campaign. Courtesy of SF sportswriters.

 

[Carddan]

The author displayed ignorance. She can write "truly bad" about the Cardinals in the Bay Area and get no flack or arguement, so she does. I do not care what she writes as long as she's writing that the "truly bad" Cardinals kicked the butts of the sacred 49ers in about 10 days.

 

[Skkorpion]

Nancy Gay wrote the article for a Bay area target audience about a Bay area team. From that perspective, I thought her analysis of the Raiders' passing offense was excellent.

She took a gratuitous shot at the Cards, without bothering to do much research on our defense. So what? It's not as if there isn't any history on her side.

 

[NeverSayDieFan]

I registered w/the S.F. Chronicle and sent "Nancy"...

a lil' "note". Nowadays, when I see someone take a cheap-shot at us, I call 'em on it. Kornheiser, Shrager, ESPN, whomever... They "fire" at us, I "fire" back. Just letting all of them know that we have a lil' "surprise" in store for the NFL this year! GO CARDS!!

 

[TigToad]

In fairness to her, I think the annomoly she was talking about was that 16+9 doesn't = 27 but he was given a 27 yard reception on the play.

I know I spelled anomoly incorrectly, probably twice now.

Nancy needs to learn that 16+9 does not equal 27.

 

[black]

Nancy Gay wrote the article for a Bay area target audience about a Bay area team. From that perspective, I thought her analysis of the Raiders' passing offense was excellent.

She took a gratuitous shot at the Cards, without bothering to do much research on our defense. So what? It's not as if there isn't any history on her side.

 

[Hog'sWad271]

Truly bad?

I understand the importance of a team's history is important -- when evaluating a team's history. This article was supposedly an evaluation of the Raiders in 2008 vs. the Cardinals in 2008.

THIS Cardinal team, not the 1950 or 1965 or 1978 team, was 8-8 last year. 8 wins and 8 losses with massive injuries. We lost two or three significant players, enjoy Wilson, Berry, Leinart etc. returning from IR, added 5-10 significant free agents, and had a super strong draft. Radical assumption here, but Night Train Lane, Jim Hart or Stump Mitchell do not play for this team and Bob Holloway is not the head coach, so whatever happened 80 years ago etc. is not relevant to the discussion.

Unless she thinks 8-8 is "truly bad" or she is so deaf, dumb, blind and ignorant that she thinks the Cardinals' current roster is 3 to 4 wins less talented in net worth than last season, to refer to us as an obvious last-place team is very lazy and incompetent journalism.

Get the egg ready for various faces. Raw egg. Jumbo A-grade. Find the perfect-twelve-eggs guy from Clerks and buy his best assortment. Week 1 is soon upon us.

 

[Jersey Girl]

Oh, REALLY???


You should hear me rant about damn women reporters on the sidelines. It's a man's sport. Stupid women need to shut up & report on tennis or WNBA or something.


I think JG may hit me for that one, but it's how I feel. Don't want to see no damn woman commenting...don't want to read no stupid woman's opinion.

Everyone's entitled to their opinion. In general, I believe their can be good reporting and journalism regardless of topic or gender.

I have more I could say, but I'll stop there.