Defense - The Orange Mane

alamosa bronco · 02-01-2009, 04:02 PM

Sorry if a thread is started but don't the cardinals defense look like Denvers?

Bronx33 · 02-01-2009, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alamosa bronco

Sorry if a thread is started but don't the cardinals defense look like Denvers?

Post in the game thread.

TheReverend · 02-01-2009, 04:24 PM

Talent wise, sure. Coaching wise, absolutely not.

enjolras · 02-01-2009, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Talent wise, sure. Coaching wise, absolutely not.

The Cardinals are 100x stronger at safety. They're running a very similar scheme, but they've been able to get help over the top.

The speed of that Cromartie kid helps too.

TonyR · 02-01-2009, 07:08 PM

No, the Cardinals have considerably more talent on D than we do. Dansby, Wilson, Dockett, Rodgers-Cromartie in particular.

Popps · 02-01-2009, 07:28 PM

Yea, we'd be lucky to play half as well as Arizona's D played in the post-season.

But, the high-flying passing offense was trumped in the big game by the #1 defense.

No surprises here.

Popps · 02-01-2009, 07:36 PM

That said... great games by both QBs, in different ways. Warner made a bad pass and Pitt's D made a few more big plays.

Great game, imo.

snowspot66 · 02-01-2009, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

Yea, we'd be lucky to play half as well as Arizona's D played in the post-season.

But, the high-flying passing offense was trumped in the big game by the #1 defense.

No surprises here.

Actually the offense did pretty well I'd say. Even when down. Pittsburgh got one bad play from Warner. Other than the first quarter they were pretty much outplayed.

ZachKC · 02-01-2009, 08:55 PM

It was a lot of fun watching Wilson play in the post season. He gets after it.

Rock Chalk · 02-01-2009, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snowspot66

Actually the offense did pretty well I'd say. Even when down. Pittsburgh got one bad play from Warner. Other than the first quarter they were pretty much outplayed.

Agree.

Not sure what Popps was watching but Arizona for the most part did what they wanted. A bad play call hurt them in the end but Pitts #1 defense didnt really stop Arizona's offense. Arizona's offense scored more than Pitt's offense and should have scored even more but for one bad play call that Pitt took advantage of.

Pitts offense managed 20 points and I thought the Cardinals D played excellent most of the game.

Popps · 02-01-2009, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rock Chalk

Agree.

Not sure what Popps was watching but Arizona for the most part did what they wanted. A bad play call hurt them in the end but Pitts #1 defense didnt really stop Arizona's offense..

Alec,

Arizona's first six drives featured 1 TD, one INT and four punts. I wouldn't exactly say they had their way with Pitt.

A defensive play turned the game around... plain and simple. Call it a poor throw, but a talented defender not only held onto the ball but made a phenomenal runback. That's what defensive talent brings. It's the little things... the little plays. (Or big plays, as it turns out.)

Arizona's offense had a good night when all was said and done. My point wasn't that Pitt's D dominated the game, because they didn't. The point was simply that it's no surprise the team with the better defense won tonight.

It just has a way of working out that way.

New England had the fancy passing stats last year, too. Same result.

NFLBRONCO · 02-01-2009, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alamosa bronco

Sorry if a thread is started but don't the cardinals defense look like Denvers?

Two reasons Ari D isn't like Denvers

1. Denver can't stop anyone
2. Denver would have given up 40+ points not 27

Florida_Bronco · 02-01-2009, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

Alec,

Arizona's first six drives featured 1 TD, one INT and four punts. I wouldn't exactly say they had their way with Pitt.

A defensive play turned the game around... plain and simple. Call it a poor throw, but a talented defender not only held onto the ball but made a phenomenal runback. That's what defensive talent brings. It's the little things... the little plays. (Or big plays, as it turns out.)

Arizona's offense had a good night when all was said and done. My point wasn't that Pitt's D dominated the game, because they didn't. The point was simply that it's no surprise the team with the better defense won tonight.

It just has a way of working out that way.

New England had the fancy passing stats last year, too. Same result.

The Steeler's offense bailed out the defense with that last drive.

Popps · 02-01-2009, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

The Steeler's offense bailed out the defense with that last drive.

Well, or.... Arizona's D didn't step up and seal the game.

You say tomato...

I was rooting for AZ. They were a great story, but I had no doubt this would turn out how it did.

Props to both teams for nice post-season runs.

azbroncfan · 02-01-2009, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

The Steeler's offense bailed out the defense with that last drive.

They aren't even in the game if there isn't a pick 6 with no time on the clock before the half. Did you even realize the Pitt D scored as many pts as AZ did for the first 3 quarters? Even if Harrison picks it and gets tackled AZ would of been up by more than 3 in the 4th quarter.

Florida_Bronco · 02-01-2009, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

Well, or.... Arizona's D didn't step up and seal the game.

You say tomato...

Valid point, but I'd say the Steelers making plays when needed and good play calling was more important than a few slip ups by the Cards defense.

Florida_Bronco · 02-01-2009, 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azbroncfan

They aren't even in the game if there isn't a pick 6 with no time on the clock before the half. Did you even realize the Pitt D scored as many pts as AZ did for the first 3 quarters? Even if Harrison picks it and gets tackled AZ would of been up by more than 3 in the 4th quarter.

And then that same defense let the Cards come right back while committing stupid penalties to make it that much easier, so the offense had to go out there and score the winning touchdown.

ZONA · 02-01-2009, 10:54 PM

The INT was the difference in that game. Most likely, it was a 14 point swing.

Take away that INT and Arizona wins that game probably by 10 points.

And what's with those refs - I don't think I have ever seen a Superbowl where the stripes called so many ticky tack penalties. That roughing the passer call was total BS. And not just in this game, I've seen that called alot this year. A 250+ pound defender running full speed 1 step away from a QB and he is supposed to just stop on a dime? Get real NFL. I think a defender can see the QB getting rid of the pass and could probably avoid wrapping up and tackling him or a vicious hit, but he won't be able to avoid contact. I think they should allow a 2 handed push within 2 steps. You are still protecting the QB because a push isn't gonna get him hurt and you are not penalizing a guy for not being able to defy the laws of physics.

azbroncfan · 02-01-2009, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

And then that same defense let the Cards come right back while committing stupid penalties to make it that much easier, so the offense had to go out there and score the winning touchdown.

If your defense gives up 21 pts and scores 7 a football team should win 90+ percent of their games. Pitts offense let the defense down 2X by not punching it in for 7pts on 2 to goal situations from the 1 and 3 yard line. Actually they had three chances but AZ bailed them out with a penalty giving them another 4 downs.

Popps · 02-01-2009, 11:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Florida_Bronco

And then that same defense let the Cards come right back while committing stupid penalties to make it that much easier, so the offense had to go out there and score the winning touchdown.

Well, it's funny... because I get flamed if I say that defense wins championships, and I got flamed for saying Ben R. was a great QB. (Even if I don't personally care for him.)

So, I'm not sure what people want to hear around this place sometimes.

But, Rothlisberger really is a championship QB. People confuse elite statistics for elite QBs. He's simply got the make-up of a champion. I mean, it's pretty much beyond arguing, at this point. That final drive and TD throw was just as clutch as it comes, but because his stats wouldn't have won people their fantasy football games... your average fan has a hard time looking at him and understanding what they're seeing.

He's no John Elway, but he's a great QB and an absolute gamer.

Again, I had this argument with people years ago about Tom Brady. At that time, his stats were just above normal and people insisted he was an average QB. He obviously was much more than that.

I don't even like Ben R., but the ****er can play. He does so many little things in a game that don't make the stat sheets.

Yes, Pitt's O deserved tons of credit for that final drive. It was an offensive game. My earlier point was just that teams with great defenses always seem to play the trump card. Happened last year... and happened again this year.

Two years in a row, two big-stat passing teams sent home losers.

enjolras · 02-01-2009, 11:29 PM

Quote:

Two years in a row, two big-stat passing teams sent home losers.

Yet in both those years those offenses had their teams in position to win the game with under 3 minutes to play.

In both those years the offenses on those 'defensive' teams had to make huge plays to win the game.

I'll say it again: well constructed teams (NOT DEFENSE) wins championships.

Popps · 02-01-2009, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjolras

Yet in both those years those offenses had their teams in position to win the game with under 3 minutes to play.

In both those years the offenses on those 'defensive' teams had to make huge plays to win the game.

I'll say it again: well constructed teams (NOT DEFENSE) wins championships.

Well, the Pats are well-constructed... obviously. They've won a few. Balance is obviously a must.

The point is, defense remains the trump-card in close games. It happened again this year.

The #1 D took it all down.

The #1, #2 and #3 defense made the final four.

Drek · 02-02-2009, 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popps

Well, the Pats are well-constructed... obviously. They've won a few. Balance is obviously a must.

The point is, defense remains the trump-card in close games. It happened again this year.

The #1 D took it all down.

The #1, #2 and #3 defense made the final four.

And last year you could make the same statement about offensive teams making the playoffs.

Its a cyclical league. Some of the best offensive teams got a big handicap this year and fell off the wagon.

The real difference here is a great offensive team can literally be thrown out of SB contention and possibly even playoff contention with a single player getting hurt. The Patriots aren't the only example of this. SD is an entirely different team all season if they have a healthy LT, and the Colts would likely have had a much better playoff showing if Manning would've been healthy to start the season, since they probably would've have gone 3-4 to start the season and could've won the division. The Colts at home are a hell of a lot tougher than the Colts on the road.

Every NFL season is a war of attrition and you can plug and play on defense much easier than you can on offense. If Arizona lost Fitzgerald do you think they could've beaten any other playoff team? But with him they make the SB. But would Pittsburgh still be nearly as good if they didn't have Harrison or Polamalu? Probably still real solid.

Building an elite offense has that huge risk, losing your star QB, RB, WR, etc. and your team could completely fall apart. But it also brings the same huge reward we saw from AZ tonight. The Steelers averaged 13.9 points a game defensively, the Cards averaged 30 points a game offensively. If AZ's offense and defense each manage to not make any one of a half dozen drive killing or extending plays, or if Warner doesn't throw his worst pick of the entire season (and not because it got taken back, but because he'd dialed in on Fitzgerald and tried to force it when even a quick double take would've dispelled the notion that he'd be open) they probably put up theirs.

I'd go so far as to say that the #1 defense in the NFL this year got manhandled by a very one dimensional offense all game. The difference makers were a ton of stupid penalties by a very immature Cards team and Roethslithberger being a flat out winner. I don't think he's the best passer in the game for sure, but he sure does remind you of Terry Bradshaw (who irritates the hell out of me FYI). When a play needs to stay alive or be kept alive a little longer he finds a way to make it happen. He's a rare type of player and Pittsburgh is lucky to have him.

Killericon · 02-02-2009, 03:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NFLBRONCO

Two reasons Ari D isn't like Denvers

1. Denver can't stop anyone
2. Denver would have given up 40+ points not 27

Arizona's D only gave up 20 points.

cutthemdown · 02-02-2009, 03:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend

Talent wise, sure. Coaching wise, absolutely not.

talent wise. They have more talent then us by far.

I'd say about 10 of the Cards players would start on Denvers defense. Bailey when healthy would make the squad and thats about it.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-01-2009, 04:02 PM	#1
alamosa bronco Just Drafted Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 9	Defense Sorry if a thread is started but don't the cardinals defense look like Denvers?

02-01-2009, 04:24 PM	#3
TheReverend www.PatrickTurley.org ^ buy this... twice Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 32,966 Adopt-a-Bronco: Mike Shanahan	Talent wise, sure. Coaching wise, absolutely not.

02-01-2009, 07:08 PM	#5
TonyR Franchise Poster Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Mid-Atlantic Posts: 15,547	No, the Cardinals have considerably more talent on D than we do. Dansby, Wilson, Dockett, Rodgers-Cromartie in particular.

02-01-2009, 07:28 PM	#6
Popps TEAM FIRST. Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 29,785	Yea, we'd be lucky to play half as well as Arizona's D played in the post-season. But, the high-flying passing offense was trumped in the big game by the #1 defense. No surprises here.

02-01-2009, 07:36 PM	#7
Popps TEAM FIRST. Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles, CA Posts: 29,785	That said... great games by both QBs, in different ways. Warner made a bad pass and Pitt's D made a few more big plays. Great game, imo.

02-01-2009, 08:55 PM	#9
ZachKC For The Glory Of The City Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Kansas City Posts: 9,665 Adopt-a-Bronco: Eddie Kennison	It was a lot of fun watching Wilson play in the post season. He gets after it.

02-01-2009, 10:54 PM	#18
ZONA Ring of Famer Liquid greatness in every packet Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,363 Adopt-a-Bronco: Chris Harris	The INT was the difference in that game. Most likely, it was a 14 point swing. Take away that INT and Arizona wins that game probably by 10 points. And what's with those refs - I don't think I have ever seen a Superbowl where the stripes called so many ticky tack penalties. That roughing the passer call was total BS. And not just in this game, I've seen that called alot this year. A 250+ pound defender running full speed 1 step away from a QB and he is supposed to just stop on a dime? Get real NFL. I think a defender can see the QB getting rid of the pass and could probably avoid wrapping up and tackling him or a vicious hit, but he won't be able to avoid contact. I think they should allow a 2 handed push within 2 steps. You are still protecting the QB because a push isn't gonna get him hurt and you are not penalizing a guy for not being able to defy the laws of physics.