Pivotal Season?

Proximo

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 8, 2015
Posts
13,439
Reaction score
11,486
I still think Petzing is majorly at fault for the offense's lack of production.

He just doesn't want to take chances at all. Why I am not sure, it may be he doesn't trust Kyler, or it may be he just doesn't trust any QB to throw down the field. All I know is Kyler was much more effective throwing down field before he got here - so to me logically he is the reason.
 

CardNots

ASFN Addict
Joined
Sep 12, 2002
Posts
5,545
Reaction score
6,335
Location
Jenks, Oklahoma
Hi Harry, great writeup. Best I have seen on the Cardinals this year. We should improve with the easier schedule. Like most teams the season will be determined by how well the QB plays. I am not optimistic.
With the upgrades on defense playing same difficult schedule as last year would land you at least 10 wins. Add a little better health on the OL we easily make waves.

So the idea of doing better based on an easier schedule implies we need that?
 

Goodyear Card

Link Guy
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Posts
2,362
Reaction score
2,125
I still think Petzing is majorly at fault for the offense's lack of production.

He just doesn't want to take chances at all. Why I am not sure, it may be he doesn't trust Kyler, or it may be he just doesn't trust any QB to throw down the field. All I know is Kyler was much more effective throwing down field before he got here - so to me logically he is the reason.
Petzing has let Murray throw the ball deep, but Murray has thrown interceptions and then Petzing reverts to the ground game and short passing plays. Murray had a good deep ball when he was throwing to Hopkins. Since Hopkins left his deep ball has been poor.
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
19,981
Reaction score
19,161
Location
Modesto, California
With the upgrades on defense playing same difficult schedule as last year would land you at least 10 wins. Add a little better health on the OL we easily make waves.

So the idea of doing better based on an easier schedule implies we need that?
Imo... remove the injuries,...add the new talent we added this off season...and last season would have been 11 wins minimum.

So now we have the added talent. Our young guys from 24 have a years experience...and our injured players are back.
Even with a tougher schedule we should be expecting 10 wins in 25 as a floor...
But I am kinda expecting 12 wins assuming we don't get decimated by injuries.
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
19,981
Reaction score
19,161
Location
Modesto, California
Seems fairly mid to me (17 players had 10+ sacks in 2024; 35 had 8+ sacks). 12 would be excellent.
Yeah I kinda expect double digit sacks from sweat being back in this system...10 might even be disappointing...12 would be good...since he had 11 last time he played in this system.
15 is likely way too high an expectation though...
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,779
Reaction score
35,219
Location
Charlotte, NC
The Eagles have $25 million in effective cap space right now. I don't think the Eagles let those guys leave because they're bad; I think the Eagles let those guys leave because they're not that good.
Or they have much cheaper roster options and it leaves cap space open for future moves.
 

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
6,894
Reaction score
3,491
Location
Expat in Kuala Lumpur
The Eagles have $25 million in effective cap space right now. I don't think the Eagles let those guys leave because they're bad; I think the Eagles let those guys leave because they're not that good.
The more realistic reason would be that they do not want to have so much money tied up in a single position group and they have to extent two other players, who are both 1st rounders
 

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
6,894
Reaction score
3,491
Location
Expat in Kuala Lumpur
Thanks for the great write-up @Harry.

Super complex discussion IMO.

I think you are absolutely right in JC wanting to play ball controlled offense and do not see as big of a need to upgrade the offense.

But I also think there is more to it.

I think it’s fair to say that Kyler and Petzing left a lot to be desired last season. The weird thing for me is that you saw a glimpse of the less conservative approach. Reiman caught the very few balls thrown his way, but he was basicly never schemed or targeted.
We saw one game of Dortch being let loose with great showing very late in the season.
Zay Jones looked pretty decent at the end of the season when he was finally schemed and targeted.

I also feel there is a need for a deep threat on the team, but JC and MO doesn’t seem to share that opinion. Why is that?

Could it be that we only saw a very limited version of the offense, because the offense constantly had to play the TOP game to protect an overmatched defensive rosters?

What if Petzing had more options but was told to play it super conservative? The team was in all the games that were lost by playing conservative.

And while we sit here on this board complaining, the offense still finished 11th in scoring offense.
 
Last edited:

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
6,894
Reaction score
3,491
Location
Expat in Kuala Lumpur
You expect a 28 year old with 64 NFL starts to, what, be top 5 in sacks this season? 11+ sacks?
Curious about all these questions. No rational explanation for them. You provide no thoughts for them.


What factor does age at 28 have for a pass rusher?

How is starts (64) a factor?

Where does the definition of top 5 = great or 11+ = great come from?

If I didn’t know any better, it’s almost like you are just pulling random stuff out of your ass to be aggressive towards other posters. But, that would certainly not be your style :rolleyes:
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
39,991
Reaction score
33,481
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Curious about all these questions. No rational explanation for them. You provide no thoughts for them.


What factor does age at 28 have for a pass rusher?

How is starts (64) a factor?

Where does the definition of top 5 = great or 11+ = great come from?

If I didn’t know any better, it’s almost like you are just pulling random stuff out of your ass to be aggressive towards other posters. But, that would certainly not be your style :rolleyes:
lol. You’re being intentionally obtuse. Gimme a break.

A guy past his prime is unlikely to set high-water marks for past production. I’d consider top 5 to be “great” production, and 11 sacks would qualify as top five.

Find a new slant.
 

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
6,894
Reaction score
3,491
Location
Expat in Kuala Lumpur
lol. You’re being intentionally obtuse. Gimme a break.

A guy past his prime is unlikely to set high-water marks for past production. I’d consider top 5 to be “great” production, and 11 sacks would qualify as top five.

Find a new slant.
At least we got your thoughts on the age.

4 of the top 5 in sacks last year were older than 28, so your conclusion of past prime is not correct. Top 6 were 30,29,25,34,30 and 30. So just something you made up to fit your narrative.

What are your thoughts on number of starts as a factor, please?
 
Last edited:

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
6,894
Reaction score
3,491
Location
Expat in Kuala Lumpur
I still think Petzing is majorly at fault for the offense's lack of production.

He just doesn't want to take chances at all. Why I am not sure, it may be he doesn't trust Kyler, or it may be he just doesn't trust any QB to throw down the field. All I know is Kyler was much more effective throwing down field before he got here - so to me logically he is the reason.
Question is how much he was asked not to do and how much he was incapable of fixing
 

Shane

This is my year!
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
71,387
Reaction score
44,415
Location
Las Vegas
lol. You’re being intentionally obtuse. Gimme a break.

A guy past his prime is unlikely to set high-water marks for past production. I’d consider top 5 to be “great” production, and 11 sacks would qualify as top five.

Find a new slant.
28 is past prime now?
 

oaken1

Stone Cold
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 13, 2004
Posts
19,981
Reaction score
19,161
Location
Modesto, California
lol. You’re being intentionally obtuse. Gimme a break.

A guy past his prime is unlikely to set high-water marks for past production. I’d consider top 5 to be “great” production, and 11 sacks would qualify as top five.

Find a new slant.
Come on K9...you know a guy at 28 still has a couple prime years left...especially a pass rusher.
We should be able to count on him for 25 & 26 at least...possibly as long as 2025-2029...good speed rushers with bend and a decent Arsenal of moves should be effective till about 32
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,779
Reaction score
35,219
Location
Charlotte, NC
lol. You’re being intentionally obtuse. Gimme a break.

A guy past his prime is unlikely to set high-water marks for past production. I’d consider top 5 to be “great” production, and 11 sacks would qualify as top five.

Find a new slant.
:lmao:

Pure ridiculousness. Quite a few pass rushers have been productive into their even mid 30's. What's his Madden rating?
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
717,094
Posts
5,694,246
Members
6,365
Latest member
FranciscoChavez
Top