This year's Cardinals kind of remind me of the 2011 49ers

[kearly]

I remember being so unimpressed with the 13-3 team from the bay in 2011. They had Alex Smith at QB, and a defense that seemed to be having a fluky good run defense at the same time that they also benefited from a fluky high turnover ratio.

But mostly, what annoyed me about the 2011 49ers was that it seemed like every time they faced a good team, that team would suddenly play their worst game of the season. It seemed to happen every single week for the 49ers. There is nothing more annoying than having a division rival win a game they shouldn't win, and the 2011 49ers seemed to do that more than any team in recent memory.

A lot of smart football analysts at places like FO and advanced NFL stats had picked the 49ers as a prime candidate to fall back to earth in 2012, but as it turns out, the 2012 49ers went from being a huge overachiever to being a freakishly good team instead. The 49ers had turned an unsustainable way of winning into something very sustainable.

But back to that 2011 team for a second. They went 13-3! The last two 49ers teams have been better, but only won 11.5 and 12 games respectively. Sure, the 49ers non-Seahawks wins have been extremely steady the last three years (11, 10.5, 11), but there's no way in hell that the 2011 Niners were the best team of the Harbaugh era. But they won games. And they won for a very important reason that supersedes a fluky turnover ratio.

They won because they had an "annoying" defense. Sure, that defense made plays and had a few big name stars, but the real reason they won so often is because every good team that faced the 49ers that year suddenly decided to play like crap.

Watching the 49ers that year I learned something. I learned that the truest sign of a great defense is that they disrupt and annoy every offense they face. What is more effective for winning? A defense that gets 4 sacks, or a defense that keeps a QB from finding an open target for 4 quarters? Is it the defense that recovers 2 fumbles or the defense that keeps a run-first team to only 2 yards a carry?

That 2011 49ers defense was the best in the league at annoying opponents. It's hard to win when your team is built on a finely tuned offense and the other team (49ers) won't let you run that offense the way you need to.

I see a lot of that annoying spirit in the 2014 Cardinals. In fantasy football, their defense is in the bottom half of the league. They don't make big plays very often. But look at how frustrated they made Philip Rivers look. Eli played them at home and couldn't do anything. Kaepernick tried to pass on them, and yet after some initial success he was stymied the rest of the game. Not because these guys were being sacked or intercepted into oblivion. But because the Cardinals took the running game away and stubbornly refused to give up the easy stuff in the passing game (an idea Seattle might want to look into a bit more often).

That's your 2014 Cardinals. The annoying team that looks like an 8-8 outfit who will probably win 11-13 games because the other team magically finds a way to play worse almost every week. Except here's the thing, it's not luck or magic at all, it's completely by design.

Arizona may lack playmakers compared to Seattle or SF, but Arians' staff has masterfully found a way to turn a couple of stars with a big cast of no name players into an army of annoying SOBs.

But as we know from the past, annoying football done well is winning football. Seattle has struggled a bit against annoying teams. Even if Seattle plays great and SF rebounds, I would not be surprised if Arizona is in the hunt for all 17 games this year.

 

[hawknation2014]

They're going to get killed this week by the Broncos. The second half of their schedule is going to be brutal for them.

 

[ivotuk]

Interesting subject Kearly. It's one of those that bugs me but I'm not sure what it is until someone else articulates it.

I have to say, what really bugged me about the 2011 niners, is that their defense were all older guys who played almost every down right in to the NFCCG. I was sure that the older players would fall off in 2012 or that there would be a rash of injuries, but no, they went one further and made it to the big dance a year later.

So here it is 2014 and despite injuries and suspensions, they still manage to pull wins out of what looks like a dumpster fire. They did it last year in the NFCCG, as did the Cardinals just a few weeks prior. Both teams had multiple turnovers but some how kept coming back, with one actually winning, and the other a fingertip away from winning.

How do they do this? How do they rejuvenate these older players and get so much out of them? I think it has to be the training staff and the coaching. They are going for broke in every way and keep coming up aces. I keep waiting for a collosal collapse but it never happens. Which is actually a good thing, because being in the NFCW, competing against great teams is what makes the Seahawks so great. It's why we blew out the Broncos in the SuperB Owl, because we had already been baptized by fire.

A lesser team may have gotten ahead of Denver last February and coasted, only to let the Broncos back in. But Seattle had seen that story before, and knew what could happen. There was no way Pete Carroll or his coaching staff were going to play "not to lose" in the biggest game of their careers. It was pedal to the metal and don't let up until the final whistle blows.

That's why I have mixed feelings about any of the other 3 NFCW teams struggling or succeeding. Because either way, it benefits the Seahawks. That loss to Arizona, at home, was a good loss. It removed any thoughts of arrogance, of overlooking an opponent, and of a prevent defense.

These days I hope that Arizona, Saint Louis, and Santa Clara put it on teams outside of the NFCW, because I know it will only strengthen the resolve of the Seahawks. And it will be that much sweeter when we come out of the NFCW gauntlet this year with a winning record.

 

[Scottemojo]

I wild ass guessed that the Cards would cover the loss of their linebackers from last year by blitzing this year's linebackers and safeties a shit ton. So far, that is what is working for them. I wonder if they will continue that this week?

They go about being annoying in a far different way than the 2011 Niners. The Niners were so good at stopping the run with 7 of the best up front that they rarely had to cheat safeties to stop the run. They had a great pass rush, and IMO, it was middle push, especially by Justin in perhaps his finest season, that was the key to those numerous interceptions they racked in 2011. Yeah, Aldon got his, but it was middle push that drove the bus. Good defense isn't that hard to sustain, but great D like that, and what we had last year, is damn hard to repeat year after year.

The similarity is that the Cards get middle push from extra attackers. They are playing D in the style of the Jets when Rex Ryan first got to New York, and got to the AFCCG two years running. Line up looking blitz with 7 guys, and send 5 or 6 more than half the time, but a different 5 or 6 every time. Blitz the run gaps in case you guessed pass on a run down. Or don't blitz at all now that you have the QB staring down his hot read. Both the 2014 Cards and the 2011 Niners get the pressure in the middle, but they go about it very different ways.

 

[RolandDeschain]

I wild ass guessed that the Cards would cover the loss of their linebackers from last year by blitzing this year's linebackers and safeties a shit ton. So far, that is what is working for them. I wonder if they will continue that this week?

The Cardinals were already the most frequent-blitzing defense in the NFL last year. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -blitzing/ Not exactly a stretch to assume they will continue doing it a lot.

Kearly - way too often, a great defense doesn't get credit for causing an opposing offense to have a bad day. People seem to think that the offense "just didn't click" if there weren't a ton of ints/fumbles to use to excuse away their performance. Good write-up.

 

[hawksfansinceday1]

Kearly.........Good write-up.

As usual.

Good read. Thanks man.

 

[ringless]

Yes that was a great write up, and I often felt the same way about the 49ers. I know we've had a lot of talk about the Cards having an OVERPERFORMING defense, I just can't stop getting feeling the wheels will come off. I think we have some of the best coaches in the league, and our defense is extremely disciplined. I think our defense will be exposed this weekend in Denver. We had a pass rush last year, this year we don't. In saying that I expect our offense to be one of the nearby the end of the season. The last 8 games of the season last year we were averaging 28 pts a game. This year we have a more talented offense, the best o-line we've ever had, and more weapons so I expect a shift towards that. However I hope our defense can annoy Peyton's enough to lead us to another win this Sunday.

 

[loafoftatupu]

I think they look a lot like the 2011 Niners right now. I truly doubt that they will look like them by week 10.

They also look a lot like the 2012 Cards.

Just not buying it yet.... There is a lot of football to play.

 

[MizzouHawkGal]

Meh, us twice San Francisco when it's ALL on the line among others in the back half? Yeah, count me not scurred. I do see them being the breaker of some team's dream when they make the playoffs. I can see 10-11 wins for them if everything breaks perfectly for them.

 

[ringless]

I think the comparisons to the 2012 Cardinals are ridiculous. The only thing in common is the 3-0 start (maybe 4-0) but let's be real here. They are vastly different teams. In 2012 you're talking about a team led by John Skelton and Ryan Lindley, the starting running back Alfonso Smith, and the 2nd worst offensive line in the history of the NFL that came jar shy of breaking the sack record. So let's compare that offense to this years since everyone keeps seeming to do that.

Palmer and Stanton while not the best in the league. Are far superior to Skelton and Lindley. Not even in the same league... Literally. We have Ellington who is a dynamic threat out of the backfield. The best offensive line this team has ever had. As well as several threats at WR as compared to only one then.

On Defense we still will have a top 15, maybe top 10 this year. I just don't get the comparisons. After 8 games we should be 4-4 if this team is the same as that. Or finish with 5 wins. That's ridiculous.

I do expect our Defense to regress, and our offense to progress. After these next three games we very well may be sitting at 5-1.

 

[ringless]

But I agree. 10-11 wins being the limit

 

[VivaEfrenHerrera]

Looking at the schedule, getting to 12 wins is a fairly tough chore, The path is pretty clear for the next 7 games -- with likeliest losses at Dallas and at Denver. If they go 5-2 during this period, that'll put them at 8-2 heading into the final stretch, which is pretty punishing. Four out of six on the road, including @the NFC West, and @ Atlanta. Home games are the Hawks and KC. Going 4-2 in that stretch to get to 12 is asking a lot.

 

[Popeyejones]

I think if you could rerun their season a bunch of times the 9ers would finish at 12-4 (and maybe even 11-5) more frequently than 13-3* but they don't remind at all of the Cardinals this year.

The 2011 9ers used running between the tackles and short high percentage passes to pair with an awesome front 7 on defense. They went up early and then played ball control, which they could do because they got pressure only rushing four while keeping seven back in coverage to prevent quick scores. The strategy was to make less mistakes then their opponents, build leads, and sit on them.

The Cardinals can't run between the tackles and their passing game is reliant on high risk and high reward intermediate passes. They also haven't successfully been getting pressure while regularly rushing 5 or 6. They're high risk high reward on both offense and defense. They've also been losing for over 8 out of 12 quarters played so far.

So, I think they're style of play is incredibly different from the 2011 9ers, and frankly, despite the quick start I also don't think they're that good. TBH I think all four of the NFCW teams have regressed a bit this year, with the Hawks only having regressed the least (I.e. the division isn't going to come down to a bounce or two like it did last year).

*which TBF you could say of almost every 13-3.

 

[kearly]

I definitely don't think the teams are the same in terms of X's and O's. On offense especially, they are quite different. I'm just saying that the 2011 niners won by being really good at annoying opponents and disrupting their game plans. So far that's what the Cardinals have done too. The exact way they've done it is different of course, but the idea is the same. The Cardinals aren't really blowing anybody out, and 10 of the 49ers 13 wins in 2011 were by 2 scores or less.

So, I think they're style of play is incredibly different from the 2011 9ers, and frankly, despite the quick start I also don't think they're that good. TBH I think all four of the NFCW teams have regressed a bit this year, with the Hawks only having regressed the least (I.e. the division isn't going to come down to a bounce or two like it did last year).

The Cardinals beat the Chargers who might be a top 3 team in the AFC. They beat the Giants and your 49ers with a CFL caliber QB who currently sports the NFL's lowest completion rate.

It's too early to know for sure if anybody's taken a step back or a step forward. But you don't win games with Drew Stanton against decent NFL teams unless you have a championship defense. I wasn't really sold on Arizona after week 1. But seeing how the last few weeks have gone, I think that coaching staff might get more out of their team than anyone else in the league. And that's a team we should take seriously, especially since they currently have an advantage in the standings going forward.

 

[chris98251]

I think the real test is sustaining it, they had a lot of adversity and have risen up and played at a high level based on pulling together understanding team football. When that emotion is stretched over several weeks does the coaching keep them playing at that level. We seen our Seahawks use emotion and adversity to their advantage, can the Cards duplicate that kind of play all season long.

 

[loafoftatupu]

The Cards could be a totally different team, but for me personally it has never been about what they could do, it has been about what they actually do.

I get the whole respect for the 3-0 record again but I have seen this movie before and the storyline is consistency.

I just have reservations about jumping on the Cards Wagon until I see them hold it together for a while. Just my opinion.

 

[ringless]

I think if you could rerun their season a bunch of times the 9ers would finish at 12-4 (and maybe even 11-5) more frequently than 13-3* but they don't remind at all of the Cardinals this year.

The 2011 9ers used running between the tackles and short high percentage passes to pair with an awesome front 7 on defense. They went up early and then played ball control, which they could do because they got pressure only rushing four while keeping seven back in coverage to prevent quick scores. The strategy was to make less mistakes then their opponents, build leads, and sit on them.

The Cardinals can't run between the tackles and their passing game is reliant on high risk and high reward intermediate passes. They also haven't successfully been getting pressure while regularly rushing 5 or 6. They're high risk high reward on both offense and defense. They've also been losing for over 8 out of 12 quarters played so far.

So, I think they're style of play is incredibly different from the 2011 9ers, and frankly, despite the quick start I also don't think they're that good. TBH I think all four of the NFCW teams have regressed a bit this year, with the Hawks only having regressed the least (I.e. the division isn't going to come down to a bounce or two like it did last year).

*which TBF you could say of almost every 13-3.

The Cardinals were leading against the Chargers for the 2nd, and 4th quarter.... That is 2/4 in the first game.
Against the Giants, they were leading in the first, second, and 4th quarter... 3/4 5/8 total
Against the 49ers they were leading in the 4th quarter.... 6/12

Other than that, we can't run between the tackles. In fact Ellington doesnt fall forward for extra yards and he gets stood up at contact or pushed backwards. He doesn't have the strength or size to get those yards... We did bring in another back that hopefully can give us that...

 

[Scottemojo]

I wild ass guessed that the Cards would cover the loss of their linebackers from last year by blitzing this year's linebackers and safeties a shit ton. So far, that is what is working for them. I wonder if they will continue that this week?

The Cardinals were already the most frequent-blitzing defense in the NFL last year. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -blitzing/ Not exactly a stretch to assume they will continue doing it a lot.

Kearly - way too often, a great defense doesn't get credit for causing an opposing offense to have a bad day. People seem to think that the offense "just didn't click" if there weren't a ton of ints/fumbles to use to excuse away their performance. Good write-up.

Yeah, not a stretch. But there was a lot of talk that they couldn't run that high blitz attack without Dansby and Washington. I don't know the exact 2014 numbers, but on the Niners/Cards broadcast, they said they blitz 58 percent of the time, which would be a sizable increase over last year.

Dansby is a great cover linebacker. The guys they got now not so much. So blitzing them even more makes sense.

 

[NINEster]

J.F.C. man......Kearly you're totally off base with the backhanded compliments of a great 2011 49er team.

It's pretty clear to me you did not watch that team very carefully.

That defense was lights out the entire year and carried a rather average offense. No rushing TDs until a Willis-less team came to Seattle in week 16. A sick pass rush combined with one dimensionalizing teams made them a monster in turnovers. Only one 100 yard rusher allowed all year, a streak going back to 2009.

Justin Smith playing at a level that JJ Watt plays at now. Ray McDonald playing at a real high level. The DL was better then than the LBs when you factor that Ahmad Brooks was not quite what he was until 2012/2013, and Parys Haralson was the starter. Aldon Smith was more of a pass rush only specialist back then.

The red zone defense was very near the top in the league. Bend but don't break was ok when you couldn't get it in the end zone.

They gave up some yards in the air but for the most part kept teams in check and got wins. They also had the best special teams in town both in coverage units and returns. Ball control, efficient passing offense that limited turnovers (5 INTs and 5 fumbles lost all year).

If you look at the tape, that team probably should have finished 10-6 or 11-5 based on a bit of luck/having to rely so much on turnovers -- Eagles game could have been a loss, Bengals game too, Lions game came down to 4th down, Giants game was tight, second Seahawk game was very tight. But what that team had that the 2012 and more recent Harbaugh teams did not have was this really passionate spirit. I believe that willed them to win games they probably should have lost.

I would say the Saints playoff game was a perfect example of that. It's a shame we never got to see that Saints caliber team play against the Hawks because that was a totally different animal than the lame ducks you dismissed at C-link lately. Much better than the 2010 team for sure.

Ultimately relying on turnovers to win games bit them in the ass when they played the Giants. I think the stat that year was that the 49ers went 14-4 and only won one game being negative in the turnover ratio (Detroit I think).

That defense was sick in that Champ game though. And while that team didn't have the secondary the current Hawks have, that front 7 was by far the nastiest unit the league has seen probably in the whole decade going back to the '00 Ravens. If Eli wasn't a tough SOB, he would have been knocked out of that game for sure.

There was no defensive peer in 2011 for SF while SF & CAR were comparable last year to SEA.

Part of the joy in watching that 2011 team was the outright consistency on defense week in and week out. All 18 games they played great defense, not one bad week. Every team they played got beat up nice even if they won. To know without a doubt they would show up and kick ass was special.

Haven't seen that level of consistency since. We see higher highs and lower lows, but that nice even keel, nah.

The annoying part about the "annoying" comment is that it implies luck or a fluke, but when the team won as many games as it did while consistently playing sound defense, the more appropriate term would be dominant.

Ironic, because the only annoying defense I've seen lately were the last two seasons of Hawks teams annoying the s**** out of receivers both physically and verbally.

As far as the Cardinals, they are a good team but we still have a long way to go before we know exactly how good they really are. I've always said they can be a tough out on any given Sunday, but have had flaws in their game the last few years that have prevented them from being an 11+ win team.

I don't want to be a hater, but the 49ers the last three years have actually been the most consistent team in the league at winning, and 3 straight NFCCs. Maybe no Lombardis, but they've proven plenty. Cardinals have proven nothing of real substance.

Let's see a Warner-less Cardinals make the playoffs first, and then we can anoint them as the new champs.

 

[frosted21]

I remember being so unimpressed with the 13-3 team from the bay in 2011. They had Alex Smith at QB, and a defense that seemed to be having a fluky good run defense at the same time that they also benefited from a fluky high turnover ratio.

But mostly, what annoyed me about the 2011 49ers was that it seemed like every time they faced a good team, that team would suddenly play their worst game of the season. It seemed to happen every single week for the 49ers. There is nothing more annoying than having a division rival win a game they shouldn't win, and the 2011 49ers seemed to do that more than any team in recent memory.

A lot of smart football analysts at places like FO and advanced NFL stats had picked the 49ers as a prime candidate to fall back to earth in 2012, but as it turns out, the 2012 49ers went from being a huge overachiever to being a freakishly good team instead. The 49ers had turned an unsustainable way of winning into something very sustainable.

But back to that 2011 team for a second. They went 13-3! The last two 49ers teams have been better, but only won 11.5 and 12 games respectively. Sure, the 49ers non-Seahawks wins have been extremely steady the last three years (11, 10.5, 11), but there's no way in hell that the 2011 Niners were the best team of the Harbaugh era. But they won games. And they won for a very important reason that supersedes a fluky turnover ratio.

They won because they had an "annoying" defense. Sure, that defense made plays and had a few big name stars, but the real reason they won so often is because every good team that faced the 49ers that year suddenly decided to play like crap.

Watching the 49ers that year I learned something. I learned that the truest sign of a great defense is that they disrupt and annoy every offense they face. What is more effective for winning? A defense that gets 4 sacks, or a defense that keeps a QB from finding an open target for 4 quarters? Is it the defense that recovers 2 fumbles or the defense that keeps a run-first team to only 2 yards a carry?

That 2011 49ers defense was the best in the league at annoying opponents. It's hard to win when your team is built on a finely tuned offense and the other team (49ers) won't let you run that offense the way you need to.

I see a lot of that annoying spirit in the 2014 Cardinals. In fantasy football, their defense is in the bottom half of the league. They don't make big plays very often. But look at how frustrated they made Philip Rivers look. Eli played them at home and couldn't do anything. Kaepernick tried to pass on them, and yet after some initial success he was stymied the rest of the game. Not because these guys were being sacked or intercepted into oblivion. But because the Cardinals took the running game away and stubbornly refused to give up the easy stuff in the passing game (an idea Seattle might want to look into a bit more often).

That's your 2014 Cardinals. The annoying team that looks like an 8-8 outfit who will probably win 11-13 games because the other team magically finds a way to play worse almost every week. Except here's the thing, it's not luck or magic at all, it's completely by design.

Arizona may lack playmakers compared to Seattle or SF, but Arians' staff has masterfully found a way to turn a couple of stars with a big cast of no name players into an army of annoying SOBs.

But as we know from the past, annoying football done well is winning football. Seattle has struggled a bit against annoying teams. Even if Seattle plays great and SF rebounds, I would not be surprised if Arizona is in the hunt for all 17 games this year.

Sounds like a well coached team.