Cardinals' Situational Chaos
At this point in the Cardinals' dismal 5-13 stretch from Week 12 of 2024 through Week 12 of 2025 there is growing evidence as to how woefully unprepared the Cardinals are in handling late-game situations. As I felt compelled to say on this week's Red Rain Podcast, "these late game situations are totally lost on the Cardinals' inexperienced coaching staff."
Situation 1:
Jaguars decide to go for the win on 4th and 1, up 24-21 with 1:44 left, as the Cardinals have now used all 3 of their timeouts. If the Jaguars convert, they can run out the clock.
Curiously, the Jaguars, after having gotten stuffed on the 3rd and 1, elected not to run the ball. They motioned WR Tim Patrick to the right and it's the perfect play call because no Cardinal defender mirrors Patrick on the motion --- which indicated to Trevor Lawrence that the Cardinals are in one of their patented soft zones --- and so all the Jaguars really have to do is throw the ball immediately to Tim Patrick who, as you can see --- IS UNCOVERED.
full play, click here:
Notice that on this play, Nick Rallis has by far his best edge rusher Josh Sweat (#10) dropping into coverage in what can only be described as "no man's land." It feels like every time this season. when Rallis drops Sweat into coverage it has backfired. So, you are going to take Sweat away from the pass rush with the game on the line?
What's the definition of insanity?
Miraculously, Tim Patrick is in his own "no man's land" apparently completely unaware of how wide open he is, and Trevor Lawrence's pass goes unseen and incomplete, despite the alarming fact that 3 Cardinals' zone defenders are covering NO ONE on the play.
Mind you --- this soft zone deluxe gift-wrapping was the Cardinals' defensive call coming out of a TIMEOUT.
Just imagine how Josh Sweat was saying WTF to himself after he learned the call.
The reason why I harkened back to Week 13 of last season is --- with the game on the line versus the Vikings on a 4th and 5 with 2:10 left from the ARI 32-yard line and the Cardinals clinging to a 22-16 lead --- it was the exact same defensive "soft zone, drop your best edge rusher (Baron Browning at the time) into no man's land" play call that resulted in this:
If you polled the other 31 NFL defensive coordinators, how many of them would have ever in their right minds, with the game on the line, leave Justin Jefferson this WIDE OPEN in a soft zone?
Answer: 0
These soft play calls with games on the line are one of the unmistakable and recurring reasons why these late-game situations are utterly lost on the Cardinals' inexperienced, absurdly conservative coaching staff.
Situation 2:
Jacoby Brissett has connected on a great double move route by Michael Wilson behind 24-21 with 27 seconds left. Wilson inexplicably spins the ball like a spike, then races to retrieve it, bobbles it and by the time the ball is placed by the referee, there are 18 seconds remaining on the clock. By then the entire offense should have been set so that Brissett could spike the ball and stop the clock.
Instead, Brissett is taking precious time off the clock to call out a play, as the offense still is not lined up. Offensive coordinator Drew Petzing defended that decision citing how the chaos could catch the Jaguars off-guard.
How about --- how the chaos caught Petzing and his players off-guard?
As Kyle Ledbetter pointed out so well on this play of the Cardinals' spike the ball here, they would also get the benefit of a 5-yard off-sides call. With 18 seconds on the clock at the Jaguars' 6-yard line, the Cardinals could have taken 3 shots at the end zone.
The truth is with regard to the situation --- if the offense was going to try to capitalize on the Jaguars' chaos, then Petzing should have had a designed play to run in this situation --- call it "Omaha" or "Rita". What's so disconcerting is, not only did Petzing and the offense NOT have a designated play for this situation, when the ball is snapped, Michael Wilson jogged out what is basically a non-route. Jacoby Brissett's eyes were only on Wilson and seeing as Wilson had already taken himself out of the play, Jacoby has no other choice but to fling the pass over Wilson's head out of bounds.
Clearly, Michael Wilson didn't know what the play call was. It hadn't been practiced or prepared. That was by far the worst route he ran all day. And just as weirdly, he's looking back when a pass to him under the goal line, if caught and tackled properly would have ended the game, --- which means that he is not even cognizant of that critical aspect of the situation.
This sequence is the epitome of Cardinals' chaos.
The profound irony is how Gannon, Petzing and Brissett all lauded their final passing attempt of the game with regard to the incomplete deep post they tried to throw to Xavier Weaver as "we are throwing to win the game."
Oh really?
What feels hypocritical about the Cardinals' decision to "pass for the win" on 4th and 4 in OT from midfield on a deep post is the decision not to get lined up asap and spike the ball on the Jaguar's 11-yard line at the end of regulation which could have given Brissett 2-3 shots at the end zone. Situational chaos in full array.
Views
Two Recurring Realities:
In the Cardinals 6 consecutive close losses, two things have been true:
1. The defense can't close out the game. They have surrendered 5 4th quarter leads and one 4th quarter tie.
2. The offense can't close out the game. In 5 of the 6 games, they could not answer to falling behind in the 4th quarter or OT.
Therefore, until the Cardinals' preparation and situational play calls become competent, the Cardinals will continue to be lost in their own, self-imposed clouds of chaos.
Doctor your example number 2 is simply not painting an accurate picture. Even though our soon to be former QB isn’t mentioned your example shades the reality of what took place in his three losses versus what took place in JB’s 5 losses. You said in 5 or the six losses the offense, Kyler and JB, “can’t close out games, they could not answer to falling behind in the fourth quarter”.Looking at the eight losses, 3 where Kyler was QB, 5 where JB was QB, Kyler gave the defense the lead in two of the three losses and in the third loss drove the team to the tie with a touchdown leaving 30 seconds left on the clock. I will always believe the cardinals would have beaten Seattle in OT. They had the look of a beaten team very exhausted and unable to stop the cardinals offense. Of course we know the outcome. JG and the kicking team gets fancy and drops the kick short of the 20, run no time off the clock, and set the defense up for failure. Both losses to Tennessee and San Francisco were lost on the last play of the game. JB’s 5 losses, even with the offense opening up, looking better, and shooting rockets down the field, something I believe Petzing didn’t allow Kyler to do except in the Seattle loss toward the end of the game, two of JB’s losses were blowouts, no chance to come back and the other three losses the offense had the opportunity to take the lead but failed. I wish JB much success as the future QB of the cardinals for the rest of this year and into next year, but Kyler did not loss the three games you have insinuated because he/they could not answer to falling behind in the fourth quarter. The team would have won 4 of the 5 games Kyler played, and I think all 5 if the defense has made, like our famous former coach would say, “A Damn Play”.
ReplyDeleteHere are the facts, Mel.
DeleteAt SF --- 4th Q
* 13-13 ARI ---> 3 plays for 5 yards: PUNT
* 15-13 ARI gets a safety and ball back on the punt
* ARI ---> 5 plays for 15 yards: PUNT
* SF ---> 10 plays for 61 yards, GW FG
SEA -- 4th Q
ARI ----> 2 TDs, the second of which tied the game with 28 second left
That's the 1 scenario I mentioned as a 4th Q TIE that, as you said, was lost by STs and D.
TEN --- 4th Q
* 21-12 ARI --- 3 plays 1 yard, PUNT
* 21-91 ARI --- 6 plays 15 yards PUNT
* TEN --- 11 plays 71 yards GW FG
The Cardinals' offense with Kyler had chances to close out the SF and TEN games --- just as the offense with Jacoby had chances to do so against IND, GB and JAX where just like in the SF, SEA and TEN games, the defense gave up the 4th Q leads.
All of those 6 losses were games in which the Cardinals could not hold or add to a 4th Q lead or tie. There's a clear pattern here regardless of who the QB was.
Therefore, I believe these assessments to be accurate and unbiased:
In the Cardinals 6 consecutive close losses, two things have been true:
1. The defense can't close out the game. They have surrendered 5 4th quarter leads and one 4th quarter tie.
2. The offense can't close out the game. In 5 of the 6 games, they could not answer to falling behind in the 4th quarter or OT..
Well saiid Dictor. I will refer
Deleteto your statement that the Kyler “offense could not add to the lead”. Agreed. But the defense gave up the ghost. Maybe if Kyler had an opportunity to go win the game, who knows. But JB had those opportunities and failed. All three times. Respectfully.
Sorry I meant well said Doctor Walt.
ReplyDeleteAnd finally, please remember in the San Francisco the receiver was stripped of a first down after the running back dropped a touchdown pass at the five yard line, after our number one receiver dropped a wide open passed in his hands that would have resulted in a possible TD but that the least a 50 yard gain. And in the Tennessee game Petzing decided to run three times consecutively for a total of 2 yards and 20 seconds off the clock instead of attempting to win the damn game like he implies he is doing now. Go for the win.
ReplyDelete