Michael Irvin (Hawks related)

I'm watching TNF pregame and Irvin says the Cardinals beat us at home because they have 'big WRs.' How much are they paying this guy??

Money is not equal to brains.

Irvin is FAR from a Hawk hater but yea, that is a clueless statement. That is just a former big WR talking up big WRs because he can. The Hawks lost that game because the offense was pathetic and could not take advantage of being handing 4 interceptions by the D, who picked off 4 passes intended for those big Cardinal WRs.

Ummm, that was LAST YEAR. How is that relevant?

Hawks Offense was SO BAD in the game. I believe that was the game Bennett scooped up a fumble and brought it back to the 5. We came away with zero points. 5 yards away from the endzone and we get zero points. I knew then we were going to lose.

HawkFan72":1h95gn2y said:

Hawks Offense was SO BAD in the game. I believe that was the game Bennett scooped up a fumble and brought it back to the 5. We came away with zero points. 5 yards away from the endzone and we get zero points. I knew then we were going to lose.

Click to expand...

I think the play that you are referring to happened in the NFC Championship game last year.

Missing_Clink":2nvexr8i said:

HawkFan72":2nvexr8i said:

Hawks Offense was SO BAD in the game. I believe that was the game Bennett scooped up a fumble and brought it back to the 5. We came away with zero points. 5 yards away from the endzone and we get zero points. I knew then we were going to lose.

Click to expand...

I think the play that you are referring to happened in the NFC Championship game last year.

Click to expand...

You're probably right. I can't remember. But the same level of ineptitude was all over that Arizona game too.

EDIT: Looked up the game. The play I am talking about was when Malcolm Smith picked off Palmer and returned it to the 3 right before halftime. We gained 2 yards on 3 plays and Hauschka missed a FG. I knew there was something like that in the Arizona game, I just mixed up the plays.

Longterm effects of the booger sugar.

Well, in a way he's right. That TD pass through Maxwell's hands was the difference in the game. He had awesome coverage on the play, but the WR (don't remember who it was) went up and got the ball anyway. It was really an incredible play.

I wouldn't say the WRs were the entire difference, but the difference between Seattle and AZ WR corps definitely played a HUGE role in the outcome. Seattle's WRs couldn't get open on one play the entire game. It was horrible. Golden Tate just got completely owned. On the flip side, AZ's receivers were able to get open on enough plays to pick up yards and score TDs, and did so well enough to beat us.

So he's not entirely wrong on that.

It was a combination of RW struggling, a stacked box, a crazy catch in the end zone and the ground causing an interception after the offense finally woke up and scored one after figuring the Cards out. Even after the crazy catch I felt like the Hawks would bring it back. Then the terrible call.

Whatever. It was all of that and had zero to do with big receivers.

loafoftatupu":1vocbkh0 said:

It was a combination of RW struggling, a stacked box, a crazy catch in the end zone and the ground causing an interception after the offense finally woke up and scored one after figuring the Cards out. Even after the crazy catch I felt like the Hawks would bring it back. Then the terrible call.

Whatever. It was all of that and had zero to do with big receivers.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you were at the game or not, but the reason RW was struggling was because not one of his receivers was able to get open the entire day. It's one of those things you don't see on TV but you see at the game. Seattle's WRs just got totally dominated. Wilson was struggling because he was trying to buy time to allow them to get open, but they couldn't.

I'm convinced that game was a big reason Carroll let Tate go. I saw Carroll talking to Tate many times during the game and Tate looked very upset and was being animated. He was just not in the same league as AZ's big physical DBs who had no problem at all in shadowing him.

On the flipside, Seattle played good to great pass defense, but AZ's big physical receivers were able to get open on some plays, and those plays turned out to be the difference.

We can all discuss what "might" have been, but what actually happened is what actually happened. And in that game, the difference was definitely that AZ was able to throw and move the ball while Seattle simply couldn't.

That game was a clear case of clinched playoff dialing back the offense. That game would have been another come from behind win for Wilson if it didn't bounce off the ground for an interception. Nothing to do with Palmer or his receivers, but thanks for playing.

HawKnPeppa":swdxwdkr said:

I'm watching TNF pregame and Irvin says the Cardinals beat us at home because they have 'big WRs.' How much are they paying this guy??

Click to expand...

Don't see what's wrong with what he said....the Cards do have big receivers. Fitz is 6'3/218 and Michael Floyd is 6'3/225. Michael Floyd made a heck of a catch for the winning TD over Maxwell. Maxwell had good coverage on him too. It's a big receiver making a catch. It happened and it's a fact.

Larry Fitzgerald - http://www.azcardinals.com/team/roster/Larry-Fitzgerald/5e798db3-4421-453f-a489-c060d8eaf731

Michael Floyd - http://www.azcardinals.com/team/roster/Michael-Floyd/aa1e79c8-b719-4aa1-81f9-c0c3e7343ea2

hawkfan68":34cejvm9 said:

HawKnPeppa":34cejvm9 said:

I'm watching TNF pregame and Irvin says the Cardinals beat us at home because they have 'big WRs.' How much are they paying this guy??

Click to expand...

Don't see what's wrong with what he said....the Cards do have big receivers. Fitz is 6'3/218 and Michael Floyd is 6'3/225. Michael Floyd made a heck of a catch for the winning TD over Maxwell. Maxwell had good coverage on him too. It's a big receiver making a catch. It happened and it's a fact.

Larry Fitzgerald - http://www.azcardinals.com/team/roster/Larry-Fitzgerald/5e798db3-4421-453f-a489-c060d8eaf731

Michael Floyd - http://www.azcardinals.com/team/roster/Michael-Floyd/aa1e79c8-b719-4aa1-81f9-c0c3e7343ea2

Click to expand...

IMO, they beat us by completely shutting down our offense for most of the game. Not with WRs.

Darryl Washington charging up the gut, off the left hip of Campbell, on virtually every single play, and the staff could not conceive of a way to counter it. He blew up the read option. He blew up the pass protection. He blew up everything. It is why that left guard is gone and Carpenter was moved there.

I am seriously surprised that other opponents have not tried to replicate it. Denver didn't try it at all, even once, in the Super Bowl.

In other words, it has nothing to do with Arizona's big wide receivers.

HawKnPeppa":2w756hpe said:

hawkfan68":2w756hpe said:

HawKnPeppa":2w756hpe said:

I'm watching TNF pregame and Irvin says the Cardinals beat us at home because they have 'big WRs.' How much are they paying this guy??

Click to expand...

Don't see what's wrong with what he said....the Cards do have big receivers. Fitz is 6'3/218 and Michael Floyd is 6'3/225. Michael Floyd made a heck of a catch for the winning TD over Maxwell. Maxwell had good coverage on him too. It's a big receiver making a catch. It happened and it's a fact.

Larry Fitzgerald - http://www.azcardinals.com/team/roster/Larry-Fitzgerald/5e798db3-4421-453f-a489-c060d8eaf731

Michael Floyd - http://www.azcardinals.com/team/roster/Michael-Floyd/aa1e79c8-b719-4aa1-81f9-c0c3e7343ea2

Click to expand...

IMO, they beat us by completely shutting down our offense for most of the game. Not with WRs.

Click to expand...

While the Cards played well defensively, they did enough on offense to win the game. Ultimately, it was the touchdown scored by Floyd that was the difference in the game. The score was 10-9 Seahawks up to that point. It was a defensive battle for both teams, no doubt. While Cards may have not won because of the WRs. It was a big WR who made a big TD catch. His size comes into play into that catch as he caught over an 6'1 CB in Maxwell who had him blanketed. So ya...agreed that Cards didn't win the game solely because of their WRs. They won the game because they were able to make enough plays to win both offensively and defensively. The Cards turned the ball over 4 times while only having 2 takeaways. They lost the turnover battle yet still won the game. IMO, the loss had more to do with Seahawk's offense being out of sync rather than anything extraordinary that the Cards defense was doing. Seattle had a very bad game offensively.

It was painful, very painful.
I had almost squashed all recollection.
Then this thread.
Dam you Michael Irvin.

pmedic920":2ur53jdd said:

It was painful, very painful.
I had almost squashed all recollection.
Then this thread.
Dam you Michael Irvin.

Click to expand...

No doubt. Terrible memory.

What bothered me more than finally losing at home was that the loss forced us to play the Rams with everything on the line, instead of having the luxury of resting our starters, especially Wilson, who I felt was still recovering from his last clash with the (QB killing) Rams. Worked out pretty well in the end, though. ; )

Largent80":wjcgmeop said:

Ummm, that was LAST YEAR. How is that relevant?

Click to expand...

Thank you. You beat me to it.

Irvin is a crackhead, I would put zero stock in what he says. He picks Dallas to go to the super bowl every year.