NFC West Week 5 Edition

[ClutchDJ]

Yes with the Okafor injury we just lost our only pass rusher because nobody else gets it done from that spot. Hopefully its nothing too serious and something he can come back from by the end of the year.

Interesting stat through four wins and a loss the Cardinals have a +100 point scoring differential.
Average strength of victory 25 points.

I think it's fair to say we aren't exactly paper tigers. 10+ wins in both Seasons under Arians and 4-1 in year three. We have a real shot at contending for the division this year. However we have a lot of road games coming up and Seattle should be able to pull even with us. I don't think that makes us a bad team. I just think we have progressed, and they have regressed slightly which is what happens when you make deep runs and people want to get paid

Am I the only that thinks he's been underachieving so far?

It seems like all of his sacks are coverage sacks & he had a "ehhh" game today.

 

[rideaducati]

I am interested to hear rideducati's take on the season thus far.
With the double standard explanation incoming in 3, 2, 1

If you only knew the meaning of double standard... I've tried to explain it, but I can't fix stupid, so you're on your own.

We get to see the Cards play their tough opponents LATER in the season while the Seahawks work through the puff portion of their schedule. See ringles? No double standard there. I doubt you'll be able to comprehend that though.

Meanwhile, the Cards get a couple of their tougher opponents while their opponent's starting QB is on the shelf which will make even their tougher portion of their schedule more puff than the Seahawks. No double standard there either. Puff means easy, just so you know. For instance, the Steelers without Big Ben is an easier game to win than playing the Steelers WITH Big Ben. Again, without double standard.

Since you can't get beyond your thinking that I am applying a double standard to your cards, I will AGAIN point out my first response where you wrongly accuse me of having a double standard. CARDINALS fans were bitching about how the Cards would have won the division if their QB had not gotten injured. I simply pointed out that they were actually fortunate when they got wins when they got to play opponents that were without their starting QB. I NEVER said the Seahawks WEREN'T fortunate to play teams with backup QBs going. (that would be a double standard, but since it didn't happen, you just make yourself look dumb by insisting it happened)

Sure, the Seahawks were fortunate in the same way as the Cards were, but since I was only talking about the cardinals, you wrongly ASSumed the double standard. AGAIN, I was ONLY speaking about the cards and since TWO OR MORE things are NEEDED to even have a possibility of a double standard, a double standard was not possible.

I hope that helps you, but I have my doubts.

 

[ringless]

Yes with the Okafor injury we just lost our only pass rusher because nobody else gets it done from that spot. Hopefully its nothing too serious and something he can come back from by the end of the year.

Interesting stat through four wins and a loss the Cardinals have a +100 point scoring differential.
Average strength of victory 25 points.

I think it's fair to say we aren't exactly paper tigers. 10+ wins in both Seasons under Arians and 4-1 in year three. We have a real shot at contending for the division this year. However we have a lot of road games coming up and Seattle should be able to pull even with us. I don't think that makes us a bad team. I just think we have progressed, and they have regressed slightly which is what happens when you make deep runs and people want to get paid

Am I the only that thinks he's been underachieving so far?

It seems like all of his sacks are coverage sacks & he had a "ehhh" game today.

Well he did blow up two quick passes today and one was almost tipped for an interception. He definitely isn't anything special. He would be an average LB on most teams which really says how poor our LB's really are.

The fact that our beat writers are saying it looks like we might have to consider signing Freeney says a lot. That would mean we have Freeney and Woodley as our outside LB's. Basically a geriatric unit, with zero speed. Then Freeney hasn't practiced with a team in quite some time and is not in game shape. If this is the case and from the tweets its looking like it might be. We will have the worst LB's in football. They already were uninspiring.

 

[rideaducati]

Yes with the Okafor injury we just lost our only pass rusher because nobody else gets it done from that spot. Hopefully its nothing too serious and something he can come back from by the end of the year.

Interesting stat through four wins and a loss the Cardinals have a +100 point scoring differential.
Average strength of victory 25 points.

I think it's fair to say we aren't exactly paper tigers. 10+ wins in both Seasons under Arians and 4-1 in year three. We have a real shot at contending for the division this year. However we have a lot of road games coming up and Seattle should be able to pull even with us. I don't think that makes us a bad team. I just think we have progressed, and they have regressed slightly which is what happens when you make deep runs and people want to get paid

We won't know for sure if the Cards are paper tigers or not until they play a good team or two.

 

[ringless]

I am interested to hear rideducati's take on the season thus far.
With the double standard explanation incoming in 3, 2, 1

If you only knew the meaning of double standard... I've tried to explain it, but I can't fix stupid, so you're on your own.

We get to see the Cards play their tough opponents LATER in the season while the Seahawks work through the puff portion of their schedule. See ringles? No double standard there. I doubt you'll be able to comprehend that though.

Meanwhile, the Cards get a couple of their tougher opponents while their opponent's starting QB is on the shelf which will make even their tougher portion of their schedule more puff than the Seahawks. No double standard there either. Puff means easy, just so you know. For instance, the Steelers without Big Ben is an easier game to win then playing the Steelers WITH Big Ben. Again, without double standard.

Since you can't get beyond your thinking that I am applying a double standard to your cards, I will AGAIN point out my first response where you wrongly accuse me of having a double standard. CARDINALS fans were bitching about how the Cards would have won the division if their QB had not gotten injured. I simply pointed out that they were actually fortunate when they got wins when they got to play opponents that were without their starting QB. I NEVER said the Seahawks WEREN'T fortunate to play teams with backup QBs going. (that would be a double standard, but since it didn't happen, you just make yourself look dumb by insisting it happened)

Sure, the Seahawks were fortunate in the same way as the Cards were, but since I was only talking about the cardinals, you wrongly ASSumed the double standard. AGAIN, I was ONLY speaking about the cards and since TWO OR MORE things are NEEDED to even have a possibility of a double standard, a double standard was not possible.

I hope that helps you, but I have my doubts.

I understand that. What I meant is last year you clearly had a double standard. You discounted the fact that Seattle got to play more backups then AZ. And then to add insult to injury you didn't count us playing with a backup with 10 games as making a difference.

I understand we play the easier part of our schedule first. But you did say the Lions would beat the Cardinals today. The Cardinals played a better game than Seattle did against that same Lions team. You could also say we played the Bears better because we played for four quarters.

What Backups have we played? Clausen. When Clausen came in the Bears were already down by 14. The score was 28-14 with Cutler.

The Seahawks got to play Clausen for 4 quarters.

We played Drew Brees, a starter. Nick Foles, a Starter, Matt Stafford, a Starter. And Kap. A Starter. So so far we have played backups 2 quarters less than Seattle.

Now I could be wrong, but it seems you are leaving out the fact you guys get to play Dallas without Romo? Without Bryant?
You guys got to play GB without their #1, and #2 WR. Their #1 RB was out as well.

You got to play STL without Gurley or Tre Mason and that didn't turn out to well.

So yes, I'd say that's a double standard because you always leave out the fact that Seattle also plays teams without their starting QB's while always having their starter. Thats a double standard. You discount the fact we've played our games in common stronger than Seattle has. If we were to even just use that as a small sample.

 

[rideaducati]

I am interested to hear rideducati's take on the season thus far.
With the double standard explanation incoming in 3, 2, 1

If you only knew the meaning of double standard... I've tried to explain it, but I can't fix stupid, so you're on your own.

We get to see the Cards play their tough opponents LATER in the season while the Seahawks work through the puff portion of their schedule. See ringles? No double standard there. I doubt you'll be able to comprehend that though.

Meanwhile, the Cards get a couple of their tougher opponents while their opponent's starting QB is on the shelf which will make even their tougher portion of their schedule more puff than the Seahawks. No double standard there either. Puff means easy, just so you know. For instance, the Steelers without Big Ben is an easier game to win then playing the Steelers WITH Big Ben. Again, without double standard.

Since you can't get beyond your thinking that I am applying a double standard to your cards, I will AGAIN point out my first response where you wrongly accuse me of having a double standard. CARDINALS fans were bitching about how the Cards would have won the division if their QB had not gotten injured. I simply pointed out that they were actually fortunate when they got wins when they got to play opponents that were without their starting QB. I NEVER said the Seahawks WEREN'T fortunate to play teams with backup QBs going. (that would be a double standard, but since it didn't happen, you just make yourself look dumb by insisting it happened)

Sure, the Seahawks were fortunate in the same way as the Cards were, but since I was only talking about the cardinals, you wrongly ASSumed the double standard. AGAIN, I was ONLY speaking about the cards and since TWO OR MORE things are NEEDED to even have a possibility of a double standard, a double standard was not possible.

I hope that helps you, but I have my doubts.

I understand that. What I meant is last year you clearly had a double standard. You discounted the fact that Seattle got to play more backups then AZ. And then to add insult to injury you didn't count us playing with a backup with 10 games as making a difference.

I understand we play the easier part of our schedule first. But you did say the Lions would beat the Cardinals today. The Cardinals played a better game than Seattle did against that same Lions team. You could also say we played the Bears better because we played for four quarters.

What Backups have we played? Clausen. When Clausen came in the Bears were already down by 14. The score was 28-14 with Cutler.

The Seahawks got to play Clausen for 4 quarters.

We played Drew Brees, a starter. Nick Foles, a Starter, Matt Stafford, a Starter. And Kap. A Starter. So so far we have played backups 2 quarters less than Seattle.

Now I could be wrong, but it seems you are leaving out the fact you guys get to play Dallas without Romo? Without Bryant?
You guys got to play GB without their #1, and #2 WR. Their #1 RB was out as well.

You got to play STL without Gurley or Tre Mason and that didn't turn out to well.

So yes, I'd say that's a double standard because you always leave out the fact that Seattle also plays teams without their starting QB's while always having their starter. Thats a double standard. You discount the fact we've played our games in common stronger than Seattle has. If we were to even just use that as a small sample.

I can't fix your issue. You can't comprehend.

I was ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE CARDINALS. You ASSumed all the rest.

 

[ClutchDJ]

Yes with the Okafor injury we just lost our only pass rusher because nobody else gets it done from that spot. Hopefully its nothing too serious and something he can come back from by the end of the year.

Interesting stat through four wins and a loss the Cardinals have a +100 point scoring differential.
Average strength of victory 25 points.

I think it's fair to say we aren't exactly paper tigers. 10+ wins in both Seasons under Arians and 4-1 in year three. We have a real shot at contending for the division this year. However we have a lot of road games coming up and Seattle should be able to pull even with us. I don't think that makes us a bad team. I just think we have progressed, and they have regressed slightly which is what happens when you make deep runs and people want to get paid

Am I the only that thinks he's been underachieving so far?

It seems like all of his sacks are coverage sacks & he had a "ehhh" game today.

Well he did blow up two quick passes today and one was almost tipped for an interception. He definitely isn't anything special. He would be an average LB on most teams which really says how poor our LB's really are.

The fact that our beat writers are saying it looks like we might have to consider signing Freeney says a lot. That would mean we have Freeney and Woodley as our outside LB's. Basically a geriatric unit, with zero speed. Then Freeney hasn't practiced with a team in quite some time and is not in game shape. If this is the case and from the tweets its looking like it might be. We will have the worst LB's in football. They already were uninspiring.

I already thought we had one of the worst LBs in the NFL.

However, I am very interested in Riddick getting PT. Love his upside, but hopefully he has the mental side down.

 

[ringless]

I am interested to hear rideducati's take on the season thus far.
With the double standard explanation incoming in 3, 2, 1

If you only knew the meaning of double standard... I've tried to explain it, but I can't fix stupid, so you're on your own.

We get to see the Cards play their tough opponents LATER in the season while the Seahawks work through the puff portion of their schedule. See ringles? No double standard there. I doubt you'll be able to comprehend that though.

Meanwhile, the Cards get a couple of their tougher opponents while their opponent's starting QB is on the shelf which will make even their tougher portion of their schedule more puff than the Seahawks. No double standard there either. Puff means easy, just so you know. For instance, the Steelers without Big Ben is an easier game to win then playing the Steelers WITH Big Ben. Again, without double standard.

Since you can't get beyond your thinking that I am applying a double standard to your cards, I will AGAIN point out my first response where you wrongly accuse me of having a double standard. CARDINALS fans were bitching about how the Cards would have won the division if their QB had not gotten injured. I simply pointed out that they were actually fortunate when they got wins when they got to play opponents that were without their starting QB. I NEVER said the Seahawks WEREN'T fortunate to play teams with backup QBs going. (that would be a double standard, but since it didn't happen, you just make yourself look dumb by insisting it happened)

Sure, the Seahawks were fortunate in the same way as the Cards were, but since I was only talking about the cardinals, you wrongly ASSumed the double standard. AGAIN, I was ONLY speaking about the cards and since TWO OR MORE things are NEEDED to even have a possibility of a double standard, a double standard was not possible.

I hope that helps you, but I have my doubts.

I understand that. What I meant is last year you clearly had a double standard. You discounted the fact that Seattle got to play more backups then AZ. And then to add insult to injury you didn't count us playing with a backup with 10 games as making a difference.

I understand we play the easier part of our schedule first. But you did say the Lions would beat the Cardinals today. The Cardinals played a better game than Seattle did against that same Lions team. You could also say we played the Bears better because we played for four quarters.

What Backups have we played? Clausen. When Clausen came in the Bears were already down by 14. The score was 28-14 with Cutler.

The Seahawks got to play Clausen for 4 quarters.

We played Drew Brees, a starter. Nick Foles, a Starter, Matt Stafford, a Starter. And Kap. A Starter. So so far we have played backups 2 quarters less than Seattle.

Now I could be wrong, but it seems you are leaving out the fact you guys get to play Dallas without Romo? Without Bryant?
You guys got to play GB without their #1, and #2 WR. Their #1 RB was out as well.

You got to play STL without Gurley or Tre Mason and that didn't turn out to well.

So yes, I'd say that's a double standard because you always leave out the fact that Seattle also plays teams without their starting QB's while always having their starter. Thats a double standard. You discount the fact we've played our games in common stronger than Seattle has. If we were to even just use that as a small sample.

I can't fix your issue. You can't comprehend.

I was ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE CARDINALS. You ASSumed all the rest.

Because you make up information. You say we are a paper tiger because we only beat teams with backups. Yet last year you played 2 more backup QBs than AZ. (Oh and we played with one 10 times to your zero) This year you played more time against backups as well. Again, and this is a question you've never been capapble of answering. Why does it only count for AZ but not Sea

You then say we are lucky because we don't have to face big Ben, but then disregard you don't have to play Romo and Bryant. Thats a double standard. Again why does this only count for AZ but not for Seattle?

You said Lions would beat us. Yet we played them better than Seattle did. But I am open to hear your logic on that one as well.
I'm still waiting for the answers you've never been able to give. If you are going to make that claim. PLEASE BACK IT UP. Why are the two above questions not double standards based on the information you provide which is only half the picture?

You've now started name calling and insults because you know you are wrong. You are backed into a corner because you just refused to be objective at any point. You just dig your heels in further and further bc you are so scared of beign wrong or admitting another team might just be better than average. Im not asking a lot. Just why does it only count for the Cardinals and not the Seahawks, and why can't you admit we might be an above average team?

 

[rideaducati]

If you only knew the meaning of double standard... I've tried to explain it, but I can't fix stupid, so you're on your own.

We get to see the Cards play their tough opponents LATER in the season while the Seahawks work through the puff portion of their schedule. See ringles? No double standard there. I doubt you'll be able to comprehend that though.

Meanwhile, the Cards get a couple of their tougher opponents while their opponent's starting QB is on the shelf which will make even their tougher portion of their schedule more puff than the Seahawks. No double standard there either. Puff means easy, just so you know. For instance, the Steelers without Big Ben is an easier game to win then playing the Steelers WITH Big Ben. Again, without double standard.

Since you can't get beyond your thinking that I am applying a double standard to your cards, I will AGAIN point out my first response where you wrongly accuse me of having a double standard. CARDINALS fans were bitching about how the Cards would have won the division if their QB had not gotten injured. I simply pointed out that they were actually fortunate when they got wins when they got to play opponents that were without their starting QB. I NEVER said the Seahawks WEREN'T fortunate to play teams with backup QBs going. (that would be a double standard, but since it didn't happen, you just make yourself look dumb by insisting it happened)

Sure, the Seahawks were fortunate in the same way as the Cards were, but since I was only talking about the cardinals, you wrongly ASSumed the double standard. AGAIN, I was ONLY speaking about the cards and since TWO OR MORE things are NEEDED to even have a possibility of a double standard, a double standard was not possible.

I hope that helps you, but I have my doubts.

I understand that. What I meant is last year you clearly had a double standard. You discounted the fact that Seattle got to play more backups then AZ. And then to add insult to injury you didn't count us playing with a backup with 10 games as making a difference.

I understand we play the easier part of our schedule first. But you did say the Lions would beat the Cardinals today. The Cardinals played a better game than Seattle did against that same Lions team. You could also say we played the Bears better because we played for four quarters.

What Backups have we played? Clausen. When Clausen came in the Bears were already down by 14. The score was 28-14 with Cutler.

The Seahawks got to play Clausen for 4 quarters.

We played Drew Brees, a starter. Nick Foles, a Starter, Matt Stafford, a Starter. And Kap. A Starter. So so far we have played backups 2 quarters less than Seattle.

Now I could be wrong, but it seems you are leaving out the fact you guys get to play Dallas without Romo? Without Bryant?
You guys got to play GB without their #1, and #2 WR. Their #1 RB was out as well.

You got to play STL without Gurley or Tre Mason and that didn't turn out to well.

So yes, I'd say that's a double standard because you always leave out the fact that Seattle also plays teams without their starting QB's while always having their starter. Thats a double standard. You discount the fact we've played our games in common stronger than Seattle has. If we were to even just use that as a small sample.

I can't fix your issue. You can't comprehend.

I was ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE CARDINALS. You ASSumed all the rest.

Because you make up information. You say we are a paper tiger because we only beat teams with backups. Yet last year you played 2 more backup QBs than AZ. (Oh and we played with one 10 times to your zero) This year you played more time against backups as well. Again, and this is a question you've never been capapble of answering. Why does it only count for AZ but not Sea

You then say we are lucky because we don't have to face big Ben, but then disregard you don't have to play Romo and Bryant. Thats a double standard. Again why does this only count for AZ but not for Seattle?

You said Lions would beat us. Yet we played them better than Seattle did. But I am open to hear your logic on that one as well.
I'm still waiting for the answers you've never been able to give. If you are going to make that claim. PLEASE BACK IT UP. Why are the two above questions not double standards based on the information you provide which is only half the picture?

Why would I bring up what the Seahawks did when I was only talking about the cardinals?

The Seahawks have beaten good teams WITH their starting QBs over the past few seasons, the cardinals haven't. This year might be different, but we have to wait to find out.

 

[ringless]

Okay, I just don't feel its fair to say the Cardinals were lucky last year to play 8 backups (While playing with one themselves for 10 games) Because I feel if you want to lose that logic it's only fair to apply to Seattle as well who played 10 backups.

I don't think it's fair to say we are lucky, when Seattle has even been more lucky in regards to that. And I don't think its fair to pout about us getting to play Pitts when you have the same situation with Dal.

You can't have it both ways. If you want to use that to knock us down a notch you then have to use the same logic for Seattle or thats what creates a double standard.

 

[marko358]

Niners looking like an NFL team tonight. Won't be a cakewalk playing them, especially the way we've been playing this season.

 

[rideaducati]

Okay, I just don't feel its fair to say the Cardinals were lucky last year to play 8 backups (While playing with one themselves for 10 games) Because I feel if you want to lose that logic it's only fair to apply to Seattle as well who played 10 backups.

I don't think it's fair to say we are lucky, when Seattle has even been more lucky in regards to that. And I don't think its fair to pout about us getting to play Pitts when you have the same situation with Dal.

You can't have it both ways. If you want to use that to knock us down a notch you then have to use the same logic for Seattle or thats what creates a double standard.

My stance is more than fair and the Cards WERE lucky last year. I don't have, nor do I expect to have it both ways, I have it correct. If the Cards are better this year they should be able to beat a good team at full strength.

I won't have it both ways when the Cards finally beat good teams at full strength. Until then, I still have it my way because the Cards haven't.

The "same logic" DOES APPLY because the Seahawks (before this season) have beaten good teams WITH THEIR STARTING QUARTERBACK, the Cards haven't.

It's not about which team has beaten or played against more backup QBs, it's about which team hasn't beaten good teams WITH their starting QB.

 

[ringless]

Niners looking like an NFL team tonight. Won't be a cakewalk playing them, especially the way we've been playing this season.

Seattle is going to win 5 of their next 6 games.

 

[rideaducati]

I hope the niners win just enough games to knock them past the point in the draft where they could get a top QB.

 

[ringless]

I hope the niners win just enough games to knock them past the point in the draft where they could get a top QB.

Yes have to agree. With a new coaching staff, 60 million in cap space and few key pieces locked up they might be in good position to make some moves quickly. Hopefully that doesnt involve getting a top 10 pick

 

[rideaducati]

I hope the niners win just enough games to knock them past the point in the draft where they could get a top QB.

Yes have to agree. With a new coaching staff, 60 million in cap space and few key pieces locked up they might be in good position to make some moves quickly. Hopefully that doesnt involve getting a top 10 pick

I hope they keep Baalke. Won't matter where they pick in the draft and they'll have to overpay for every decent player Baalke brings in.

 

[rideaducati]

I predicted a laugher in the niner game....I'm laughing.

 

[rlkats]

I predicted a laugher in the niner game....I'm laughing.

Ya we were laughing when the hawks lost. How was your win today oops you lost to. Atleast us niners know we have major problems you guys talk all this crap like your goung to the sb. Reality check sucka there is only 1 win seperating us bottom dwellers.

 

[ringless]

After week 5:
Cardinals 4-1
Rams 2-3* Tiebreaker over Seattle
Hawks 2-3
49ers 1-4


PLAYER
RedAlice 14-6
KEARLY 14-6
RINGLESS 14-6
Hawksfansinceday1 14-6
drdiags 13-3
POPEYEJONES 12-8
Fade 12-8
Shadowhawk 11-9
Mizzou 11-9
Hasselbeck 11-9
REX 10-6
greenblue_eye's2 9-3
ClutchDJ 9-7
UNCLE SI 8-4
Erebus 7-5
Superman28 7-6
SF49er 6-12
Marvin49 5-5
Kearly 4-0
b8rtm8nn 4-4
SALISHHAWKFAN 3-5
Laloosh 2-6
Largent80 2-2
hawk45 2-2
London 12 1-3
SeahawksTopGear: 1-3
SPORTS HERNIA 0-4
ELCALIENTE 0-4

 

[WilsonMVP]

Congrats on the NFC West title ringless.

Jesus, do you have a clue to how ridiculous you look right now? Probably not which is why you should take a deep breath and walk away from the keyboard before you give yourself a stroke.

It's a game for your enjoyment if you're not having enjoyment you might want to reassess certain things.

AZ was 9-1 and lost last year. two games is not that large if a lead especially when we play you twice and GB

Yep ringless knows. OBV we need to win other games but right now if we were to beat the cards twice we actually own the tiebreaker and techincally have a better record over them