Blogs

Whiz feels better about the injured

Posted by Darren Urban on January 4, 2010 – 11:44 am

Coach Ken Whisenhunt said “it’s too early to say” he is optimistic about the three key injured Cardinals playing this week, but certainly Whiz sounded that way when talking about Anquan Boldin, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie and Calais Campbell.

Boldin will be getting an MRI on both his left knee and ankle today as a precaution and he is sore. But it’s tough to think Boldin, who was still walking on the ankle after the game, won’t find a way to play. Tests will be done on Campbell’s fractured left thumb and surgery remains possible. But Whisenhunt noted that both guard Reggie Wells and DRC played with broken fingers this season and he hopes Campbell can do the same casted up. Whiz said he talked to DRC and DRC has a “good range of motion” today. Of all three, it seemed Whisenhunt had the highest confidence in DRC’s return.

Whisenhunt also clarified the reason Larry Fitzgerald played the whole game, noting it was important to Fitz for the receiver to get his 13th touchdown (which set a personal high for a season) and to reach 100 catches (Fitz finished with 97). Whiz acknowledged Fitz could have been hurt and “you weigh those risks.”

By the way, the NFL released the dates and times for the divisional round, and for the Cards, it means this: If the Cards and Cowboys win, the Cardinals will play in New Orleans Saturday, Jan. 16, at 2:30 p.m. Arizona time. If the Cards and Eagles win, the Cards will play in Minnesota Sunday, Jan. 17, at 11 a.m. Arizona time.


Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Blog | 19 Comments »


19 Responses to “Whiz feels better about the injured”

  1. By Mike"Pay Q" on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Darren, I heard reports that Anquan said he was”OK”, but not much clarification. It looked pretty bad, but we all know how quick a healer he is. What has he said about his injury? Also is it true that Q wanted to some out the series BEFORE he got hurt?

  2. By darrenurban on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Mike —

    All Q said afterward was that he was OK, but that’s a pretty pat answer. He didn’t sound all that concerned. But that’s all that was said.

    As far as the other thing, Q was asked if he wanted to come out of the game before the injury. His response was “I mean, they asked me to go one more series. I’m not one to shy away from competition. I don’t regret anything about today as far as going in.”

    Whiz did say today Boldin was in the game in part because he wanted the starters in with Leinart.

  3. By Kalib on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Darren,

    I’m not one to complain, but during the regular season I grew tiresome of seeing Leinart relieve Warner in a couple of the blow out victories. Leinart in my opinion did nothing but hurt the team. He did manage the offense in the TEN game, but still lost. Why did Whiz want the starting receivers and o-line to play with Leinart? Is he prepping him for the future? Why risk injury just to have them play with a very inefficient Leinart?

  4. By darrenurban on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Kalib —

    There was an element of evaluation going on for the future for sure. And there was also an element of, God forbid, if something happens to Warner in the playoffs, having Leinart get some experience with the guys he was going to play with.

    In the end, there weren’t a lot of “sit guys” options. There were only two backup O-linemen, and who do you sit among the line? I am guessing everyone could have looked at Q and Fitz only, and yes, an argument can be made that both could’ve and should’ve been taken out.

  5. By CardsFan08 on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Hey Darren,

    I’m sure Whis and staff were evaluating Leinart with the 1’s as a chance to look at the future and the emergency situation in the playoff’s, but really I didn’t understand the thought process used the game before the playoffs. To me, as just a fan, it was weird to see so many starters go in and out of a worthless game right before the playoffs. The resulting injuries speak for themselves, but really I think of what happened to Wes Welker. That should have been the icing on the cake to coaches to keep their starters clear of a worthless game. I know the starters generally play the first series, but after that, I think they should have played more cautious. DRCs injury was on the first series but that should have been enough of a scare to pull everyone possible and let the exhibition game ensue.

  6. By darrenurban on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    CardsFan08 —

    Here’s the problem with taking out all the starters. No. 1, you can’t necessarily do that everywhere (there were two backup OL active), and No. 2, let’s say you do bench all the starters. Which RB has to stay in and take all the punishment? Which DL? You sit, say, 15 of the 22 starters, that leaves 30 guys total to play offense, defense, special teams the rest of the game — and that includes your punter, kicker, long snapper. The numbers don’t compute.

  7. By kimberly on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    well all i have to say is linart hasn’t shown me anything, i would pick st. piere,sorry bad with spelling. he wasn’t too good in the preseason this year but last year he was amazing and the little time he was in on sunday was pretty good. i think he needs to go next year. hes not ready for pro football. he just doesn’t throw the ball like kurt warner…its in the air way too long and he just lobs it up…can’t do that. you can really hurt your recievers. GO CARDS!!

  8. By Adam on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Darren-

    I understand the thinking of Whiz going in to last weekend’s game, but I don’t necesarily agree with it. By telling everyone that your decision will depend on the vikings outcome, he seemed to set the players up for a let down during the Packers game. I don’t care about the outcome or the score, but when you have a team that looks disinterested and unfocused competing against a team thats prepared to play all out, that’s when injuries can, and did, occur. I know injuries can happen anytime, but don’t you think its a bad precedent to allow your team a mental “out” before any game. Why put your least replaceable players in harms way?

  9. By darrenurban on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Adam —

    If you as a coach believe the best way to approach a game is go after the No. 2 seed hard if possible and back off otherwise, that’s how you have to proceed. Ideal? No. But that’s why Whiz called it irritating last week. I don’t see how it’s a bad precedent anyway. Every game is a case-by-case basis. It’s not like players will come back next time and say, “Why aren’t we backing off this one?”

  10. By Secret on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Darren,
    First of all, thanks for responding to everyone’s questions, it helps a lot to clear things up. I was just curious, which teams do you think would be the ideal to face after Green Bay? In other words, what teams do you think would give the Cards the best chance to get to the Super Bowl and win it?

  11. By darrenurban on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Secret —

    I don’t know if there is a “best chance.” I know I’d like to see the Cards get to host another NFC Championship game, which has only one possible path: Win, go beat Minnesota in Minnesota, and host the Eagles again.

  12. By JK on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Darren,

    I would agree with what Coach Whiz did yesterday. They really did not have much to play for since the Vikes lashed out a huge W, and as for not being about to rest all starters, Coach could only do what he could do with the unbalance of position players. Gladly they did not get shutout, yet on the bright side they get to have a more personal feel of the GB starters and impact players and their tendencies. What is your take on Commissioner Goodell’s statement of investigating resting starters?

    JK

  13. By darrenurban on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    JK —

    I don’t think the Commish’s hopes have any way of being logistically feasible. How can you prove a guy is hurt or just not playing? One of the reasons Dockett played little was because he is incredibly sore from the season. Is he injured to the point where he can’t play? No. But how could the commish say “You have to play.” And what if you have a situation like Denver, where the coach benched Marshall and Scheffler — two starters — for discipline. What then? I just think it’d be impossible to sort through.

  14. By RED BIRD 66 on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    DARREN,
    HOPEFULLY THE EVALUATION OF LIENART WAS TO DETERMINE WHAT TEAM WILL ACTUALLY TRADE FOR LIENART. IF IT IS BASED ON HIS PLAY THIS YEAR WE BETTER START LOOKING FOR SOME SEMI-PRO TEAMS TO TRADE WITH-YES HE IS THAT BAD. HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET A 2ND QB THRU FREE AGENCY OR ST. PIERRE STEPS UP. I THINK LIENARTS SHIP HAS SAILED AS HE LOOKS WORSE NOW THAN HE DID AS A ROOKIE. HOPEFULLY THE COACHES PICK UP SOME TENDANCIES OF THE GB STARTERS FROM YESTERDAYS FILMS. I AM SICK OF HEARING ABOUT OUR PERFORMANCE YEATERDAY. KNOWING MINN WON AND ALL THE BLAB ABOUT RESTING STARTERS IT WAS PREDICTABLE. NEXT WEEK I EXPECT TO BE SEEING THE REAL CARDS. THEY PLAY BETTER WHEN DISRESPECTED AND BEING THE UNDERDOGS. HOPEFULLY WHIZ PUTS IT TO THEM THIS WEEK IN PRACITCE AND THE CARDS COME OUT AND TAKE IT TO THE PACK.

  15. By TucsonTim on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    To all of you Leinart haters, he is only going to get better with playing time, and a game plan designed for him. He played well enough for us to beat TN on the road. He probably feels a ton of pressure and that’s not going to help. Why aren’t people bitching about Breaston fielding a punt on the 1 yd line when we were already down a couple scores. How great was it for Leinart to come in in that situation. He needs to get comfortable reading coverages and working with the receivers.

  16. By Adam on Jan 4, 2010 | Reply

    Darren-

    I agree with what you said, and maybe “bad precedent” isn’t the right way of putting it. It just seems like playing your starters as long as they did last week, even though the game meant nothing to either side, put them at more risk for injury. We didn’t “keep momentum going” or avoid injuries or get win #11, so what was gained? I’m definitely giving Whiz the benefit of the doubt, as he’s earned it and I can’t wait for Sunday’s game. Let’s hope the loss and any criticism that’s being dished out helps fuel the “no one believes in us” model that worked so well last year.

  17. By BluePitt on Jan 5, 2010 | Reply

    Darren,
    At what point do we all get a little pi$$ed at the Pack? I Personally am disgusted with them….
    We all know that when Whiz put in our backups and even 3 stringers, the Cards were conceding. Yes I know the Pack game plan “step on the throttle”
    but at what point was it stat padding or just flat out un-sportsman like? The Hawks got mad when we tried to get Steve his 15 to make his 1,000 last year!
    Thanks

  18. By darrenurban on Jan 5, 2010 | Reply

    BluePitt —

    It’s one thing to wonder about the second half of a preseason game. But Sunday’s game was a regular-season contest and it’s possible the Packers were trying to make a point. The Cards made their choices and the Packers made theirs. The Packers didn’t do anything wrong.

  19. By Sid on Jan 5, 2010 | Reply

    Well the Cards had a good year! but their just not good enough to beat the Packers this year. This team has been so inconsistant all year. i love the cards but just have to keep it real.

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this: