Arizona Cardinals: What We Learned in Week 4
The Arizona Cardinals continued their unbeaten ways Sunday with a 24-21 victory over the Miami Dolphins at University of Phoenix Stadium. This week's victory fueled both optimism and concern 25 percent into the regular season.
While the offensive line has looked solid in pass protection at times, it is becoming more and more obvious that they will still struggle to contain the better pass rushers in the league, something that will become a greater concern with opponents such as the San Francisco 49ers, the Detroit Lions and Chicago Bears on the horizon.
At some point Arizona is going to have to get some help over to the tackles in the form of a fullback or tight end, something they've done some of already this year. Kevin Kolb was sacked eight times, this is going to have to improve if Arizona is going to be a legitimate contender come December and possibly January.
Cardinals fans will not want to hear this, but the argument can be made that Arizona did not deserve to win Sunday. That said, however, good teams find ways to win games average or below average teams do not.
The defense didn't look as crisp as they did in the first three games, yet somehow found ways to make plays when they needed to be made. The four turnovers forced by the defense helped to offset the 431 yards passing from Ryan Tannehill—one of those turnovers helping to set up the game winning field goal from Jay Feely in overtime.
It can be argued that Kolb had his worst outing of the season Sunday with two poor decisions turning into interceptions. That said, Kolb still threw for 324 yards and three touchdowns Sunday, the last touchdown being a big time throw to Andre Roberts on fourth down late in the game. Kolb's first interception was his first in 108 attempts and on the season he is 67-of-107 for 752 yards, seven touchdowns, two interceptions and a quarterback rating of 97.6.
Most Cards fans are happy to take that along with the 4-0 start.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?