Well, look at that: the Cardinals pull off the win against the 49ers and now head to what becomes an important NFC matchup in Green Bay. Sure it's still early in the season but these NFC games matter, big-time. To a lesser extent, so does the mailbag. RIght? Anyway, questions have been edited for length and clarity. A couple were sent in post-Washington and pre-SF. I am guessing you'll be able to tell. Don't forget to send a question for a future mailbag with at least a first name and last initial.

From Richard Kemmler:

"Is it fair to say that James Conner is the best back the Cards have had since moving to Arizona? I mean that from a year-to-year basis of production. I've been watching since 1992 and while a few guys have had a good season or two but I can't remember I back being consistently productive like he is from one year to the next."

If Conner has the kind of season this year that he has started, then I think you'd be right. Larry Centers was a hell of a player for a few years, although he did more of his damage as a pass catcher than a runner. Conner has probably surpassed David Johnson. Other than that, in Arizona? I mean, Edgerrin James is the only player to have back-to-back 1,000-yard seasons (or hell, two 1,000-yard seasons period) and Conner can equal that this season -- which I think he will.

From Walker:

"Darren, considering the frequency of knee injuries in the league, it's worth discussing why NFL players don't wear knee braces as NCAA players do. Given the substantial salaries owners pay, one might assume they would mandate such protection. If reduced mobility is the sole concern, wouldn't it be advantageous to have players more available, albeit slightly less mobile? This is particularly pertinent during practice sessions."

Unlike college players, to me, these guys are all pros and adults, and I think they should be allowed to choose their safety features to wear or not. I don't know if this is in reaction to the Will Hernandez injury; I'm not even sure how much a brace like that could protect against a play like that. Nick Bosa, accidentally, looked like he exploded onto the back of Hernandez's leg.

From Nate Smith:

"Hey Darren! Big fan of your work and currently working with Red Mountain to pursue the same career field as you. I know the Cardinals spent a good deal of time in the offseason bulking the defensive line (somewhat) to a certain degree. Would you expect a trade towards the deadline to hopefully strengthen the defensive line? Not only in the trenches but to the secondary? If not, do we just kinda ride the wave with these young guys and see what they develop into?"

I do not expect trades to import anyone. The Cardinals are trying to grow the young guys they have -- especially in the secondary -- and they don't like to part with draft picks. Do I think they could chase higher dollar defensive guys next year in free agency? I think that is possible. But I don't expect any in-season trades.

From Andrew Miller:

"Two related questions: 1) Do you know or can you easily ascertain what percentage of first downs in SF game did the Cardinals run James Connor? 2) What was his rushing average per attempt on first down compared to all other downs? Big fan of Connor and understand the importance of emphasizing and establishing the run, however, this facet of the offense seems quite predictable and the number of second down and 9 yards or 10 yards makes sustaining drives challenging."

In the San Francisco game, Conner had 12 carries on first down: 0, 0, -3, 1, 4, 5, 3, 1, 9, 3, 10, -1. That totals to 32 yards, or 2.7 yards a carry. And you're right, there were a number of carries that put the Cardinals behind the sticks. There's a fine line there, however, and those last four were on that final Conner-is-bellcow drive where the Cardinals were about imposing their will on the ground.

From Matthew C.:

"Couldn't help but notice that Brock Purdy had a pass tipped at the line and two pop-flies intercepted. Is he too short? Can he not see over his O-line? In all seriousness, how would you rank the NFC West quarterbacks this year? With respect to a future HOF QB, it has to be Kyler>Stafford>Purdy>Geno, right?"

Kyler is playing pretty good football. But Sunday notwithstanding, Purdy has had the best overall season this year IMO. If you are going to make me choose, I would likely put -- after five weeks -- Purdy/Kyler, then Geno, Stafford. This is nothing against Kyler but about Purdy's body of work. It's so tight IMO. This division has good quarterback play. I'll say this: if Kyler keeps playing well and he starts to match up with Harrison more often, he's going to get to the top of the list.

From Walt B:

"Long, long-time Cardinals fan. Why are we not addressing the defense? Or should I say our lack of a defense. I am ashamed to say that I don't expect this team to win, just be competitive, and they can't even do that. The team has money sitting on the table and is just content with the status quo. Maybe it's time to seek out a new team to root for."

I can't tell you what to do, Walt. Follow your heart. The defense is a work-in-progress when it comes to roster building. I understand the frustration about the salary cap space, but Monti Ossenfort has been methodical with how he has operated thus far and that's not going to change. Obviously, this defense has its moments -- the Cardinals don't win Sunday without those three takeaways and second-half shutout of the 49ers.

From Sebas Quiros:

"Hey Darren. Really happy with the win. It was needed. A record of 2-3 is much better than 1-4. However there is still something that worries me and it's Marvin's usage. It bewilders me so much that we seems to have gotten very away of what we did in Marv's best game. I feel like he's not in the slot as much. Why do you think this is?"

According to Pro Football Focus, Harrison has lined up in the slot 42 times out of his 251 snaps, or 16.7 percent of the time. In his best game -- I am assuming you mean the Rams win -- he actually lined up in the slot less than any game, five of 46 snaps. He actually had his highest percentage in the slot against the 49ers, 25 percent (11 of 44). So I do think they try Harrison in the slot, but he is mostly an outside receiver -- they aren't going to have him inside most of the time. They want to use his length outside and down the field.

From Stephen Small:

"Hi Darren! Not to complain after a victory, but for as amazing as our defense played as a whole in the second half, we still have a major tackling problem in our secondary. Not being able to tackle is only passable if you're Deion Sanders and you shut down the wide receiver. I heard the team focused on tackling in practice last week, so Sunday was a surprising result of 'tackling focus.'"

I would agree that there was a tackling issue against Washington. I agree it was better against the 49ers, and I don't think it is a "major" problem. Especially for the cornerbacks, you need to have the guys that cover the best as your top guys (and let's not forget the pass rush aspect of the cover portion of the program.) I don't think it was surprising either; that's what happens after what I think is an overall outlier of a performance. I won't sit here and say this cornerback group is the best tackling group of all time but I don't think it rates as one of the defense's biggest concerns.

From Jeff Smith:

"Hello Darren. Good outing, we stole a win. It is evident our weakness is the pass rush. Three questions.

1. Why does the right guard Will Hernandez stand up before the snap, is he responsible for the offensive alignment?
2. I am concerned about Marvin Harrison Jr. Do you see an opportunity for Kyler to adjust to MHJ or is it on him to make the difficult catches? The sideline throws to MHJ drive me crazy, give him a chance.
3. Is there an opportunity to go after Haason Reddick or trade for another pass rusher?"

Here are some answers:

1. When the Cardinals run a silent count it was Hernandez's job to set that up, which is why he would stand up. Who that job falls to now is TBD with Hernandez out for the season.
2. I think both players have to find ways to adjust but I do think Harrison needs to (and will eventually) make the tough catches. Of course Kyler has to make good throws but you draft a receiver top five in part because he can make those kinds of unlikely plays. In this league, you can't count on wide-open targets often.
3. Again, I don't see Reddick coming here. And teams generally don't trade decent pass rushers, especially in season.

From Rob S.

"Hey Darren, I'm writing this after the Commanders game mailbag came out, so who knows how they looked against the Niners but I'm still pretty grumpy about how bad the Cards looked in that Washington game. I'm not advocating for this (yet) but I can't help but wonder if the Cards end up with a low draft pick again if it is worth thinking about taking a QB?"

There are a lot of reasons the Cardinals shouldn't want to do that and frankly, wouldn't want to do that. At least you acknowledged the timing of your question -- you see Murray break out that 50-yard run and the way he made the final drive work (and yes, a lot of Conner, but Kyler was steering the ship) and he outplayed Purdy. Every player is evaluated after the season. Let's see where we are then. I am guessing you won't feel the same.

From Chad D:

"I remember a couple years ago we had a similar offensive issue where we were good on the first drive, then struggled the rest of the game. I know we don't have almost any staff from back then, but could you shed some light on how we worked through those issues last time? In the mailbag I think you mentioned that the first drive is usually planned out the week leading up to the game."

Yes, teams usually script the first drive. Then the other team makes adjustments, the game begins to take shape (and playcalling must be fluid within that.) If you are going back to the Kliff era, I'm not sure they ever did work through the issues. The Cardinals lost (including one playoff game) 18 of Kingsbury's last 23 games. If I knew what the best way to change things, I would be making more money and working on the football side. I do think they have to find a way for more explosives to aid first-down totals.

From Tom Cowley:

"Hi Darren. Good win though with a scent of good luck. I believe good and dependable additions are REQUIRED for the OL and DL before we can be a winner each week. I also believe that without reinstatement from the IR or a trade we will continue to see-saw. Also, why haven't the supermen from the draft performed as the media had/has predicted? Our DL is going to be full of them soon."

Not sure who the supermen are to whom you refer. Harrison? On the defensive line, besides Robinson, who is finally coming back to practice, who else are you talking about? I do find it humorous that, in a league where every team seeks better depth on the offensive line (and defensive line, to be honest) that people think "good and dependable" players are just sitting out there without jobs. Good and dependable offensive linemen are all starting in the NFL. There might be a few backups, but they are already on rosters. You plug holes where you can.

From Jason B:

"It is sad to see the team getting booed at a home game for lack of production with as much talent as we have. I have to ask the question, what is the answer to all the issues? We know 'there has to be better coaching and execution.' However, the same problems have been there since BA left. The offense can't put up points, the defense can't stop the run. Ultimately the coaches don't play and are not on the field. I've seen no player take accountability."

I will say, I am a proponent of the cliche, "It's not the x's and o's, it's the Jimmys and Joes." That said, the coaches and the players did a wonderful job sticking with their plan against the 49ers and that's why they won the game. I think after losses we hear a lot from players about "looking in the mirror." Self-accountability is what they mean. They had a clunker against the Commanders. It happens.

From Joy B:

"It wasn't easy, but the team hung together and pulled off a great win over the 49ers. Now we need to keep 'em coming. To stick with the Niners topic, on last week's Underground (podcast) you guys were talking about a Montana-led 49ers team that had six turnovers in a game and still won. You said no one could do that today. I remember back in 2016 or 2017 the Cards were playing I think the Seahawks and Carson Palmer threw five interceptions. As only Palmer could do, he shook it off and still led the Cards to a win."

Close! The game to which you refer was at Seattle in 2013. Palmer threw four interceptions, but hit Michael Floyd for the game-winning touchdown late to pull off the huge win. I also remember a game in which the Cardinals collected six Falcons turnovers in Atlanta in 2012 and still found a way to lose the game.

From Jim Otto:

"I figured it out. The reason people are so confused about Kyler. Kyler's ultimate talent is playing poorly but having an OK stat line. For example, that amazing completion percentage would be a lot worse if he threw the ball away instead of taking sacks."

Kyler did pretty well against the 49ers, so ...

From Max Warner:

"Without being rude or unprofessional, have any of the reporters asked what's wrong with Kyler's deep ball? The Cardinals released a video of Kyler's 100 TDs, in chronological order, the other day and the one thing above all else that stood out: the degradation of Kyler's deep ball. That and just how amazing Christian Kirk was."

I am confused -- are you saying you aren't trying to be rude, or advance-warning reporters they shouldn't be rude in asking such a question (which, I'm not sure why you'd think a) that would be a rude question or b) why you'd assume reporters would be rude.) As for the deep ball, it's a fair question. I noticed the same. I think in part it's because of the speed of the receiver; Kirk was fast down the field and I am not sure they have had or have now that speed guy. Yes, Kyler hasn't been on target as much either, but I expect that to improve as his work with MHJ continues. He's had moments. Rondale Moore has speed and they had a deep ball in Houston last year.

From Don Geisler:

"Hey Darren! I didn't get this question in before the post-Washington mailbag, hopefully we are basking in the glow of a nice victory against SF before it's posted. One of your responses regarding fans' questions being mostly rhetorical caught my attention, because I had some VERY specific questions about the Washington failure that I would love to have answered.

1. Is it possible that the coaches paralyzed the defense against Daniels by drilling in the message of lane/gap integrity and not letting him get loose?
2. I know the question of the offensive play calling 'lack of creativity' sounds rhetorical, but I saw a very specific example. The effectiveness of play-action comes when the defense is mostly expecting the run. That may very well be on first down. The defense is expecting the run game to be established to lead to play-action later. Well, why not take a well-executed shot at play-action and go over the top EARLY?
3. My son (born and raised bleeding Cardinal red, now 22 years old) and I joked all game that the Cardinals must have lost the pages in the playbook that contained bootlegs and rollouts, were those pages actually lost?

We LOVE this team, the joy and pain that it has provided our family over the years, and the hard work you all do. Appreciate that! P.S. YES....... cancel the tickets of people who sell to opposing fans."

I see you have worked hard on the sarcasm, and as an aficionado, I understand. To be honest, I don't know what the plan was to attack the Washington defense so to assume those things were "ignored" is ... not fair. I think it's safe to say the whole group was poor against Washington, so everyone was going to have things to answer to. As far as the deep shot, again, I'd have to go look (which, being far past that game I will not), but what was the defense doing? Were they two-high? Taking a shot is fine -- I have no problem with it -- but it's also low-percentage. Let's not act as if the Cardinals didn't march right down and score to open that game. It's not like they struggled out of the gate.

As far as defending Daniels, I don't know about paralyzing the defense, but making sure he didn't escape very well could've been the decision. And let's face it, when you have that kind of threat at QB, you're going to have to pick your poison. It's not like Daniels only hurt the Cardinals; he's doing it against everyone so far.

From David Brandt:

"Hey Darren. Thought I'd drop a line to ask a seeming difficult question. It's difficult because I realize that our Cardinals clan love the black uniform that we have however, it's nagging at my psyche that the outcome in those games in those jerseys is usually not a win. Maybe Michael Bidwill might wish to reconsider our alternate color. Can you imagine someone in our locker room opening a new box of jersey and spouting out "Hey, these jerseys aren't charcoal ash, these jerseys are pyrrhuloxia grey!" Paul would a field day for life with that word the way he rambled on and on about the "Honolulu" blue BS. Again, we're talking about uniforms. Can you find out what their record in black is? Yeah, I know they made me irate at the Commanders game."

And to think that question was edited. You gave it a good run, David.

1) All-time record in all-black/color rush uniforms (there were some black jersey/white pants before that but I've only got so much time to research): 2-10
2) Uniforms have absolutely nothing to do with results.