We're on the right track

[eap33]

It's not contradiction, cause I was talking about the talent level of the players around Woodson/Harris. If Bigby was a player with all this raw, easily accessible talent he would've been able to break into the Jets or Dolphins' starting lineups (look at their secondaries, lol); it's the coaching/talent evaluation here that got him to use it. "letting him play" is a form of coaching. You can have all the talent in the world, but if you don't know the proper technique and your personal responsibilities inside the scheme, you don't win and keep a starting position for long.

I'm not looking for a fight, but you took what were intended to be honest thoughts on our secondary pretty far out of context. Maybe I'll explain it all better when I get some time, but I tried to be very clear in providing my line of thought.

I understand your line of thought, I just completely disagree. It took Bigby 2 years and an injury to a teammate to "break into" the Packers starting lineup. Did he have a lack of talent before he was a starter? No, he just had people ahead of him in line.

That being said, the wonderful coaching staff didn't "LET" him play, he was forced into the starting position due to injury. Then the DB coach goes "Wow... this kid can play" and he continued as a starter even after Nick Collins came back.

Was that a strategic coaching decision? Let him sit on the bench for 2 years because they knew that he wouldn't be good until someone got injured? It just doesn't make sense.

 

[PackFanWithTwins]

It's not contradiction, cause I was talking about the talent level of the players around Woodson/Harris. If Bigby was a player with all this raw, easily accessible talent he would've been able to break into the Jets or Dolphins' starting lineups (look at their secondaries, lol); it's the coaching/talent evaluation here that got him to use it. "letting him play" is a form of coaching. You can have all the talent in the world, but if you don't know the proper technique and your personal responsibilities inside the scheme, you don't win and keep a starting position for long.

I'm not looking for a fight, but you took what were intended to be honest thoughts on our secondary pretty far out of context. Maybe I'll explain it all better when I get some time, but I tried to be very clear in providing my line of thought.

I understand your line of thought, I just completely disagree. It took Bigby 2 years and an injury to a teammate to "break into" the Packers starting lineup. Did he have a lack of talent before he was a starter? No, he just had people ahead of him in line.

That being said, the wonderful coaching staff didn't "LET" him play, he was forced into the starting position due to injury. Then the DB coach goes "Wow... this kid can play" and he continued as a starter even after Nick Collins came back.

Was that a strategic coaching decision? Let him sit on the bench for 2 years because they knew that he wouldn't be good until someone got injured? It just doesn't make sense.

This sure seems to happen alot in the NFL all around. In GB look. Edgar Bennett injured, replaced by Dorsey Levens injured replaced by Ahman Green.

Look back to STL. Trent Green starter gets hurt, Kurt Warner all of a sudden is seen as the best QB in the League.

Maybe coaches are sometimes afraid to take a chance on a player who may be better and stick with what was working. If they would make a change and it failed they would be second guessed and would end up saying bye bye.

 

[Greg C.]

I don't know how anyone can judge a position coach. Unless you have inside information, it's impossible to tell how well they are doing their job. Are dumb mistakes the result of bad coaching by the position coach, the coordinator, or the head coach--or just dumb players?

Like a lot of Packer fans, I've always been suspicious of Kurt Schottenheimer. During his time in Green Bay we've had a lot of bad play out of safeties who were supposed to be good, then there was the Mike McKenzie flap, where supposedly one of the reasons for his holdout was that Schottenheimer had been promoted ahead of Lionel Washington. (I don't know if that was ever confirmed as a reason for McKenzie's discontent.)

This was the first year in a long time that I've been pleased with the quality of play that we had at the safety position. So maybe Schottenheimer is okay after all. Another plus is that I have more confidence in Mike McCarthy's ability to put together a good coaching staff than I did with Mike Sherman, at least toward the end. So if Schottenheimer is good enough for McCarthy, he's good enough for me, I guess.

 

[Zombieslayer]

I don't know how anyone can judge a position coach. Unless you have inside information, it's impossible to tell how well they are doing their job. Are dumb mistakes the result of bad coaching by the position coach, the coordinator, or the head coach--or just dumb players?

Like a lot of Packer fans, I've always been suspicious of Kurt Schottenheimer. During his time in Green Bay we've had a lot of bad play out of safeties who were supposed to be good, then there was the Mike McKenzie flap, where supposedly one of the reasons for his holdout was that Schottenheimer had been promoted ahead of Lionel Washington. (I don't know if that was ever confirmed as a reason for McKenzie's discontent.)

This was the first year in a long time that I've been pleased with the quality of play that we had at the safety position. So maybe Schottenheimer is okay after all. Another plus is that I have more confidence in Mike McCarthy's ability to put together a good coaching staff than I did with Mike Sherman, at least toward the end. So if Schottenheimer is good enough for McCarthy, he's good enough for me, I guess.

I understand that argument. But I'm more along the lines of there's no such thing as a bad student, just bad teacher. Well, not that extreme, but along those lines.

I seriously think Bigby is the real deal and would be a Pro Bowler if he had the right coaching. Do I have inside info? No. I'm just a fan who watches a lot of Packer games. But the thing is, when you hear both fans and "experts" saying he's a weak link, you have to wonder. Sure, we can all be wrong and he might be a good coach after all, but don't be surprised if MM lets him go. Personally, I'd love to see him replaced with LeRoy Butler.

 

[Greg C.]

I understand that argument. But I'm more along the lines of there's no such thing as a bad student, just bad teacher. Well, not that extreme, but along those lines.

I seriously think Bigby is the real deal and would be a Pro Bowler if he had the right coaching. Do I have inside info? No. I'm just a fan who watches a lot of Packer games. But the thing is, when you hear both fans and "experts" saying he's a weak link, you have to wonder. Sure, we can all be wrong and he might be a good coach after all, but don't be surprised if MM lets him go. Personally, I'd love to see him replaced with LeRoy Butler.

Who are the "experts" who think he's a weak link? I mostly just read the Green Bay Press Gazette and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, and I can't recall any of those guys saying much at all about Schottenheimer, one way or another.

It would definitely be cool to have LeRoy Butler on the staff.

 

[bozz_2006]

Who are the "experts" who think he's a weak link?

Skip Bayless, Tony Kornheiser, Mitt Romney, John Travolta... none of whom work for the Green Bay Press Gazette.