Bob Sanders really was that bad

[red]

a lot of us on here were really on the fire bob sanders band wagon from day one.

the d's uninspired play and vanilla scheme were really thorns in our side. there was hardly any fight on that side of the ball

now bob is gone and dom is in charge and it's amazing to see the total transformation of this team. its not just the switch to the 3-4 but the attitude and speed of the players.

its the same players (except the rooks), just a different attitude

to me this just shows how bad sanders was. to me thats the only major black spot on m3's resume, he hired and kept sanders even when it was clear he sucked

it should also be noted that capers and m3 have brought in some other top notch assistants that are also helping the cause

[sheepshead]

Night and Day my Packer Brothah.

[BallHawk]

And here's the sad thing, we had a coach on our team WORSE than Bob Sanders.....and he went by the name Kurt.

[Fritz]

By golly, I'm always up for kicking a guy who's no longer around.

Frickin' Schottenheimer. If the team plays lousy this year it'll be his fault too!

[KYPack]

The guy was the DC on a 13-3 team. Sometimes a good year can really hurt you. Lot's of teams really prepped for the Pack bc they were seen as a powerhouse. The more coaches that looked at tape, the more OC's realized the Packers were an easy read on defense.

6-10 helped MM pull the trigger on cleaning house, at least.

[pbmax]

Yes, Reggie Miller and the Pacers were a MUCH better offensive team KY :lol:

I thought Sanders was given way too much blame last year. He clearly wasn't Buddy Ryan, but it simply didn't look like he had the players. Even the small fade at the end (esp. pass rush) in 07 seemed linked to injuries.

I agree Capers is far more capable, even if we are just to base that on his history. So I think this will be very good for the team long term. But I am not ready yet to pass final judgement on Sanders until we lose a few guys on D this year and see what happens.

That said, for preseason, this transition has gone over more smoothly than I would have expected and rarely have I been happier to be wrong.

[KYPack]

I put an "instant edit' on that type, PB.

Truth is, I type "Pacers" quite a lot.

The spellcheck doesn't catch that baby, but I usually am able to eyeball the error before it goes to post.

[Administrator]

I put an "instant edit' on that type, PB.

Truth is, I type "Pacers" quite a lot.

The spellcheck doesn't catch that baby, but I usually am able to eyeball the error before it goes to post.

I'm glad you explained. You caught it before I did, and I was confused by the other post. :P I couldn't figure out what the heck Reggie Miller and the pacers had to do with your point!

[VegasPackFan]

I was of the opinion that we had pretty good players and in some cases really good players and talent on the D, but that the talent was being wasted to some extent with those teriible schemes.

There was ZERO innovation and imagination.

[Bretsky]

a lot of us on here were really on the fire bob sanders band wagon from day one.

the d's uninspired play and vanilla scheme were really thorns in our side. there was hardly any fight on that side of the ball

now bob is gone and dom is in charge and it's amazing to see the total transformation of this team. its not just the switch to the 3-4 but the attitude and speed of the players.

its the same players (except the rooks), just a different attitude

to me this just shows how bad sanders was. to me thats the only major black spot on m3's resume, he hired and kept sanders even when it was clear he sucked

it should also be noted that capers and m3 have brought in some other top notch assistants that are also helping the cause


DITTO; I was on the fire Bob Wagon three quarters of the way into year one of his terror and hated the hire in the first place

Glad to see the ship is above water again

[Scott Campbell]

In fairness to Sanders, Capers probably couldn't have overcome the loss of Jenkins, Barnett and Harris either. IMO

[Tarlam!]

In fairness to Vanilla Bob, he ran the Bates defense that most of us heralded when it came from the original source. Bates, however, didn't stutter. V-Bob does.

And to a man, the defensive players stood behind V-Bob in the press, only now are they remarking on improvements.

[Fritz]

a lot of us on here were really on the fire bob sanders band wagon from day one.

the d's uninspired play and vanilla scheme were really thorns in our side. there was hardly any fight on that side of the ball

now bob is gone and dom is in charge and it's amazing to see the total transformation of this team. its not just the switch to the 3-4 but the attitude and speed of the players.

its the same players (except the rooks), just a different attitude

to me this just shows how bad sanders was. to me thats the only major black spot on m3's resume, he hired and kept sanders even when it was clear he sucked

it should also be noted that capers and m3 have brought in some other top notch assistants that are also helping the cause


DITTO; I was on the fire Bob Wagon three quarters of the way into year one of his terror and hated the hire in the first place

Glad to see the ship is above water again

And I don't know for sure, but I think you also came up with the moniker "Vanilla Bob," which really stuck.

[Kiwon]

Coaching is a strange profession.

13-3, you're a hero. A losing record, you stink.

You could turn it around and focus on Capers.

He's got a 48-80 record as head coach. What's wrong with the guy? So is he a good coach or a lousy coach based upon his record?

Isn't coaching basically about motivating the players, getting the right players to fit your scheme, and then praying like crazy that they don't get injured?

Success is fleeting, losing is the norm. Even the best coach gets fired one day and his talents considered suspect.

Like I said, it's a strange profession.

[red]

In fairness to Sanders, Capers probably couldn't have overcome the loss of Jenkins, Barnett and Harris either. IMO

injuries or not, every player on the d seems to have a certain spark, or more energy or something that they didn't have in previous years

[KYPack]

Coaching is a strange profession.

13-3, you're a hero. A losing record, you stink.

You could turn it around and focus on Capers.

He's got a 48-80 record as head coach. What's wrong with the guy? So is he a good coach or a lousy coach based upon his record?

Isn't coaching basically about motivating the players, getting the right players to fit your scheme, and then praying like crazy that they don't get injured?

Success is fleeting, losing is the norm. Even the best coach gets fired one day and his talents considered suspect.

Like I said, it's a strange profession.

Capers has generally been a spectacular DC. When he gets the big chair, he is totally dependent on his GM and OC to build him an offense. When they fail him, he gets canned.

When he's a DC focused only on defense, he gets the job done.

[denverYooper]

Coaching is a strange profession.

13-3, you're a hero. A losing record, you stink.

You could turn it around and focus on Capers.

He's got a 48-80 record as head coach. What's wrong with the guy? So is he a good coach or a lousy coach based upon his record?

Isn't coaching basically about motivating the players, getting the right players to fit your scheme, and then praying like crazy that they don't get injured?

Success is fleeting, losing is the norm. Even the best coach gets fired one day and his talents considered suspect.

Like I said, it's a strange profession.

He could be a good coach but not a great manager. Head coaching also has a significant management component that is not included in being a coordinator.

[Merlin]

Sanders came from the Bates school of defensive schemes. But only Bates had success in the Bates scheme. The Packers defense has been vanilla for many years, even under Bates. It was Bates coaching that made the difference. You can't just say "here is the defensive play book" and not coach the team. Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going. Capers has success the first year he takes over a defense, just like Bates did. There isn't much room to go down so we have to go up and that's where Bates was his first season.

First order of business - Kurt Schottenheimer is GONE! Good riddance and if ANYONE hires this guy back to Green Bay, they need to immediately be fired themselves!

[Zool]

Coaching is a strange profession.

13-3, you're a hero. A losing record, you stink.

You could turn it around and focus on Capers.

He's got a 48-80 record as head coach. What's wrong with the guy? So is he a good coach or a lousy coach based upon his record?

Isn't coaching basically about motivating the players, getting the right players to fit your scheme, and then praying like crazy that they don't get injured?

Success is fleeting, losing is the norm. Even the best coach gets fired one day and his talents considered suspect.

Like I said, it's a strange profession.

Capers has generally been a spectacular DC. When he gets the big chair, he is totally dependent on his GM and OC to build him an offense. When they fail him, he gets canned.

When he's a DC focused only on defense, he gets the job done.

Also he keeps getting the nod for startup franchises. How many expansion teams are any good? Didn't he take the Panthers to the NFCC game in their 2nd year against the Packers?

[Tarlam!]

Sanders came from the Bates school of defensive schemes. But only Bates had success in the Bates scheme. The Packers defense has been vanilla for many years, even under Bates. It was Bates coaching that made the difference. You can't just say "here is the defensive play book" and not coach the team. Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going. Capers has success the first year he takes over a defense, just like Bates did. There isn't much room to go down so we have to go up and that's where Bates was his first season.


Gee, really? And what you said differs from my comments how, exactly?

[mraynrand]

Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going.

Maybe you missed the defensive disaster known as the '2004 season.' Slowit called plenty of blitzes and exotic defenses. But with Hawthorne, Joey Thomas, and Ahmad 'boxing gloves' Carroll back there, the 'exotic' defenses were about as effective as an exotic dance featuring Barney Fife.

[Tarlam!]

Zool, I respect Merlin. I rarely post anything original about football because, frankly, I know my place around here is that of a student. But, in the one time in a millennium that I actually do have an original thought, I'd like at least, ah, you know what. forget it.

[rbaloha1]

Lack of dc experience was also a contributing factor. Poor communication and players loosing faith in the scheme also contributed to Coach Sanders demise.

Obviously the talent exists and Capers is having success that TT and MM expected.

[Merlin]

Sanders came from the Bates school of defensive schemes. But only Bates had success in the Bates scheme. The Packers defense has been vanilla for many years, even under Bates. It was Bates coaching that made the difference. You can't just say "here is the defensive play book" and not coach the team. Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going. Capers has success the first year he takes over a defense, just like Bates did. There isn't much room to go down so we have to go up and that's where Bates was his first season.


Gee, really? And what you said differs from my comments how, exactly?

Not sure where you were going with this. I just posted my thoughts, it had nothing to do with your post.

[Merlin]

Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going.

Maybe you missed the defensive disaster known as the '2004 season.' Slowit called plenty of blitzes and exotic defenses. But with Hawthorne, Joey Thomas, and Ahmad 'boxing gloves' Carroll back there, the 'exotic' defenses were about as effective as an exotic dance featuring Barney Fife.

Oh I remember the "exotic" blitzes, they were so bad it appeared the other team knew they were coming the day before the game. Slowik wasn't original and he was predictable, maybe I should have used those terms instead of vanilla. To me anything predictable is vanilla, generic, or whatever term. I will try to be more clear in the future.

[Waldo]

Sanders came from the Bates school of defensive schemes. But only Bates had success in the Bates scheme. The Packers defense has been vanilla for many years, even under Bates. It was Bates coaching that made the difference. You can't just say "here is the defensive play book" and not coach the team. Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going. Capers has success the first year he takes over a defense, just like Bates did. There isn't much room to go down so we have to go up and that's where Bates was his first season.

First order of business - Kurt Schottenheimer is GONE! Good riddance and if ANYONE hires this guy back to Green Bay, they need to immediately be fired themselves!

Incorrect.

Bates got his scheme from Jimmy Johnson, created for the unique talents of the early 90's Cowboys, with monster DT's, stud pass rushing backups, speed ends, and shutdown corners. He then took the scheme with him to Miami and drafted the players to fill it. When Jimmy was fired Bates carried the mantle of the defense, somehow it has become known as the Bates defense, really though it is Jimmy Johnson's.

It is a scheme built for a team loaded with superior talent. It works great when the team is loaded with superior talent, not so much otherwise. It requires 2 elite shutdown corners, 2 plugger NT's, 2 box safeties that can cover, and 2 OLB's that can plug a gap and cover, and a tackling machine LB, in addition to an assortment of various size pass rushers. Good luck with that.

[Merlin]

I can believe that. Johnson is a brilliant coach, although I think his hair is his best feature.

[pbmax]

I can believe that. Johnson is a brilliant coach, although I think his hair is his best feature.
He become a caricature of his hair and the Cowboys, but his background was on the defensive side of the ball. He was an Assistant Coach at Pitt under Jackie Sherrill when they had Hugh Green and Ricky Jackson (I think it was Ricky Jackson) on defense. I think that is where he met Wannestache, much to the delight of Bears fans everywhere. :lol:

And remember Bates (with the talent he was given) looked much better in comparison with Slowik than he did in raw numbers. He essentially stopped the bleeding in the secondary and slowed big plays.

[BobDobbs]

So, if you need all that assorted talent to run it. Maybe they should the Herschel Walker defense.

[SkinBasket]

Slowik was as vanilla as it gets. Slowik would try his all out blitz schemes in the pre-season and then back off once the season got going.

Maybe you missed the defensive disaster known as the '2004 season.' Slowit called plenty of blitzes and exotic defenses. But with Hawthorne, Joey Thomas, and Ahmad 'boxing gloves' Carroll back there, the 'exotic' defenses were about as effective as an exotic dance featuring Barney Fife.

Oh I remember the "exotic" blitzes, they were so bad it appeared the other team knew they were coming the day before the game. Slowik wasn't original and he was predictable, maybe I should have used those terms instead of vanilla. To me anything predictable is vanilla, generic, or whatever term. I will try to be more clear in the future.

Actually, I recall other coaches praising the uniqueness of his blitz scheme after the first game. I thought the problem was that it was too complex for it's own good considering our players couldn't figure it out any better than the opposing team could. It didn't take long before our personnel forced Slowik into a team mandated limited defensive set.

So while the defense ended up playing a very basic scheme, I don't think it was because Slowik was unoriginal. He tried to be too clever with sub par talent.

[pbmax]

Actually, I recall other coaches praising the uniqueness of his blitz scheme after the first game. I thought the problem was that it was too complex for it's own good considering our players couldn't figure it out any better than the opposing team could. It didn't take long before our personnel forced Slowik into a team mandated limited defensive set.

So while the defense ended up playing a very basic scheme, I don't think it was because Slowik was unoriginal. He tried to be too clever with sub par talent.
He succeeded in the first game versus Carolina, but then the bottom fell out. People either had enough film to block it or Carolina was uniquely vulnerable, but those exotic blitzes stopped getting home and QBs had time to throw. We also had a huge game running on the Carolina D.

And whether by scheme, talent or coach, the secondary could not prevent big plays if the QB had time.