Bigby Quietly Excels in New Role: Packer D Dominates...

[SnakeLH2006]

http://gnb.scout.com/2/934200.html

The safety has more mental and coverage responsibilities under the new defensive scheme; coach Mike McCarthy is planning ahead for the possibility the Packers will open the playoffs on Saturday; plus more from Friday.

Atari Bigby knows what the statistics say, but he knows those numbers don’t define his performance.

His 50 tackles are less than half of what he recorded in 2007, when he finished third on the team with 121. His three interceptions are less than his five from two years ago.

“In terms of statistics, nah,” Bigby said when asked if he was satisfied by his performance. “But as far as doing what I have to do to make sure the team is on the right track, I feel like I’ve managed it well. We haven’t been perfect and I haven’t been perfect, but as far as explosive gains and things like where I was supposed to be, I think I’ve handled it well this season.”

Bigby, coming off a two-interception performance against Seattle, must be doing something right. The Packers rank second in total defense and first against the run. If Bigby was out of position or being beaten regularly, the Packers would be giving up a lot more big plays and they wouldn’t hold such lofty spots in the rankings.

“Exactly my point,” he said. “As far as just keeping everyone in line and making the defense look honest as whole, I feel like I’ve been doing a good job with that.”

While it might not be apparent, Bigby says he’s still thinking too much in the new scheme. He’s lining up deeper in the secondary and has more responsibilities, frequently moving to where there are multiple receivers and having to diagnose multiple routes quickly. If last week’s game against Seattle is a barometer, he’s peaking at the right time.

“From what I see, I have a great responsibility,” he said. “For the most part, I feel I’ve been doing it.”

___________________________________

It's true...since Bigby came back from early season injuries, the Packer D has absolutely dominated statistically and won a lot of games (check when he came back). Is this all on Bigby, no, but when he was healthy (dominated in 2007) the Pack won....He was out in 2008 a bunch and the D struggled. Coincidence...Nope. This guy is a winner and top notch starter at Strong Safety.

I know that Skin will want to kill me for posting this pro-Bigby topic, but the dude hasn't been beat in coverage all year (that I can remember) and intimidates with big hits and makes plays at times (rare for a SS). This guy is a catalyst for a good D, and have advocated him since he stepped on the scene in GB as a starter. He really fills out the safety position, letting Collins (who has been great again) make the plays, while doing everything asked of him as a run-stopper, big hitter, occasional playmaker at Strong Safety. I'm glad he's healthy, and this is what I expected from him and hope they resign him long term.

Snake loves some Bigby. Don't hate me Skin. LOL. We are winning...our D is dominate since he came back, and he really helps carve out a niche that Aaron Rouse could never do. Anyone miss Rouse?....Still waiting?

If we win a SuperBowl this year, Bigby will be remembered as a Packer Great on a great Packer D....That's how history goes.....esp. after looking back after a decade. Realistically, Bigby is the underappreciated equivalent/importance of Gilbert Brown from the 1997 Packer team as far as the Defense goes. He's the glue who doesn't mess up and makes some plays and makes the D go. History is predicated by the champions.

Snakes loves some Bigby. He's a really good NFL safety.

[SkinBasket]

I'm fine with where we're at right now. Bigby, however, is still the weakest link when we're in a base defense, even more so now that Poppinga rarely sees the field. I always maintained we could afford to have one of those guys out there at a time, but not both.

From what I can tell, we're dropping him deep, not asking a lot out of him, despite how he feels in this article, and allowing him to fill those roles which he is suited to, covering small areas and giving help as a moving (albeit slowly) fence post.

I would also posit the article is putting the carriage in front of the horse. Our line and backers are controlling the LOS and stopping the run before it gets to Bigby, and limiting his opportunities to be exposed. Somehow this article seems to be arguing that his mere presence in the secondary is helping the guys up front, or as Atari says, "keeping everyone in line and making the defense look honest as whole," whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.

That being said, this last game was a good one for him - more for the ankle tackles he was able to make to prevent bigger plays than the easy INTs, but those are nice too. Watching Jarrett Bush play defense makes it harder to be critical of Bigby too. Bigby can look downfield as say, "Well, at least I ain't as bad as that guy..."

From what I see, they've made him feel like he has great responsibility to allow him to play with confidence while simultaneously limiting his role to one that he feels comfortable with.

[Administrator]

wasn't Bigby supposed to have provided safety help on the "last second" Pittsburgh TD?

[Bretsky]

yes, that was the reports but my guess is he read something else from Big Ben. He was a good ten yards away it seemed.

IMO Bigby is a good backup and can be alright if he doesn't have too cover anybody for over a couple seconds.

[packers11]

Bigby is a huge upgrade of anything else we have. THATS A FACT.

When he was out earlier in the season there was a lot of blown assignments at the backup safety position. (check out the first vikings game, you can see harris yelling at martin on a couple of big plays)...

Would I be mad if they packers drafted someone or brought someone in to replace bigby? No. but to say he is below average is foolish. He is average / a little bit above average (at times), but cannot be anything more because he lacks speed.

[Pugger]

Bigby is a huge upgrade of anything else we have. THATS A FACT.

When he was out earlier in the season there was a lot of blown assignments at the backup safety position. (check out the first vikings game, you can see harris yelling at martin on a couple of big plays)...

Would I be mad if they packers drafted someone or brought someone in to replace bigby? No. but to say he is below average is foolish. He is average / a little bit above average (at times), but cannot be anything more because he lacks speed.

+1

[Bretsky]

Bigby is a huge upgrade of anything else we have. THATS A FACT.

When he was out earlier in the season there was a lot of blown assignments at the backup safety position. (check out the first vikings game, you can see harris yelling at martin on a couple of big plays)...

Would I be mad if they packers drafted someone or brought someone in to replace bigby? No. but to say he is below average is foolish. He is average / a little bit above average (at times), but cannot be anything more because he lacks speed.


Of course he's an upgrade over the others; he's starting. And if I'm not mistaken that was after GB let a couple guys go so there were newbies (Martin) in that didn't know all of their assignments yet. Foolish.....hardly think so. You have provided no more data to say he's above average than others have who think he's below average. There are a boatlead of reasons this defense has come together since that Vikings game. Saying he's better than our backups is a given. Jarrett Bush, Martin, Bell........heck some of them are backups to backups who were injured (Blackmand, Lee)

[SkinBasket]

He is average / a little bit above average (at times), but cannot be anything more because he lacks speed.

Speed is only one of the many things he lacks. Our defensive staff is doing a great job limiting his exposure, allowing him for the most part to drift around deep, keeping the play in front of him, which is the only way Bigby can play. On any other team that doesn't have the corners we're blessed with, Bigby would be brutalized.

As far as the TD in Pittsburgh, I don't think Bigby has anything to offer to that coverage, which was pretty good for a 6th or 8th string CB. Bigby certainly doesn't have the speed/positional awareness to get in front of that play, which was the only way it was going to be defensed.

[pbmax]

Bigby was supposed to be in the endzone (he was), and then come up in support to stop any receiver who caught the ball in the field of play. Not double-team a receiver.

Bell was supposed to keep the receiver away from the sideline and always stay in front of the WR. The idea is to force the receiver to catch any ball in the field of play short of the endzone and in the middle of the field where two DBs could hit him. Should have looked like this:


******************************* backline
*
* Bigby
*
*------------------------------ goal line
*
* WR
*
* Bell

The idea would be to give the WR and QB an inviting target in the middle of the field and close the sideline. Just like you might overplay a basketball player's right side when you really want him to go left.

If the QB and WR still go sideline, then Bell in is front of the throw forcing it to go high, giving Bigby time to get to the WR's body or the ball. Bell allowed the throw to go low and direct, eliminating his help.

The other route that is might be here is the corner of the endzone, but the reasoning is that the throw will still need to go over Bell and give Bigby time to close. Whether he could have gotten there or not is the subject of debate about Bigby. Lately, he has been able to clock receivers in front of him in time, but moving laterally like this would require him is a different matter. I don't know if he gets there.

[bobblehead]

I've pimped Bigby for awhile, I think he is somewhere between choice B or C. I don't ever see him making a pro bowl, but I think he is an above average NFL starter at safety. He isn't collins or polamalu or reed, but I would take him over 65% of the other safeties in the league.

When Grant held out I stated then that I would rather pay Bigby. I still maintain that. Cause and effect are hard sometimes in the NFL, but when Bigby is in the lineup the D plays better. We have run several safeties through town, but he is still a starter on a top notch defense. Coincidence...doubt it.

[CaptainKickass]

How many times has our D gotten worse with Bigby out?

How many times has our D gotten better with Bigby out?


Sure, he probably isn't gonna win any pro-bowls. But until the D gets better with someone other than Bigby in there..."2600" has my full support.

[Bretsky]

How many times has our D gotten worse with Bigby out?

How many times has our D gotten better with Bigby out?


Sure, he probably isn't gonna win any pro-bowls. But until the D gets better with someone other than Bigby in there..."2600" has my full support.


Whose poses a question; is that due to Bigby being that good or our backups being that bad :?: :?:

[Patler]

Bigby was supposed to be in the endzone (he was), and then come up in support to stop any receiver who caught the ball in the field of play. Not double-team a receiver.

Bell was supposed to keep the receiver away from the sideline and always stay in front of the WR. The idea is to force the receiver to catch any ball in the field of play short of the endzone and in the middle of the field where two DBs could hit him. Should have looked like this:


******************************* backline
*
* Bigby
*
*------------------------------ goal line
*
* WR
*
* Bell

The idea would be to give the WR and QB an inviting target in the middle of the field and close the sideline. Just like you might overplay a basketball player's right side when you really want him to go left.

If the QB and WR still go sideline, then Bell in is front of the throw forcing it to go high, giving Bigby time to get to the WR's body or the ball. Bell allowed the throw to go low and direct, eliminating his help.

The other route that is might be here is the corner of the endzone, but the reasoning is that the throw will still need to go over Bell and give Bigby time to close. Whether he could have gotten there or not is the subject of debate about Bigby. Lately, he has been able to clock receivers in front of him in time, but moving laterally like this would require him is a different matter. I don't know if he gets there.

I'm glad you brought that up pbmax, I have been meaning to do that when the comments about Bigby have been made regarding the last Pittsburgh play; but most times the threads have quickly moved on to something else.

Several have commented that Bell had very "tight" coverage, and the throw was perfect. That's all true, Bell's coverage was "tight" (as in he was close to the receiver), but Bell's coverage was very wrong. A DB is supposed to know where his help on any play will come from (if he is getting any), and he should force the receiver toward that help. On the play in question, Bell negated the help from Bigby by giving the sideline to the receiver. In essence, he put himself between the receiver and any help from Bigby. There was no way for Bigby to get there for that. As a result, Bell's only "help" on the play would be an errant throw, and Roethlisberger didn't give him that. Taking away the sideline, forcing the receiver yards closer to the center of the field, would have given Bigby a chance to get there.

[Pugger]

How many times has our D gotten worse with Bigby out?

How many times has our D gotten better with Bigby out?


Sure, he probably isn't gonna win any pro-bowls. But until the D gets better with someone other than Bigby in there..."2600" has my full support.


Whose poses a question; is that due to Bigby being that good or our backups being that bad?:?: :?:

Bigby won't be going to the HOF but our D did improve once he returned to the lineup. Coincidence? Bigby is better than the the backups as are most starters.

[Fritz]

Bigby was supposed to be in the endzone (he was), and then come up in support to stop any receiver who caught the ball in the field of play. Not double-team a receiver.

Bell was supposed to keep the receiver away from the sideline and always stay in front of the WR. The idea is to force the receiver to catch any ball in the field of play short of the endzone and in the middle of the field where two DBs could hit him. Should have looked like this:


******************************* backline
*
* Bigby
*
*------------------------------ goal line
*
* WR
*
* Bell

The idea would be to give the WR and QB an inviting target in the middle of the field and close the sideline. Just like you might overplay a basketball player's right side when you really want him to go left.

If the QB and WR still go sideline, then Bell in is front of the throw forcing it to go high, giving Bigby time to get to the WR's body or the ball. Bell allowed the throw to go low and direct, eliminating his help.

The other route that is might be here is the corner of the endzone, but the reasoning is that the throw will still need to go over Bell and give Bigby time to close. Whether he could have gotten there or not is the subject of debate about Bigby. Lately, he has been able to clock receivers in front of him in time, but moving laterally like this would require him is a different matter. I don't know if he gets there.

I'm glad you brought that up pbmax, I have been meaning to do that when the comments about Bigby have been made regarding the last Pittsburgh play; but most times the threads have quickly moved on to something else.

Several have commented that Bell had very "tight" coverage, and the throw was perfect. That's all true, Bell's coverage was "tight" (as in he was close to the receiver), but Bell's coverage was very wrong. A DB is supposed to know where his help on any play will come from (if he is getting any), and he should force the receiver toward that help. On the play in question, Bell negated the help from Bigby by giving the sideline to the receiver. In essence, he put himself between the receiver and any help from Bigby. There was no way for Bigby to get there for that. As a result, Bell's only "help" on the play would be an errant throw, and Roethlisberger didn't give him that. Taking away the sideline, forcing the receiver yards closer to the center of the field, would have given Bigby a chance to get there.

Here's what I don't get: if Bell covered in front of the receiver and forced him inside, and Bigby was near the middle of the end zone, then the receiver would simply have cut inside, been a step ahead of Bell with Bigby behind him. It's still a touchdown, isn't it? But instead of having to force the ball into one spot, Rothlisberger would have had more space to throw to. The only way Bigby could've broken it up would've been with a big hit. I mean, the receiver was in the end zone on the play; a cut inside would've still put him a step inside the end zone with Bell a step or two away on the outside and Bigby behind him.

[mraynrand]

Bigby was supposed to be in the endzone (he was), and then come up in support to stop any receiver who caught the ball in the field of play. Not double-team a receiver.

Bell was supposed to keep the receiver away from the sideline and always stay in front of the WR. The idea is to force the receiver to catch any ball in the field of play short of the endzone and in the middle of the field where two DBs could hit him. Should have looked like this:


******************************* backline
*
* Bigby
*
*------------------------------ goal line
*
* WR
*
* Bell

The idea would be to give the WR and QB an inviting target in the middle of the field and close the sideline. Just like you might overplay a basketball player's right side when you really want him to go left.

If the QB and WR still go sideline, then Bell in is front of the throw forcing it to go high, giving Bigby time to get to the WR's body or the ball. Bell allowed the throw to go low and direct, eliminating his help.

The other route that is might be here is the corner of the endzone, but the reasoning is that the throw will still need to go over Bell and give Bigby time to close. Whether he could have gotten there or not is the subject of debate about Bigby. Lately, he has been able to clock receivers in front of him in time, but moving laterally like this would require him is a different matter. I don't know if he gets there.

I'm glad you brought that up pbmax, I have been meaning to do that when the comments about Bigby have been made regarding the last Pittsburgh play; but most times the threads have quickly moved on to something else.

Several have commented that Bell had very "tight" coverage, and the throw was perfect. That's all true, Bell's coverage was "tight" (as in he was close to the receiver), but Bell's coverage was very wrong. A DB is supposed to know where his help on any play will come from (if he is getting any), and he should force the receiver toward that help. On the play in question, Bell negated the help from Bigby by giving the sideline to the receiver. In essence, he put himself between the receiver and any help from Bigby. There was no way for Bigby to get there for that. As a result, Bell's only "help" on the play would be an errant throw, and Roethlisberger didn't give him that. Taking away the sideline, forcing the receiver yards closer to the center of the field, would have given Bigby a chance to get there.

Here's what I don't get: if Bell covered in front of the receiver and forced him inside, and Bigby was near the middle of the end zone, then the receiver would simply have cut inside, been a step ahead of Bell with Bigby behind him. It's still a touchdown, isn't it? But instead of having to force the ball into one spot, Rothlisberger would have had more space to throw to. The only way Bigby could've broken it up would've been with a big hit. I mean, the receiver was in the end zone on the play; a cut inside would've still put him a step inside the end zone with Bell a step or two away on the outside and Bigby behind him.

What are the choices here? Bigby wasn't anywhere near the receiver. If there was supposed to be double coverage with the safety behind and Bell in front, where the hell was Bigby? Maybe Bell ran the wrong coverage, but if so, Bigby completely screwed it up.

[pbmax]

Bigby was supposed to be in the endzone (he was), and then come up in support to stop any receiver who caught the ball in the field of play. Not double-team a receiver.

Bell was supposed to keep the receiver away from the sideline and always stay in front of the WR. The idea is to force the receiver to catch any ball in the field of play short of the endzone and in the middle of the field where two DBs could hit him. Should have looked like this:


******************************* backline
*
* Bigby
*
*------------------------------ goal line
*
* WR
*
* Bell

The idea would be to give the WR and QB an inviting target in the middle of the field and close the sideline. Just like you might overplay a basketball player's right side when you really want him to go left.

If the QB and WR still go sideline, then Bell in is front of the throw forcing it to go high, giving Bigby time to get to the WR's body or the ball. Bell allowed the throw to go low and direct, eliminating his help.

The other route that is might be here is the corner of the endzone, but the reasoning is that the throw will still need to go over Bell and give Bigby time to close. Whether he could have gotten there or not is the subject of debate about Bigby. Lately, he has been able to clock receivers in front of him in time, but moving laterally like this would require him is a different matter. I don't know if he gets there.

I'm glad you brought that up pbmax, I have been meaning to do that when the comments about Bigby have been made regarding the last Pittsburgh play; but most times the threads have quickly moved on to something else.

Several have commented that Bell had very "tight" coverage, and the throw was perfect. That's all true, Bell's coverage was "tight" (as in he was close to the receiver), but Bell's coverage was very wrong. A DB is supposed to know where his help on any play will come from (if he is getting any), and he should force the receiver toward that help. On the play in question, Bell negated the help from Bigby by giving the sideline to the receiver. In essence, he put himself between the receiver and any help from Bigby. There was no way for Bigby to get there for that. As a result, Bell's only "help" on the play would be an errant throw, and Roethlisberger didn't give him that. Taking away the sideline, forcing the receiver yards closer to the center of the field, would have given Bigby a chance to get there.

Here's what I don't get: if Bell covered in front of the receiver and forced him inside, and Bigby was near the middle of the end zone, then the receiver would simply have cut inside, been a step ahead of Bell with Bigby behind him. It's still a touchdown, isn't it? But instead of having to force the ball into one spot, Rothlisberger would have had more space to throw to. The only way Bigby could've broken it up would've been with a big hit. I mean, the receiver was in the end zone on the play; a cut inside would've still put him a step inside the end zone with Bell a step or two away on the outside and Bigby behind him.

What are the choices here? Bigby wasn't anywhere near the receiver. If there was supposed to be double coverage with the safety behind and Bell in front, where the hell was Bigby? Maybe Bell ran the wrong coverage, but if so, Bigby completely screwed it up.
Given the one video I have seen, I agree, it looks like Bigby would not have gotten to even an inside route, but he is following BenR eyes as well as receivers, so he may have been led to his right if BenR had to choose that route instead of coming all the way over to Bell's sideline at the last minute.

But if Bell is on the WR's outside, he should be able to chase a completed interior pass toward the middle, so the WR can arc around Bell and score. Every step that Bell can force toward the middle rather than towards the goal line is a step Bigby does not have to take. In essence, if Bell forces Pitt's WR inside, Bigby is a LOT closer to the tackle.

[Patler]

Bigby was supposed to be in the endzone (he was), and then come up in support to stop any receiver who caught the ball in the field of play. Not double-team a receiver.

Bell was supposed to keep the receiver away from the sideline and always stay in front of the WR. The idea is to force the receiver to catch any ball in the field of play short of the endzone and in the middle of the field where two DBs could hit him. Should have looked like this:


******************************* backline
*
* Bigby
*
*------------------------------ goal line
*
* WR
*
* Bell

The idea would be to give the WR and QB an inviting target in the middle of the field and close the sideline. Just like you might overplay a basketball player's right side when you really want him to go left.

If the QB and WR still go sideline, then Bell in is front of the throw forcing it to go high, giving Bigby time to get to the WR's body or the ball. Bell allowed the throw to go low and direct, eliminating his help.

The other route that is might be here is the corner of the endzone, but the reasoning is that the throw will still need to go over Bell and give Bigby time to close. Whether he could have gotten there or not is the subject of debate about Bigby. Lately, he has been able to clock receivers in front of him in time, but moving laterally like this would require him is a different matter. I don't know if he gets there.

I'm glad you brought that up pbmax, I have been meaning to do that when the comments about Bigby have been made regarding the last Pittsburgh play; but most times the threads have quickly moved on to something else.

Several have commented that Bell had very "tight" coverage, and the throw was perfect. That's all true, Bell's coverage was "tight" (as in he was close to the receiver), but Bell's coverage was very wrong. A DB is supposed to know where his help on any play will come from (if he is getting any), and he should force the receiver toward that help. On the play in question, Bell negated the help from Bigby by giving the sideline to the receiver. In essence, he put himself between the receiver and any help from Bigby. There was no way for Bigby to get there for that. As a result, Bell's only "help" on the play would be an errant throw, and Roethlisberger didn't give him that. Taking away the sideline, forcing the receiver yards closer to the center of the field, would have given Bigby a chance to get there.

Here's what I don't get: if Bell covered in front of the receiver and forced him inside, and Bigby was near the middle of the end zone, then the receiver would simply have cut inside, been a step ahead of Bell with Bigby behind him. It's still a touchdown, isn't it? But instead of having to force the ball into one spot, Rothlisberger would have had more space to throw to. The only way Bigby could've broken it up would've been with a big hit. I mean, the receiver was in the end zone on the play; a cut inside would've still put him a step inside the end zone with Bell a step or two away on the outside and Bigby behind him.

What are the choices here? Bigby wasn't anywhere near the receiver. If there was supposed to be double coverage with the safety behind and Bell in front, where the hell was Bigby? Maybe Bell ran the wrong coverage, but if so, Bigby completely screwed it up.

Bigby was helping from the inside out, and I assume also had other responsibilities depending on how the play unfolded. If the receiver was forced to break toward the middle, toward Bigby, he likely would have been there.

There was a photo published of the catch, taken from the sideline looking in, and Bigby looks as big as the others, running toward the play, apparently not all that far away. If they had been running toward each other, it might have been a good collision course!

[Joemailman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrU9ixj0I2o&feature=related

Gotta say in the first replay, Bigby looks pretty far away. In the second replay which starts at about the :30 mark, you can say Bell looking around, perhaps to see where his help is. He may have decided he didn't have any help and needed to guard against the inside move.

[Patler]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DrU9ixj0I2o&feature=related

Gotta say in the first replay, Bigby looks pretty far away. In the second replay which starts at about the :30 mark, you can say Bell looking around, perhaps to see where his help is. He may have decided he didn't have any help and needed to guard against the inside move.

Look at where Bell and the receiver started the play, the ball was on the right hashmark. If Bell takes away the outside move, forcing him to move toward the inside, even if the receiver makes it to the endzone, he would be a lot closer to Bigby. Bigby was near/on the "P" in the endzone when the pass was caught as it was.

You also have to look at it from Bigby's perspective, once Bell failed to take away the outside move and gave the receiver the sideline, Bigby knows there is now way for him to get there in time, which I'm sure would slow any move he makes in that direction. It also may instinctively keep him working toward a different area where he can help, in case Roethlisberger goes to a different receiver. Had the receiver been forced to a different area closer to the center of the field, one where Bigby could help, Bigby might drive earlier and harder toward the receiver than when the receiver goes to an area Bigby knows he can't get to anyway.

[bobblehead]

how about we just tip our hats to pitt....perfect throw and catch...absolutely ridiculous. I am blaming no one other than ben and the reciever for that play.

[Joemailman]

Big Ben was definitely on a roll that day. Hard to stop him when he's playing like that. Let's face it, losing Harris, Lee and Blackmon for the year has created a tough situation. These guys who are playing now in the nickel and dime are going to give up some plays.

I'm fine with Bigby, but the depth behind him and Collins scares me. Hope nobody gets hurt today or we're dead in the playoffs.

[SkinBasket]

More of the same tonight. Bigby playing an adequate center fielder while the front applies pressure. And he whiffed on one of his patented (though you can count them on one hand) BIG HITS!!!!

People's obsession with Bigby is approaching the glue factor argument in favor of Ruvell. It's simply frightening how many people voted him at "Pro Bowl" caliber. Ick. Barf.

[SnakeLH2006]

Skin...give up some props bro. Bigby is not fast. Got it. But the D takes place when he's on the field. Look at 2007 (dominate)...2008 (hurt and lackluster in the secondary)....2009...hurt early (lackluster)...comes back and have the best points/yards per game since he came back.

It's not all on Bigby, but hell he is glue (the safety net) that lets Collins run loose and CWood. He's pretty damn good at what he does, and the bottom line is our secondary and defensive stats. He scares peeps out there with hits. I played HS and College Football and those guys making hits might not get all the stats, but you worry about them, and it affects how you play. Bigby, when he came back (around game 4 or 5) really gelled this D for the Pack.

He's kinda unspoken stat wise ala Pickett, but really is a beast to help out the overall D. Not mention 4 INT's for a SS is pretty good (and had one taken away in game 16...not to mention the one that counted).....He's pretty damn good and does the dirty work that you need from a Strong Safety (big hits and who else does that on our D??..tackling ability at scrimmage...some sense of INT when presented...rarely gives up big plays deep..the Pittsburgh TD is questionable). He's pretty damn good, and I only ask, what Rouse? what Marquand Manual, Mark Roman, or how many shitty safeties we went through in FA before him? He's pretty damn good. To compare him to that turd Poppinga is garbage...Bigby holds his own. Popps isn't worth a roster spot or his absurd almost $4 million cap number in 2010. Now that is something to bitch about there. Popps is shit.

[RashanGary]

how about we just tip our hats to pitt....perfect throw and catch...absolutely ridiculous. I am blaming no one other than ben and the reciever for that play.

Because that's not true. Bell played the wrong coverage and got beat for his mistake. We got beat over and over for mistakes in the Minny games. It's pretty important to not just move on from that. We're fans, maybe we dont' problem solve it, but why should we ignore it?

[SkinBasket]

Skin...give up some props bro. Bigby is not fast. Got it. But the D takes place when he's on the field. Look at 2007 (dominate)...2008 (hurt and lackluster in the secondary)....2009...hurt early (lackluster)...comes back and have the best points/yards per game since he came back.

Like I said in the other Atari thread, I have too much confidence in this defense, the coaching, and the new scheme to believe that Bigby, who most would agree is probably our weakest, or second weakest starter, has that much impact on this team, yet losing Al Harris means nothing by the same comparison. Bigby is benefiting from other things that have happened in this defense, most notably our D line playing the run well, the emergence of 52 as a pass rusher, and less notably, the emergence of 59 as an upgrade result wise to Kampman. Atari is doing a fine job capitalizing on the opportunities that result from our front applying pressure and our corners playing great defense. But I'm not going to believe he is the magic Ruvell Martin glue of the defense, nor am I going to pretend he's anything other than what he is. A guy that most people would still be looking to upgrade if he had a less interesting name, a haircut, and a handful of highlight reel hits two years ago. I get it. He's fun to root for and there's the specter of those huge hits from the past. I'm just hoping we can find someone better next year.

[Fritz]

To me, it's always about the trenches. When your defensive line is playing as well as Green Bay's is right now, you can make guys like Bigby look okay or even good. When the defensive line eats up blocks and doesn't get shoved around so pass pressure can be applied or running backs stuffed, then the secondary doesn't have to cover as long. It's pretty simple, to me.

It's always about the trenches. You have that, then guys like Bigby can pass muster, and guys like Woodson can contend for the defensive player of the year award.

I'd like to see the Packers draft a safety or even two this draft. I think Bigby could be replaced, though probably not by a rookie (unless he's Matthews-esque), and I think an upgrade as a backup from Giordono or whoever he is would be good.

I kinda like Bigby, but I can see that he's limited. I have no problem with Skin's problem with Bigby. Bigby is not pro bowl material. But he's passable with a good defensive line in front of him.

[Gunakor]

Football is THE team sport. Pretty much every player in the league is a product of the system they're in and the players surrounding them. Which is why a player can put up huge #'s for one team, leave in FA, get big bucks from another team that runs a different scheme with different players, and become very pedestrian overnight. It's a big reason why so many #1 picks turn out to be busts as well. So to say Bigby is more pedestrian than another guy and is simply a product of the system or merely a beneficiary of the other talented players on that defense... The same can be said for 95% of the guys out there.

So ask yourself this: Would you replace Bigby with another guy who has stood out in another system knowing full well that the new guy might not thrive in ours? Or would you just go the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" route? Personally, I would just stick with what's working. Even if the new guy was a better safety, he might not be a better safety HERE. As long as Bigby is producing HERE, regardless whether its production due to talent or a product of the system, I wouldn't risk losing that production due to a change in personnel.

[Administrator]

how about we just tip our hats to pitt....perfect throw and catch...absolutely ridiculous. I am blaming no one other than ben and the reciever for that play.

Because that's not true. Bell played the wrong coverage and got beat for his mistake. We got beat over and over for mistakes in the Minny games. It's pretty important to not just move on from that. We're fans, maybe we dont' problem solve it, but why should we ignore it?

If you watch the replay, you'll see that Bigby is moving away from the play (not towards the play). Someone speculated that he "saw something else". Maybe that's true, maybe it isn't. If it is, maybe Bigby spent too much time watching Ben and bit on a fake. Maybe, he prevented a TD in the middle of the field. We'll never know.

But, to blame that play on Bell, when you don't know what the coverage responsibilities are is foolish. Had Bell forced Walker into the middle of the field, with Bigby moving away (which others have speculated was the way the play was designed), it would have been an easy touchdown to the inside away from Bell.

The replay looks to me, like Bell was left on an island alone, and did the best that he could with the situation that he had. He forced Pittsburgh to make the perfect play, and they did.

[mraynrand]

But, to blame that play on Bell, when you don't know what the coverage responsibilities are is foolish.

Look at page one of this thread. We were told by coaches that Bell had the wrong coverage. PBmax has the correct coverage shown. Did Bigby react to Bell's incorrect coverage and change his coverage, did he cover improperly himself, did he get tricked by Ben's eyes, or something else - I don't think we know the answer to this.

[ThunderDan]

But, to blame that play on Bell, when you don't know what the coverage responsibilities are is foolish.

Look at page one of this thread. We were told by coaches that Bell had the wrong coverage. PBmax has the correct coverage shown. Did Bigby react to Bell's incorrect coverage and change his coverage, did he cover improperly himself, did he get tricked by Ben's eyes, or something else - I don't think we know the answer to this.

It's hard to believe that Bell was really supposed to be outside and behind on that play. That leaves the inside slant wide open and Bigby was nowhere near where he needed to be if that was the case.

If anything, in that case you would want your CB to use the sideline as an extra defender and pin a WR 1-on-1 against the boundary. That way you have more guys to cover the middle.

I don't blame Bell for giving his man 16" to catch the ball.

[mraynrand]

But, to blame that play on Bell, when you don't know what the coverage responsibilities are is foolish.

Look at page one of this thread. We were told by coaches that Bell had the wrong coverage. PBmax has the correct coverage shown. Did Bigby react to Bell's incorrect coverage and change his coverage, did he cover improperly himself, did he get tricked by Ben's eyes, or something else - I don't think we know the answer to this.

It's hard to believe that Bell was really supposed to be outside and behind on that play.

He wasn't. Go look again at what pbmax drew up. Bell had good coverage (only had wrong arm forward at the end), but the coaches said he ran the wrong coverage. I don't know what happened with Bigby.

[ThunderDan]

But, to blame that play on Bell, when you don't know what the coverage responsibilities are is foolish.

Look at page one of this thread. We were told by coaches that Bell had the wrong coverage. PBmax has the correct coverage shown. Did Bigby react to Bell's incorrect coverage and change his coverage, did he cover improperly himself, did he get tricked by Ben's eyes, or something else - I don't think we know the answer to this.

It's hard to believe that Bell was really supposed to be outside and behind on that play.

He wasn't. Go look again at what pbmax drew up. Bell had good coverage (only had wrong arm forward at the end), but the coaches said he ran the wrong coverage. I don't know what happened with Bigby.

That's exactly what pbmax drew up. Outside of him (between the Pitt WR and the sideline) and behind him (between the WR and the QB). Bigby was supposed to be inside (wasn't there at all) and keep the WR in front of him.

[3irty1]

I've pimped Bigby for awhile, I think he is somewhere between choice B or C. I don't ever see him making a pro bowl, but I think he is an above average NFL starter at safety. He isn't collins or polamalu or reed, but I would take him over 65% of the other safeties in the league.

When Grant held out I stated then that I would rather pay Bigby. I still maintain that. Cause and effect are hard sometimes in the NFL, but when Bigby is in the lineup the D plays better. We have run several safeties through town, but he is still a starter on a top notch defense. Coincidence...doubt it.

This is about how I feel. He's not an all world athlete but his ability to recognize plays is elite imo. He's a guy you'll try hard to replace but nobody will be able to take his job.

[mraynrand]

It's hard to believe that Bell was really supposed to be outside and behind on that play.


That's exactly what pbmax drew up. Outside of him (between the Pitt WR and the sideline) and behind him (between the WR and the QB).

I didn't think 'behind him' meant between the WR and the QB. But whatever, It looks like you get where Bell was supposed to be. Now that just leaves Bigby and I think we'll never know.

[SnakeLH2006]

I've pimped Bigby for awhile, I think he is somewhere between choice B or C. I don't ever see him making a pro bowl, but I think he is an above average NFL starter at safety. He isn't collins or polamalu or reed, but I would take him over 65% of the other safeties in the league.

When Grant held out I stated then that I would rather pay Bigby. I still maintain that. Cause and effect are hard sometimes in the NFL, but when Bigby is in the lineup the D plays better. We have run several safeties through town, but he is still a starter on a top notch defense. Coincidence...doubt it.

This is about how I feel. He's not an all world athlete but his ability to recognize plays is elite imo. He's a guy you'll try hard to replace but nobody will be able to take his job.

QFT....He's not the best...but look at when he's playing.....The Rouse shit caused major problems last year, not to mention the turds playing SS before him with gaffes the past 5 years before Bigby. He's pretty fucking solid and our Pass D and Overall D as far as Points/Game and Yards/Game is phenomenal in 2007 and 2009 when he plays.

Is that to say Bigby is the end-all stud? No. Of course not, but we have been proven to play some crazy D. Throw Jolly in there. Stats be damned. Some guys just do it. I'm happy with Bigby and will be pissed if we draft a safety over an OT or RB in the 2010 draft. There's no reason to replace Bigby......he ain't Marquand or some other douche....he doesn't get beat repeatedly....and plays unnoticed ala Pickett. Bigby at the worst is 5 times the player the revered AJ Hawk is...at least Bigby makes plays (and doesn't get torched like AJ has in the past). Nuff said.

[Gunakor]

I've pimped Bigby for awhile, I think he is somewhere between choice B or C. I don't ever see him making a pro bowl, but I think he is an above average NFL starter at safety. He isn't collins or polamalu or reed, but I would take him over 65% of the other safeties in the league.

When Grant held out I stated then that I would rather pay Bigby. I still maintain that. Cause and effect are hard sometimes in the NFL, but when Bigby is in the lineup the D plays better. We have run several safeties through town, but he is still a starter on a top notch defense. Coincidence...doubt it.

This is about how I feel. He's not an all world athlete but his ability to recognize plays is elite imo. He's a guy you'll try hard to replace but nobody will be able to take his job.

QFT....He's not the best...but look at when he's playing.....The Rouse shit caused major problems last year, not to mention the turds playing SS before him with gaffes the past 5 years before Bigby. He's pretty fucking solid and our Pass D and Overall D as far as Points/Game and Yards/Game is phenomenal in 2007 and 2009 when he plays.

Is that to say Bigby is the end-all stud? No. Of course not, but we have been proven to play some crazy D. Throw Jolly in there. Stats be damned. Some guys just do it. I'm happy with Bigby and will be pissed if we draft a safety over an OT or RB in the 2010 draft. There's no reason to replace Bigby......he ain't Marquand or some other douche....he doesn't get beat repeatedly....and plays unnoticed ala Pickett. Bigby at the worst is 5 times the player the revered AJ Hawk is...at least Bigby makes plays (and doesn't get torched like AJ has in the past). Nuff said.

That's where I'm at too. Bigby isn't a playmaker but he plays his role very well and the defense overall benefits greatly from it. You could make a change and find someone who can play that role just as well as Bigby can, but what's the point? Just to change names? Whether it's Bigby playing that role or someone else, it doesn't matter as long as they play it at a high level. That being the case, as long as Bigby is playing the role he's asked to play at a high level, why make the change? As long as the role the SS is asked to play in our defense doesn't change, I hope the player asked to play SS in our defense doesn't change either.

[SnakeLH2006]

I've pimped Bigby for awhile, I think he is somewhere between choice B or C. I don't ever see him making a pro bowl, but I think he is an above average NFL starter at safety. He isn't collins or polamalu or reed, but I would take him over 65% of the other safeties in the league.

When Grant held out I stated then that I would rather pay Bigby. I still maintain that. Cause and effect are hard sometimes in the NFL, but when Bigby is in the lineup the D plays better. We have run several safeties through town, but he is still a starter on a top notch defense. Coincidence...doubt it.

This is about how I feel. He's not an all world athlete but his ability to recognize plays is elite imo. He's a guy you'll try hard to replace but nobody will be able to take his job.

QFT....He's not the best...but look at when he's playing.....The Rouse shit caused major problems last year, not to mention the turds playing SS before him with gaffes the past 5 years before Bigby. He's pretty fucking solid and our Pass D and Overall D as far as Points/Game and Yards/Game is phenomenal in 2007 and 2009 when he plays.

Is that to say Bigby is the end-all stud? No. Of course not, but we have been proven to play some crazy D. Throw Jolly in there. Stats be damned. Some guys just do it. I'm happy with Bigby and will be pissed if we draft a safety over an OT or RB in the 2010 draft. There's no reason to replace Bigby......he ain't Marquand or some other douche....he doesn't get beat repeatedly....and plays unnoticed ala Pickett. Bigby at the worst is 5 times the player the revered AJ Hawk is...at least Bigby makes plays (and doesn't get torched like AJ has in the past). Nuff said.

That's where I'm at too. Bigby isn't a playmaker but he plays his role very well and the defense overall benefits greatly from it. You could make a change and find someone who can play that role just as well as Bigby can, but what's the point? Just to change names? Whether it's Bigby playing that role or someone else, it doesn't matter as long as they play it at a high level. That being the case, as long as Bigby is playing the role he's asked to play at a high level, why make the change? As long as the role the SS is asked to play in our defense doesn't change, I hope the player asked to play SS in our defense doesn't change either.

What that guy said<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

[mraynrand]

Which Bigby thread is better? Vote in the new "Which Bigby thread is better" thread

[Bretsky]

I vote he's not worthy of two threads