Official Fire Bisaccia Thread

[texaspackerbacker]

Bisaccia was supposed to be something special when he was brought in. He's been a big disappointment, and it's not just FG protection. Coverage hasn't been good enough either. And while so many teams are innovating and doing things like blocking kicks, up to now, the packers have not. Maybe that is partly luck, but for Bisaccia's pay and reputation, he oughta be able to create some of that luck. Another annoying thing was that the Packers didn't handle that "drop zone" thing on kickoffs, neither when we were kicking nor when receiving. That would seem to be a matter of coaching.

[Fritz]

Bisaccia was supposed to be something special when he was brought in. He's been a big disappointment, and it's not just FG protection. Coverage hasn't been good enough either. And while so many teams are innovating and doing things like blocking kicks, up to now, the packers have not. Maybe that is partly luck, but for Bisaccia's pay and reputation, he oughta be able to create some of that luck. Another annoying thing was that the Packers didn't handle that "drop zone" thing on kickoffs, neither when we were kicking nor when receiving. That would seem to be a matter of coaching.

Agree with you there, Tex.

[Joemailman]

Packers are using 2 rookies as returners who weren't returners in college. Meanwhile they have Nixon not returning. I'll bet that's not Bisaccia's decision.

[pbmax]

FIRE SOMEBODY!

This was an illuminating listen.

But the argument that the Packers don’t pay coaches doesn’t apply here. Bisaccia is highly paid.

I thought Bissaccia had a lot of say in the roster, and so I’d say he’s got more to work with than previous ST coaches.

But it’s interesting to think that The Flower is maybe the issue anyway. Still, shouldn’t Musgrave know or be coached to work inside out? Isn’t THAT on Bitch-Sac?

The article is easier to parse for what happened because it includes the video from the successful first kick and provides a prelude to the botched second kick.

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/green-bay-packers-news/71906/green-bay-packers-news-matt-lafleur-clarifies-blame-for-blocked-pat-vs-cowboys

Basically, absent a specific call, you do block down toward the ball. But the Packers had another call on. This is likely due to the speed and skill of that outside guy on the block team. The Cowboys also overloaded to the kicking team's right and force a choice.

Brant Banks (72), called up from the PS, had the tough assignment. He had to block one and get his right arm on a second. Musgrave got to pick up the speedster off the edge.

But even on the successful first kick, Banks got blown up by the guy over him which made his attempt to slow the next guy to his right barely successful. He was less effective on the blocked kick. Mosqueda says he forgot the technique. Hard to say but he doesn't even seem to try to block the guy on the unsuccessful kick. Maybe he didn't hear the call?

Both videos are in the article. Banks opposite was basically drive blocking him, not trying to get to the ball. He was trying to tie up Banks, drive him back, clearly the idea is that with the overload, two guys will threaten the edge and they are likely hoping you screw up on the inside guy as his trip to the kick is shorter.

Mosqueda makes another good point in the video that is also backed up in the article. When it was obvious Banks couldn't handle that call, they sent a starter in to do it (Jenkins). And that takes us back to the Packers roster construction. When you go young and developmental, your practice squad O lineman may very well be unable to handle some special teams duties. And then you are adding more reps to your tired starters. Injuries don't help either as Banks likely didn't get a lot of reps.

Which also helps explain why some of the GB special teams snafus get straightened out during the year.

If you still doubt it: Banks got his release and the Packers are getting an injured O lineman back (Monk) during the bye.

Don't let the LaFleur video confuse you. He talks about the TE but that is a position on the kick team manned by Banks not likely a shout out of Musgrave. By convention, and possibly the rules of the LOS on a kick, Banks is an End. Musgrave is a wing in that formation.

[George Cumby]

I posted this in the More Banjo thread, but I think it applies here.

Apparently it's a league-wide thing this year; six punt returns for TD's so far this season, as many as ALL of last season. There's been a ton of blocked FG's and PAT's, 20+, I think?

It's not isolated to the Packers.

Does this let Bisaccia off the hook? It's not clear, to me, at least.

But 4-0 vs 2-1-1 hurts........

[texaspackerbacker]

That could be bad special teams prevention of those bad things, but it also could be good special teams coaching and play making it happen. And even if he escapes some of the blame for the negative things because it's happening to a lot of teams, Bisaccia sure hasn't produced any of that innovative good stuff - long kick returns, blocked kicks, etc.

[Fritz]

Tex, the way the Packers' special teams are playing, you might want to change your avatar to this:

[run pMc]

The article is easier to parse for what happened because it includes the video from the successful first kick and provides a prelude to the botched second kick.

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/green-bay-packers-news/71906/green-bay-packers-news-matt-lafleur-clarifies-blame-for-blocked-pat-vs-cowboys

Basically, absent a specific call, you do block down toward the ball. But the Packers had another call on. This is likely due to the speed and skill of that outside guy on the block team. The Cowboys also overloaded to the kicking team's right and force a choice.

Brant Banks (72), called up from the PS, had the tough assignment. He had to block one and get his right arm on a second. Musgrave got to pick up the speedster off the edge.

But even on the successful first kick, Banks got blown up by the guy over him which made his attempt to slow the next guy to his right barely successful. He was less effective on the blocked kick. Mosqueda says he forgot the technique. Hard to say but he doesn't even seem to try to block the guy on the unsuccessful kick. Maybe he didn't hear the call?

Both videos are in the article. Banks opposite was basically drive blocking him, not trying to get to the ball. He was trying to tie up Banks, drive him back, clearly the idea is that with the overload, two guys will threaten the edge and they are likely hoping you screw up on the inside guy as his trip to the kick is shorter.

Mosqueda makes another good point in the video that is also backed up in the article. When it was obvious Banks couldn't handle that call, they sent a starter in to do it (Jenkins). And that takes us back to the Packers roster construction. When you go young and developmental, your practice squad O lineman may very well be unable to handle some special teams duties. And then you are adding more reps to your tired starters. Injuries don't help either as Banks likely didn't get a lot of reps.

Which also helps explain why some of the GB special teams snafus get straightened out during the year.

If you still doubt it: Banks got his release and the Packers are getting an injured O lineman back (Monk) during the bye.

Don't let the LaFleur video confuse you. He talks about the TE but that is a position on the kick team manned by Banks not likely a shout out of Musgrave. By convention, and possibly the rules of the LOS on a kick, Banks is an End. Musgrave is a wing in that formation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr11kIqB1P8

If you go back and watch, #41 for DAL (3rd on the RHS) chops down on Banks's right arm which I think prevents him from getting any meaningful obstacle, and Musgrave lunges forward to block vs. sitting and anchoring. It's bad technique by Musgrave and bad luck for Banks. I also think it's bad coaching by Bisaccia; if he saw risks after the first kick he should have adjusted. After the block he put starters out there who were stouter (Jenkins and Brooks).

GC is right about this being more league-wide; I wonder if there will be rule changes in XP/FG kicks and their formations. Asking Brant Banks and Luke Musgrave to block 3 rushers is a gambit IMO. I don't even know why Musgrave is out there and not Sims or... anyone else, really.

[pbmax]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr11kIqB1P8
If you go back and watch, #41 for DAL (3rd on the RHS) chops down on Banks's right arm which I think prevents him from getting any meaningful obstacle, and Musgrave lunges forward to block vs. sitting and anchoring. It's bad technique by Musgrave and bad luck for Banks. I also think it's bad coaching by Bisaccia; if he saw risks after the first kick he should have adjusted. After the block he put starters out there who were stouter (Jenkins and Brooks).

GC is right about this being more league-wide; I wonder if there will be rule changes in XP/FG kicks and their formations. Asking Brant Banks and Luke Musgrave to block 3 rushers is a gambit IMO. I don't even know why Musgrave is out there and not Sims or... anyone else, really.

RB doesn't get to choose from starters who is on ST. That's the head coach's call. And they are trying to reduce snap counts for starters. If someone of RB's stature can't get the starters until there is a screwup, then that is on the organization, not on the Special Teams coach.

They are trying to do too much with too little. Odds are this doesn't happen if the planned backups like Monk were available. Those second stringers likely got the majority of practice reps.

[texaspackerbacker]

Yeah but ....... everybody else is in the same situation, and arguably most teams don't have as good talent as the Brewers. Yet Bisaccia's special teams performed worse than most of those others - mostly coached up by less prestigious and less high paid guys.

[pbmax]

Yeah but ....... everybody else is in the same situation, and arguably most teams don't have as good talent as the Brewers. Yet Bisaccia's special teams performed worse than most of those others - mostly coached up by less prestigious and less high paid guys.

1. If you parsed your second sentence carefully, you would realize that you agree the evidence is against the Packers Org and not Bisaccia. Lesser coaches do get better results. Now you just need to ask why that keeps happening in GB. What has been true and consistent for 20 years for the Packers and not in evidence elsewhere?

2. Have the Packers have just been hiring idiots for 20 years? While other teams whose front offices and coaching staffs cannot tie their shoelaces without help (Bears) are lighting it up on ST.

3. Brant Banks, for the bye week, was waived with the intention of putting him back on the PS. He was signed instead by the Titans who have somehow lost more tackles than the Packers this year. He is the definition of a marginal talent. He might develop, but he hasn't yet.

4. The 13th O lineman coming out of camp (Banks) doesn't get a lot of ST reps. There is a reason the Boys ran that stunt to his side (though knowing the Cowboys coaches there is an outside chance this was blind luck)

5. If Bisaccia is terrible, how did they know how to fix this?

6. If it was his scheme, why did they not change the approach? Why was the fix better players?

The answer: playing better players on special teams improves performance. But the Packers are willing to run the risk and go with youth. That decision isn't Bisaccia's.

You could lay this down at his feet and say his job is to teach the youth how to do this without errors at the current rate. I would agree this is the overall goal each year. But for 20 years they have had, at best, mediocre results with multiple coaches. So I say the idea that you can combine draft and develop, the league's youngest roster and expect the callowest taking care of special teams is extraordinarily flawed.

Its also possible that with all the O line injuries, this was a one game aberration that just looks like a trend because of the Browns game. With a heathy line, it doesn't happen. Which I kind of believe, except they replaced Musgrave too, meaning its not just the O line failing on ST.

Speaking of the Browns block, does anyone have a link to the video of the block? Because from the endzone it looks like the wide player got a hand on it and then maybe the interior guy got it. But its not clear at all from the video I have seen.

[texaspackerbacker]

I guess I had Brewers on my mind when I said Brewers instead of Packers.

On 1., no I don't agree that it's the Packers organization in general. I lay it almost entirely on Bisaccia. His job it to take what is there - pro players, arguably better, certainly as good on the Packers as on other teams that are doing way better on special teams. On 2., I don't know, have the Packers hired "idiot" special teams coaches? Maybe - it was generally a bunch of no namers before Bisaccia. He, however, was supposed to be the big difference maker and was paid accordingly. Has he been that? I'd certainly say no. Do you think otherwise? 3. and 4. Who decided to put Brant Banks in that spot? I don't know, but I suspect it was either Bisaccia or LaFleur with Bisaccia's recommendation. 5. and 6. Based on results, he sure seems terrible. Do you disagree? Should the "fix" be better players i.e. more starters on special teams? Myself, I doubt it. I think a good special teams coach should be able to coach up players, almost all of whom were well above average college players. I'd say other special teams coaches do that. I'd say the bigger "risk" would be getting starting players injured ..... and I say that even though special teams cost us two games - a loss and a tie.

"You could lay this down at his feet and say his job is to teach the youth how to do this without errors at the current rate." Hell yeah, that's what I'd do and say. I guess you think otherwise. We'll see either soon or after the season what LaFleur and Gutekunst think of this.

Regarding your last couple of lines, maybe it was all luck and somehow not Bisaccia's fault. A lot of things are luck, blocked kicks pretty high on the list. When the bad luck happens too often, though, you have to consider that somebody/the coach of that aspect is to blame.

[bobblehead]

I swear if we have another blocked kick in this game I'll fly to GB and take Bisaccia out myself (this is a joke. Please don't call the FBI on me. I actually will just plant drugs in his car and call the narc squad).

[MadScientist]

I swear if we have another blocked kick in this game I'll fly to GB and take Bisaccia out myself (this is a joke. Please don't call the FBI on me. I actually will just plant drugs in his car and call the narc squad).

With McManus hurt, blocking might not make much difference. The packers might have to just go for it in kicking situations.

[Joemailman]

With McManus hurt, blocking might not make much difference. The packers might have to just go for it in kicking situations.

Packers worked out 2 kickers today. Stay tuned.