Burnett beating out Bigby would be a nice upgrade. So would Bulaga and Lang legitimitely beating out Cliffy and Tausch be nice upgrades. Always hate to see Packers like that go but it's always positive for the team. Not only does the young player provide an upgrade, but you also then have a dependable veteran backup. In addition it means we drafted well and the young players are good now, with a bright future because the current starters are still playing at a good level.

---

Exactly. Any Bigby haters want to answer this question?

---

All I know is what has frustrated me most about Bigby the last two seasons is his availability. It's hard to argue that when Bigby wasn't playing or too hurt to play well our defense suffered. If Morgan can be an upgrade, then fine, so be it. I'll take an upgrade at any position on the team. So far that kid hasn't played a game, so until then, I'm glad Bigby signed.

---

Atari was okay. We don't NEED an upgrade from Atari, we need an upgrade from Atari's replacements far more. We suffered far more when Atari was out than when he was in.

If we keep Atari healthy and have BETTER player backing him up, our defense will be that much better.

---

That's it in a nutshell. If Burnett beats out Bigby for the starting job, all the better, but I wouldn't count on it. Either way we're way better off at safety this year than last.

---

This seemed really confusing to me but then i tried to make a counter argument for it and couldn't. I guess you could point to Jones as the "worst starter" on defense but you have a very valid point.

---

Worst starter on a very well stocked defense. Someone has to be that guy. Even in the Pro Bowl, someone has to be the worst starter on the defense.

---

I agree with you that we could use better communication, but honestly after watching the Cardinals playoff loss for the 3rd time since it happened, I wonder if it is better Safety pre-snap communication we need. Put differently, I wonder if a safety is really going to make that much of a difference.

Mose of the bunch WR formations the Cards ran saw mis-matches on LBs. That is, when a CB covering the WR passed off an assignment to the player in another zone, it ended up being a LB.

After watching it again, I didn't feel a total lack of communication breakdown with our Safties was the main issue... it felt more like the entire defence was playing in a system foreign to them. That is, when it came to make adjustments and switch off players to different ones, it felt like our players were playing the 3-4 zone for the first time in their lives. They could not make heads or tails of what to do.

Now that may indicate that the level of familiarity with the 3-4 our team had was novice, and the Cards exploited it.

However, I wonder if what the Cardinals did is just exploit a flaw in the zone 3-4 scheme. I recently saw a replay of the Steelers / Cards Superbowl. Interestingly, throughout the game, but especially in the second half when the Cards got back into the game, they were using the exact same thing that gave the Packers D problems: bunch formations and having their WRs cross routes.

The Steelers, in turn, also had problems stopping this. Quite simply, the Cardinal WRs were too talented for LBs to handle one-on-one. They got match-up advantages, and then they exploited. Now the Steelers have been running a zone 3-4 for a while, so you'd think they'd be well versed in it. Yet there they were, being exploited in much the same manner the Packers were last season.

Perhaps a new SS with better communication skills will make such performances rarer. But after watching the Superbowl and seeing the Steelers D being cut up.... I can't help but think there is a flaw in the Defensive scheme we run, and it is inevitable it will be exploited from time to time.

---

Great stuff aadp. You get another clappy hands point for that post. :crab:

Seems like more nickle and dime with man coverage would be the solution to that at first glance. Easier said than done though, I'm sure.

---

I am not a Bigby 'hater'.. I just watch him take poor angles in both pursuit and coverage.. lack ball skills and instincts.. and is part of the backend communication issue that plagues us when teams stack or put in presnap movement.. the games we struggled in more so than not in coverage was stacked and movement sets.. part of that is our physical play in coverage.. but a good part of that is lack of presnap adjustments.. which like it or not comes from the safety spots.. a weakness in my opinion upon this club.

Collins has greater range, instincts and ball skills than Bigby.. but I hold them both equally accountable for the lack of adjustments and communication in the secondary.. so if Burnett can bring some help in that area.. I am all for it.. from reports.. smart effective communicator.. sounds like a fit to me.

---