Packers Staying the Course with Rich Bisaccia - and That Might Be the Right Call
For Packers fans, special teams has been a recurring sore spot - the kind that keeps showing up at the worst possible times. Penalties, breakdowns in coverage, questionable decisions in the return game - it’s all been there, season after season. And with another year of frustrating inconsistencies, it’s not surprising that some fans are calling for a shakeup.
But while the outcry for change is understandable, especially after another early playoff exit, the Packers are choosing continuity. Head coach Matt LaFleur and general manager Brian Gutekunst both received extensions after the 2025 season, despite team president Ed Policy previously suggesting those deals weren’t guaranteed. And now, with no major coaching changes expected - including at special teams - the Packers appear ready to run it back.
That decision hasn’t exactly gone over smoothly with a vocal segment of the fanbase. Many were hoping for a reset, whether that meant moving on from offensive coordinator Adam Stenavich, or more pointedly, parting ways with assistant head coach and special teams coordinator Rich Bisaccia. But while it’s easy to pin the blame on the man in charge of a struggling unit, the reality is more complicated - and firing Bisaccia might not fix what’s broken.
The Real Special Teams Problem Isn’t Just the Coach
Let’s be clear: the Packers’ special teams have had their moments of chaos. From ill-timed penalties that erase big returns, to coverage lapses, to questionable decisions on kickoffs and punts - these are the types of plays that can swing a game. And when those mistakes pile up, the coordinator is naturally the one under fire.
But here’s the thing: this isn’t a new issue in Green Bay. Special teams has been a problem long before Bisaccia arrived.
Go back to the Ron Zook era, and you’ll find many of the same complaints. The problems didn’t start with Bisaccia, and they likely won’t end with him either.
So what’s really going on?
It comes down to roster construction. Special teams is built on the depth of your team - the guys who aren’t starting on offense or defense but are still good enough to make the 53-man roster.
These are the fringe players, the backups, the developmental guys. And when your roster is as young as Green Bay’s - the youngest in the NFL for three years running - experience and consistency are hard to come by.
When Depth Gets Tested, Special Teams Feels It First
Take a guy like Keisean Nixon. He started as a return specialist, but by the end of the season, he was playing significant snaps at cornerback.
Whether or not he should be a starting corner is a conversation for another day, but his rise in responsibility is part of a larger pattern. When injuries hit or players earn bigger roles, special teams units lose their core contributors.
That forces coordinators like Bisaccia to plug new guys into critical spots mid-season - a tough ask, especially with a young, inexperienced roster.
Kamal Hadden is another example. Late in the year, he was elevated from special teams to defense due to injuries.
Then he got hurt himself. That’s a double blow - the defense loses a depth piece, and special teams has to reshuffle again.
It’s a domino effect, and it’s hard to build consistency when your personnel is constantly changing.
This is the nature of special teams in the NFL. It’s not just about schemes or coaching - it’s about who you’ve got to work with.
And right now, the Packers are thin on experienced depth. That’s not on Bisaccia.
That’s a roster issue.
Stability Over Scapegoating
It’s easy to call for a firing when things go wrong. But in this case, moving on from Bisaccia wouldn’t solve the core issue.
The Packers could bring in a new coordinator, sure. But unless the roster gets deeper, healthier, and more experienced, the results might not look much different.
That’s the uncomfortable truth. Green Bay’s special teams struggles are less about coaching and more about roster dynamics. Until the team has a more stable group of contributors who can consistently fill those third-phase roles, the unit will likely continue to be a rollercoaster.
So, for now, Bisaccia stays. And while that might not be the splashy move some fans were hoping for, it might just be the right one. Because sometimes, the solution isn’t about changing the coach - it’s about building a better foundation for him to work with.