I'm also not a big fan of this "scale/mode to every chord" approach *as a blanket approach to playing through chords in a piece*. (I make the qualification because there are times when it can be useful.)
We've been over this ground several times in this thread already, but perhaps the biggest reason I mistrust this approach in functional harmony, especially for people just starting to get a handle on harmony, is that it tends to encourage an approach of looking at chords in isolation--"atomistically," if you like--when really the idea is more to connect them in the larger framework--"holistically," if you like that kind of thing. The whole meaning of key (or modality, for that matter, if properly understood) is that the various events that occur within it *are* linked somehow; you don't invariably go to a separate harmonic world every time you go to a new chord.
I studied harmony extensively in the mid to late 70's. I quit playing for a few years. I got back into it, reviewed my old lessons and bought some books on soloing. I was in Germany and needed an English speaking teacher, with a lot of flexibility since I was in the Army. In the mean time I worked out what modes to play over what chords. I just found those charts, complicated chord sheets with even more convoluted modes written in. It is no wonder I didn't get anywhere. I was doing better soloing when I only knew chords. When I found a teacher modes were only covered for modal music.
Modes are very simple really, so simple that the use of them probably requires a teacher, they are the most misunderstood basic object in music theory. These threads are always as convoluted and contain as misinformation as legal advice threads.
No flame to the guys who have doled out good info.

