When will Zac be fired?

[masterpanthera_t]

(05-10-2021, 10:49 PM)Benton Wrote: Levi started 14 games in 2002, 16 in 2003.
Willie was a foundation by 2002 and got his first AP nod in 2003; he would have probably been considered one of the best at his position if he played on any other team.
Chad was already over 1,000 yards by 2002 and stayed there until he got injured (08?). 2003 was one of his best career seasons: 1,355 yards, 58% catch rate (second career highest) and 10 TDs (only time he got double digit TDs in a season).
Dillion averaged 4.2 YPC in 2002, 3.9 in what he played of 2003. Mixon was 4.1 in 2019 and 3.6 in 2020.
It kind of goes on and on.

The 2003 roster would've destroyed the 2019 roster. On paper, Zac inherited some of the best players of the last decade. It's kind of telling that a year later, many of them are backups, FAs or on their couch. And, no, it wasn't because ZT ruined AJ Green, it was because the Bengals FO held onto AJ for too long.

I don't disagree with your first two paragraphs. For one, they don't really refute my point. For another reason, I didn't say anything to the contrary about Levi, Chad or Willie. Nor is any of that stuff I didn't know. But it's interesting that this roster couldn't win more than 2 games the year before Marvin came in. The reason I mentioned Spikes and Dillon is that, when Marvin took over in 2003, one of the (if not THE) best player from that defense was gone, and Dillon didn't play many games nor play at his best in the one year he played for Marv. I also pointed out how T.J was a fairly average player at best before Marvin's tenure. The fact that Marv took these players and finally got them to an 8-8 season after a bunch of losing seasons in a row leads me to give Marvin more credit in developing the level of many of these players (whether we're talking very good to great, or average to very good etc. ).

All of which means I totally disagree with your third paragraph. I think Marvin would have done much better than the two wins Taylor got in 2019 with the same roster. I can't say that I'm seeing players develop more under Taylor than Marvin. It's debatable that maybe Bates and Boyd wouldn't have gotten to their current levels under Marv, but at least it's debatable either way. I'm not sure Taylor has improved any players' level since he took over. And you could argue a few have regressed. So I wouldn't give the advantage to the 2003 roster, certainly not an overwhelming one. I believe the advantage in coaching is overwhelmingly in favor of Marvin.