Three years ago.

[TecmoBengals]

(11-12-2021, 03:34 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: This would be fair if both came into similar situations. They did not.

Marvin came in to a situation with young ascending talent like Chad, P-Dub, Housh, Rudi, a good offensive line, etc. He just needed to rebuild the defense via FA and make the obvious choice with Palmer at #1.

Zac came into a situation where most of the "talent" was washed up or a poor fit. AJ Green, Geno, Dunlap, Burfict, Dalton, etc. A horrible o-line. It all needed to go.

Marvin needed to reshape the defense, but Zac had to reshape the entire team.

------------

So... Zac really didn't get to see the fruits of his labor until year 3. Again, I hold Marv in higher regard than Zac right now, but I also think it's a little unfair to try and compare the 2019-2020 teams to the 2003-2004 teams as if it was an apples to apples comparison. It's really not.

It's not fair to compare W/L records? I suppose I could support this view when comparing them based on their first three seasons of coaching, but even then it comes down to does the coach win or lose? Understanding the "why?" behind the Ws or Ls doesn't change the outcome. Zac is more aligned with Shula and Coslet than Marvin. Zac has an opportunity to change his W/L this since the Brown family has kept him around. Perhaps we'll see in a couple seasons if his records inches closer to .500.

You said Marvin needed to reshape the defense, but Zac had to reshape the entire team. I think Marvin had to reshape the entire franchise. He inherited a poorly run franchise that hadn't made the playoffs in over a decade. Talent alone didn't end the drought, Marvin's coaching contributed to the success. I'll hold my view that Marvin is better than Zac based on W/L %.