(07-08-2021, 11:32 AM)kevin Wrote: By Marvin's last year, this team was just awful. This team needed a complete rebuild of players after Marvin was fired, The players were not talented and Coach Taylor came in finding Marvin had left the cupboard bare. 

There are very few players left from Marvin and Hue getting fired, and that's a good thing. Those players were awful. 

This just re-enforces the claim that Taylor is incompetent.  Marvin won 6 games with that no-talent roster while it has taken Taylor 2 years to win 6 games.

Marvin had to go.  I was furious when he was brought back after the '17 season.  But he was still a much better coach than Taylor has been.

I think the roster is better than most outsiders think. With that being said Articles that speak negatively of the Bengals or criticizes there roster and personnel moves don't bother me. I'm at a point now with the Bengals where they just need to win on the field to shut up the outside media and to gain respect ,which I'm fine with. I like being an under dog and having an us against the world mentality and proving people wrong on the filed. The media and outsiders will always view the Bengals as losers until they break that playoff win drought. Teams like the Browns and Bills were viewed that way but have gained respect from breaking there horrific playoff win droughts.

(07-08-2021, 12:48 PM)lone bengal Wrote:  The media and outsiders will always view the Bengals as losers until they break that playoff win drought. Teams like the Browns and Bills were viewed that way but have gained respect from breaking there horrific playoff win droughts.

Outside of Cincinnati very few NFL fans know about "playoff victory droughts".  When a team makes the playoffs they are considered a good team.  Bengals got plenty of respect when they were making the playoffs 6 of 7 years.  The experts often picked them to win some of those playoff games.

We were a 4 win team who lost some of our best starters to free agency (Lawson, Jackson, Alexander). So I don't know why anyone would expect our roster talent to be highly rated.

(07-08-2021, 01:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Outside of Cincinnati very few NFL fans know about "playoff victory droughts".  When a team makes the playoffs they are considered a good team.  Bengals got plenty of respect when they were making the playoffs 6 of 7 years.  The experts often picked them to win some of those playoff games.

Yeah just my opinion/ overall feeling on the matter. Other fans/ media definitely don’t view the Bengals as a model of success. I feel like a lot of people outside of Cincinnati have viewed the Bengals as a laughing stock. I live outside Cincinnati and when talking to others they bring up how ridiculous it was to keep Marvin for that long, the epic playoff collapse vs. Pittsburgh , not showing up in the playoffs ,how dumb Burfict and Adam Jones were, the awful 90’s Bengals and the drought. The media pre draft was filled with stories of how the Bengals will ruin Joe Burrow and the ACL injury just added fuel to the fire along with not drafting Sewell. I think people will always view the Bengals as losers along with Mike Brown until they win.

(07-08-2021, 12:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The worship of PFF cracks me up.

How do guys who played against college kids last year have a higher rating than Williamson?

And when did the Ravens move Nick Boyle from TE to LT?

So the PFF comment was tossed out by the person I was replying too and I simply took the time to pull the opinions of a different author out and display them.

Again, if you disagree with the guys rankings, feel free to explain why not just say "PFF worship cracks me up."

I don't subscribe to or worship PFF, I just read the article and shared it for people to discuss.

However, I do completely agree with his viewpoint that the line is still a liability and I also agree with the placement of Jonah on that list. Nothing that I have seen in the time he has been a pro makes me believe he will be an above average LT. He has missed a tremendous amount of time and while some of that is bad luck, other parts of that look like a lack of toughness. Whit tore his knee, needed surgery and got back out there at 38 for the Rams. Jonah in his 20's goes down, and stays down, guys on the line play hurt every week, doesn't matter the era, you always hear about it in interviews. I don't see that so far from Jonah and it will be a problem as injuries don't tend to happen less often as you age...it is actually the opposite.

As for Boyle, I fixed the post, I was copying and pasting team by team and got a TE not a LT... I now have Ronnie Stanley (79.9) in his correct place.

(07-08-2021, 01:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Outside of Cincinnati very few NFL fans know about "playoff victory droughts". 

That's because they haven't had one last for 30 years.  If they did, I'm sure the topic would come up in discussion more.

How is this not obvious to you?

(07-08-2021, 01:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Outside of Cincinnati very few NFL fans know about "playoff victory droughts".  When a team makes the playoffs they are considered a good team.  Bengals got plenty of respect when they were making the playoffs 6 of 7 years.  The experts often picked them to win some of those playoff games.

Fwiw, here is a NY article that refers to the Bengals as "playoff losers" https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/31/bengals-need-to-win-sunday-to-shed-playoff-losers-label/

(07-08-2021, 01:49 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Fwiw, here is a NY article that refers to the Bengals as "playoff losers" https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2014/12/31/bengals-need-to-win-sunday-to-shed-playoff-losers-label/

I can't think of another team in any major sport that has gone through this level of absolute playoff failing.

And with all that history, people are still called negative for having an attitude of "I'll believe it when I see it."

(07-07-2021, 12:34 PM)Whatever Wrote: I have like 4 posts mentioning Auden Tate going back to May per the search feature.  And two of them were in the thread Fred created about Tate specifically.

I can name names regarding him as a WR2, but that's against the CoC and I'm not going to commit thread necromancy just to prove a point.  If you doubt that, go back and read through those Tate threads from last off-season. 

The point I was making was regarding fans of bad teams overhyping their own players.  Can either of you think of a guy that was hyped more and did less to help the team last year than Tate?

I also don't know how you get "Jerry Rice 2.0" out of stating the fact that people were calling him a WR2.  If you're going to call others out for twisting words, you might want to try not twisting other people's words.

I hate to break this news but they're right. You bash the shit out of Tate every time his name comes up. 

(07-08-2021, 12:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This just re-enforces the claim that Taylor is incompetent.  Marvin won 6 games with that no-talent roster while it has taken Taylor 2 years to win 6 games.

Marvin had to go.  I was furious when he was brought back after the '17 season.  But he was still a much better coach than Taylor has been.

Is it reasonable to expect a brand new HC with no experience at that job to replace a long term, tenured HC and win with his roster?

I don't think it is. Taylor lost 4 more game than Marvin as a rookie HC... with an old, tired roster (at key positions) and a lame duck QB. That's actually not as bad as it sounds when you reason through it.

The idea that any new coach was going to come in with the 2019 roster and do better than Marvin did (it was his roster he had groomed to play his way... for years) doesn't make much sense to me. Unreasonable expectation.

THIS season for Taylor, however, is the opposite, right? Taylor has his roster with his guys and 2 full years to figure it out along with a full offseason. 8-9 wins should be the MINIMUM for Taylor to keep his job. Regardless of schedule difficulty, injury, etc.

(07-08-2021, 01:43 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: That's because they haven't had one last for 30 years.  If they did, I'm sure the topic would come up in discussion more.

How is this not obvious to you?

NFL fans rate teams other than their own all the time.  And they don't do it based on which team won a playoff game most recently because that is kind of a silly way to do it.

When the Bengals were making the playoffs on a regular basis  no one was claiming the Browns and Lions were better franchises because they had won a playoff game more recently.  And if they make the playoffs and win a game this year there is not going to be a sudden change in the way the Bengals are viewed by the rest of the NFL community.

Only in Bengal land is it argued that teams that make the playoffs and don't win are no different from teams that don't make the playoffs.  Once a team makes the playoffs it is all about winning Championships, not single playoff games.

How is that not obvious to you?

(07-08-2021, 02:41 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Is it reasonable to expect a brand new HC with no experience at that job to replace a long term, tenured HC and win with his roster?

Maybe not, but if he does WORSE then you have a problem.

They don't have to turn the team around in just one year (or maybe two) but they are expected to at least show some improvement.

(07-08-2021, 12:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This just re-enforces the claim that Taylor is incompetent.  Marvin won 6 games with that no-talent roster while it has taken Taylor 2 years to win 6 games.

Marvin had to go.  I was furious when he was brought back after the '17 season.  But he was still a much better coach than Taylor has been.

Believe it or not that 2019 roster was worse than Marvin's 2018 roster. 

(07-08-2021, 03:32 PM)Synric Wrote: Believe it or not that 2019 roster was worse than Marvin's 2018 roster. 

Yep, lost Boling and Cordy Glenn.

(07-08-2021, 02:29 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I hate to break this news but they're right. You bash the shit out of Tate every time his name comes up. 

This is blatantly untrue.  If you read through my comments in "FredToast on Auden Tate" for example, my only comments on him were that it would be dumb for him to try to convert to TE this year because he was a virtual lock to make the roster as a WR(becoming a fully vested veteran in the process)and defending my point that he was basically a lock to make the roster.  

(07-06-2021, 02:52 PM)BengalChris Wrote: The down right horrible coaching the players have received over the past two years clearly affects their performance on the field.

Just think how much higher the numbers would be a decent coaching staff.

I don't look at the Bengals roster and think "what a horrible roster we have." I look at it and think "Boy, if we had a coaching staff who could scheme around our strengths then we could be looking at a 50/50 season, possibly even the 7th seed. But, alas, such is not the case.

I mean over a third of those players weren't even Bengals last season, almost another third weren't Bengals the year before that and then a third or so have been on IR but yeah, the takeaway from that is clearly the coaching received over the past two years affected their numbers.

Meanwhile I think the only 2 players who were here and started both years without going on IR got basically the highest PFF ranking on the team on D and O respectively.

(07-08-2021, 01:39 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: So the PFF comment was tossed out by the person I was replying too and I simply took the time to pull the opinions of a different author out and display them.

Again, if you disagree with the guys rankings, feel free to explain why not just say "PFF worship cracks me up."

I don't subscribe to or worship PFF, I just read the article and shared it for people to discuss.

However, I do completely agree with his viewpoint that the line is still a liability and I also agree with the placement of Jonah on that list. Nothing that I have seen in the time he has been a pro makes me believe he will be an above average LT. He has missed a tremendous amount of time and while some of that is bad luck, other parts of that look like a lack of toughness. Whit tore his knee, needed surgery and got back out there at 38 for the Rams. Jonah in his 20's goes down, and stays down, guys on the line play hurt every week, doesn't matter the era, you always hear about it in interviews. I don't see that so far from Jonah and it will be a problem as injuries don't tend to happen less often as you age...it is actually the opposite.

As for Boyle, I fixed the post, I was copying and pasting team by team and got a TE not a LT... I now have Ronnie Stanley (79.9) in his correct place.

Lack of toughness? Why would he rush back in a lost season? I’m sure Jonah would have returned at the end of the year if they were in the playoff hunt.

Really bad take.

(07-08-2021, 04:58 PM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: I mean over a third of those players weren't even Bengals last season, almost another third weren't Bengals the year before that and then a third or so have been on IR but yeah, the takeaway from that is clearly the coaching received over the past two years affected their numbers.

Meanwhile I think the only 2 players who were here and started both years without going on IR got basically the highest PFF ranking on the team on D and O respectively.

I don't see how that changes anything. We've witnessed a worse team the last two seasons. I don't see how a this coaching staff is going to take the 1/3 new arrivals and somehow improve their play. They've yet to do that with roster they had.

 

(07-08-2021, 04:37 PM)Whatever Wrote: This is blatantly untrue.  If you read through my comments in "FredToast on Auden Tate" for example, my only comments on him were that it would be dumb for him to try to convert to TE this year because he was a virtual lock to make the roster as a WR(becoming a fully vested veteran in the process)and defending my point that he was basically a lock to make the roster.  

It's def not blantantly untrue. I wasn't the one that pointed out, in this thread, how much you hate Tate, but i certainly thought it as soon as i read  your post and i amost replied the same way he did, but i decided against it. 

People like to think they're objective, etc, but where there's smoke there's fire, holmes. 

And there's lots of smoke when you enter into the Tate conversations.