With the extraordinary talent on the team, do you think 80% of coaches would have at least this record or even more wins?

(12-30-2021, 10:54 AM)Destro Wrote: With the extraordinary talent on the team, do you think 80% of coaches would have at least this record or even more wins?

MORE WINS.  Thank you for putting things into proper perspective!

(12-30-2021, 10:54 AM)Destro Wrote: With the extraordinary talent on the team, do you think 80% of coaches would have at least this record or even more wins?

It doesn’t happen automatically. They had to gain the confidence and learn how to win. Taylor did exactly that. Next year he should be his grade as they are nearing a conference winner contender


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(12-30-2021, 10:54 AM)Destro Wrote: With the extraordinary talent on the team, do you think 80% of coaches would have at least this record or even more win

You act like other winning teams or 500 teams dont have talent, they do also and u forget who had a hand in developing this team , the head coach. Funny now we are winning when most predicted us not to win this year and Taylor has underachieved now..lol

joe burrow is why we're winning, not zac taylor.

Why not both?

(12-31-2021, 01:03 AM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: Why not both?

Because we usually look turrible in 1st halves and there have been a few boneheaded playcalls that have lost us games. I can't tell how many games he's actually won us. He's still making mistakes as we can expect as a young coach. The more zac listens to joe, the better we will do. Burrow would elevate any franchise, I doubt Zac would. It's easy to have recency bias as an NFL fan.

Mike brown (NBA) was coach of the year when lebron won 61 games.

(12-29-2021, 11:35 AM)PhilHos Wrote: Not to mention that how players play is strictly on the coaching staff. Sometimes players do more/play better than what the coaches want/expect and sometimes they do less/play worse than what the coaches want/expect and sometimes they do exactly what the coaches want/expect.

If Burrow throws 3 straight INTs on back-to-back-to-back passes, then sure, you can say he's underperforming, but i don't see how that's necessarily Taylor's fault that Burrow "underperformed" on any/all of those plays.

Agreed, that was what I was getting at.

(12-30-2021, 12:32 AM)Tomkat Wrote: You're right.  That post does seem to contradict the others.  I'm just finding it difficult to articulate exactly what I mean.
Let me try again... we've ALL said/seen on these boards... "this team has so much more potential" - "how can they come out so flat?" - "they're playing down to their opponent," etc.  Those things are on coaching, yes?  Sure, there have been some great INDIVIDUAL player accomplishments, but TEAM wins (while way better than last year) COULD BE SO MUCH HIGHER.  If Zac had taken a bunch of no-name scrubs to 9-wins, then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.  However, with THIS TALENT ON THIS TEAM, it still FEELS like Taylor has underperformed.  Does that make any sense?

Yes, it does. I don't agree but I get where you're coming from.

I just look at the losses and while, sure Taylor deserves some, if not most, of the blame for the losses, there have definitely been some player mistakes that one could argue are the major contributing factor to the losses.

Ultimately, given the Bengals were supposed to be the worst team in the division, let alone one of the worst in the league and it's just the opposite, I just don't think the argument is simply the Bengals have "too much" talent to ONLY have 9 wins. 

(12-31-2021, 01:01 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: joe burrow is why we're winning, not zac taylor.

We back to which came 1st, chicken or egg,  very hard factually to prove your argument , the best way to prove or disprove argument is in future if Burrow and Taylor part ways and judge their success without each other, until then very difficult to separate success.

One element rarely discussed in this conversation is Taylor is HC so over entire team, as good as Joe has played without the Taylor lead restructured defense , this team would probably have a losing record or at best 500.

(12-31-2021, 10:59 AM)PhilHos Wrote: ... there have definitely been some player mistakes that one could argue are the major contributing factor to the losses.

Oh, no doubt.  The muffed/lost punts single-handedly cost the Bengals in the loss to SF.

(12-31-2021, 11:05 AM)Essex Johnson Wrote: We back to which came 1st, chicken or egg,  very hard factually to prove your argument , the best way to prove or disprove argument is in future if Burrow and Taylor part ways and judge their success without each other, until then very difficult  to separate success.

One element rarely discussed in this conversation is Taylor is HC so over entire team, as good as Joe has played without the Taylor lead restructured defense , this team would probably have a losing record or at best 500.

I think it's pretty easy. Similar reason to tampa bay winning a superbowl the same year brady joined. Then again they have a HOF coach.

It's a mike brown (Cavs coach) and Lebron situation we have going on here. Mike Brown won coach of the year. Imagine zac taylor coaching another team, or andy dalton being our current QB.

(01-02-2022, 06:47 AM)reuben.ahmed Wrote: I think it's pretty easy. Similar reason to tampa bay winning a superbowl the same year brady joined. Then again they have a HOF coach.

It's a mike brown (Cavs coach) and Lebron situation we have going on here. Mike Brown won coach of the year. Imagine zac taylor coaching another team, or andy dalton being our current QB.

Apples to Oranges now.. i did not know that Burrow was a clone of Brady.. you can;t say because it happen for one player and one coach means the same, im sure we can find the opposite of a QB not doing as well after leaving a HC and team doing better