(04-08-2016, 08:26 PM)TKUHL Wrote: LOL i told a friend who is a Browns fan that Impatient was just code for Extension and then it happens Grrr. I see both sides but at some point Brown needs to realize that Marvin is not the guy to get this team over the hump. Sure he gets us to the playoffs but damn how long are we going to keep just getting there the status quo. He has had multiple QB's, OC, DC, some years the most talented team yet we flop every post season with another excuse. Marvin is the only constant. He is Marty Schottenheimer 2.0. Should have promoted Zimmer. Again I dont hate Marvin, he has a good eye for talent,I just dont see this team winning a SB with his soft coaching mentality.

Let's face it. Mikey prefers a team that looks good and almost gets the job done, but not well enough to cost him money. He likes things the way they are...just like the "establishment" in Washington D.C.

(04-12-2016, 02:18 PM)Derrick Wrote: Let's face it. Mikey prefers a team that looks good and almost gets the job done, but not well enough to cost him money. He likes things the way they are...just like the "establishment" in Washington D.C.

Mike makes a lot more money of the Bengals win it all.

Plus, do you really think Mike Brown is so smart that he can have one of the best teams in the league over the past few years WITHOUT TRYING AS HARD AS POSSIBLE?  You really think he is such a football genius that he is outperforming an overwhelming majority of the league without even trying?

(04-12-2016, 02:03 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Again, in the case of Marvin, 'success' depends on how it's perceived. On one hand, Marvin has had a tremendous amount of regular season success and deserves a ton of credit for that. On the other hand, he is the NFL record holder in playoff ineptness, and deserves to be held accountable for that. 

So, how do you square those polar opposites in terms of success? It has to come down to, IMO, the Bengals valuing regular season success more that postseason outcomes...which explains why Marvin is still here and continually being given extensions.

I know some people on here like to compare the Bengals 'success' against teams that haven't accomplished anything..."at least we're not the Browns", "20 teams a year don't make the playoffs", "what has this team or that team done recently", etc. What I don't see a lot of from those same people is comparing the Bengals to the best in the league...which is really all we should be doing at this point, if we're looking for a true evaluation of where we are.

Over the last 5 years in which Marvin has had a lot of regular season success, how do his end results match against the best teams during that same 5 year period (regular and postseason)? The Broncos have appeared in 2 SB's, winning one. The Seahawks have appeared in 2 SB's, winning one. The Patriots have appeared in 2 SB's, winning one. 

How does Marvin's 'success' stack up to the very best? An NFL record 5 consecutive one and done's with only the last one being truly competitive. While those other 3 teams were winning playoff games and making it to a couple SB's...Marvin and the Bengals are wasting precious opportunities.

This is ridiculous.

According to your logic 29 teams should be firing their head coach right now.

That just is not how the NFL works.

(04-12-2016, 12:29 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: This.

There's now way that a new HC, no matter who it was, passes on a potential franchise QB...especially given the instability at QB during the previous decade. 

It was one of those situations where the circumstances pretty much dictated what was going to happen. You might call it a 'no-brainer'. 

I did think that Marvin did a great job with his 1st free agent class...getting guys like Kelly, Hardy, James, Thornton and Clemons to come here. 

Now that I will give Marv some credit for. He also traded for Deltha, although I believe that's the trade that cost us Steven Jackson. 

He did a good job of rounding out the roster and ditching players who weren't a good fit.

(04-12-2016, 02:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is ridiculous.

According to your logic 29 teams should be firing their head coach right now.

That just is not how the NFL works.

What other team has had the same coach for 13 seasons without a single playoff victory?  What other team currently employs the coach who owns the record for playoff futility?  There is no other situation even remotely comparable to Marvin and the Bengals.

(04-12-2016, 02:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is ridiculous.

According to your logic 29 teams should be firing their head coach right now.

That just is not how the NFL works.

When did I say that 29 other coaches should be fired? Seriously, show me where I said that.

Those other coaches/teams have situations that are varied in terms of what they're doing, what their expectations are and where they're at as an organization. The Bengals situation is completely unique to the Bengals. No other team has 5 straight playoff appearances without a single win. Whether or not any coach should be fired is determined by the specifics of that particular situation. 

Again, you seem to be more than willing to compare the Bengals to every team except those that have been more successful during the same time period. Why can't you just admit that those three teams have actually did what you're supposed to do...which is translate multiple playoff opportunities into postseason victories.

Like I said, the Bengals have been terrific in the regular season over the last 5 years. Unfortunately, it has translated into zero wins and wasted opportunities.

If you were to poll every player on the Bengals roster and ask them if -over the last 5 years- they would rather have 5 one and done's or 1 World Championship...what percent do you think would choose the WC?

(04-12-2016, 03:52 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: When did I say that 29 other coaches should be fired? Seriously, show me where I said that.

Those other coaches/teams have situations that are varied in terms of what they're doing, what their expectations are and where they're at as an organization. The Bengals situation is completely unique to the Bengals. No other team has 5 straight playoff appearances without a single win. Whether or not any coach should be fired is determined by the specifics of that particular situation. 

Again, you seem to be more than willing to compare the Bengals to every team except those that have been more successful during the same time period. Why can't you just admit that those three teams have actually did what you're supposed to do...which is translate multiple playoff opportunities into postseason victories.

Like I said, the Bengals have been terrific in the regular season over the last 5 years. Unfortunately, it has translated into zero wins and wasted opportunities.

If you were to poll every player on the Bengals roster and ask them if -over the last 5 years- they would rather have 5 one and done's or 1 World Championship...what percent do you think would choose the WC?

I would be very large sums of money that answer would be, almost 100%, the Super Bowl victory.

(04-12-2016, 03:57 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: I would be very large sums of money that answer would be, almost 100%, the Super Bowl victory.

Agreed. The reason I asked that question is because some people hold up the 5 playoff appearances, which resulted in 5 quick outs, as a great accomplishment. My point is that yeah, it's a cool stat and it's means that you're consistently 'in the mix'...but if you never do anything with it...then again, all you are is a very good regular season team...nothing more.

I personally think every one of us would trade 4 of those postseason appearances for 1 that resulted in a World Title, as would the players and coaches. 

How many opportunities can afford to be wasted? 7 opportunities, 5 in a row under Marvin...zero results. Could this finally be the year? Maybe, but how many times have we wondered that only to get the same resounding answer. 

(04-12-2016, 03:52 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: When did I say that 29 other coaches should be fired? Seriously, show me where I said that.

Those other coaches/teams have situations that are varied in terms of what they're doing, what their expectations are and where they're at as an organization. The Bengals situation is completely unique to the Bengals. No other team has 5 straight playoff appearances without a single win. Whether or not any coach should be fired is determined by the specifics of that particular situation. 

You want to fire Marvin because he has not been successful in your eyes.  And apparently the only teams that have been succesful over the last few years in your eyes are the Pats, Broncos, and Seahawks.  So it is only logical that you think all the other coaches should be fired.

Surely you are not trying to say that a guy who has not been as succesfuls as Marvin should be retained while Marvin gets fired.  that doesn't make any sense.

(04-12-2016, 03:52 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: You seem to be more than willing to compare the Bengals to every team except those that have been more successful during the same time period.

Why can't you just admit that those three teams have actually did what you're supposed to do...which is translate multiple playoff opportunities into postseason victories.

I freely admit that.  Only I am not the one saying that every coach other than the ones for these three teams should be fired.

Why do you refuse to compare Marvin to ALL the coaches instead of just the top three?

(04-12-2016, 03:15 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Now that I will give Marv some credit for. He also traded for Deltha, although I believe that's the trade that cost us Steven Jackson. 

He did a good job of rounding out the roster and ditching players who weren't a good fit.

Our trade with St. Louis is what cost us Jackson. We traded the 17th pick and got #24 and O'Neal in return. Then we traded #24 and went down to #26. St. Louis took Jackson at #24.

(04-12-2016, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You want to fire Marvin because he has not been successful in your eyes.  And apparently the only teams that have been succesful over the last few years in your eyes are the Pats, Broncos, and Seahawks.  So it is only logical that you think all the other coaches should be fired.

Surely you are not trying to say that a guy who has not been as succesfuls as Marvin should be retained while Marvin gets fired.  that doesn't make any sense.



I freely admit that.  Only I am not the one saying that every coach other than the ones for these three teams should be fired.

Why do you refuse to compare Marvin to ALL the coaches instead of just the top three?

I don't want Marvin fired because he's not successful in 'my eyes'. I want Marvin fired because he stands alone atop the mountain of playoff failure. My opinion has nothing to do with that, it's just a fact.

Again, I explained why every coaching situation is different and unique to that organization. The only person saying 29 other coaches should be fired is you...pretending that I said it. I know you like to take what people say and 'interpret' it in a way that suits your argument, but that's not gonna work with me.

As to why I don't compare Marvin to ALL coaches...

(04-12-2016, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I freely admit that.  Only I am not the one saying that every coach other than the ones for these three teams should be fired.

Why do you refuse to compare Marvin to ALL the coaches instead of just the top three?

Because Marvin Lewis is the 2nd longest tenured head coach.

In the top 6 longest tenured head coaches, Marvin Lewis is the ONLY coach not to have won a Super Bowl.

In the top 12 longest tenured head coaches, Marvin Lewis is the one of two head coaches not to have won a playoff game and not to have appeared in a championship game (Jeff Fisher is the other one)

Then you look at guys like Rex Ryan, Andy Reid, Jim Caldwell, John Fox, and Gary Kubiak. Guys that are on new teams, but yet have ALL made it to at least the Championship game.

Andy Reid in 2008
Jim Caldwell in 2009
John Fox in 2014
Rex Ryan in 2010
And obviously Kubiak won the Super Bowl last year

Marvin Lewis is one of 16 head coaches that never went to a Championship game. But the other 15 head coaches have only the head coaches of their team since 2013 and onward.
11 of which got their first head coaching position in the past 3 years.

So, there. Compared him to all the other head coaches instead of the top 3.

(04-12-2016, 04:24 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You want to fire Marvin because he has not been successful in your eyes.  And apparently the only teams that have been succesful over the last few years in your eyes are the Pats, Broncos, and Seahawks.  So it is only logical that you think all the other coaches should be fired.

Surely you are not trying to say that a guy who has not been as succesfuls as Marvin should be retained while Marvin gets fired.  that doesn't make any sense.



I freely admit that.  Only I am not the one saying that every coach other than the ones for these three teams should be fired.

Why do you refuse to compare Marvin to ALL the coaches instead of just the top three?

Would you be more inclined to fire a coach with

1) one year of experience without a playoff win

Or

2) thirteen years of experience without a playoff win?

It's really asinine to claim somebody around here suggested 29 NFL coaches should be fired when they clearly didn't.

Move on to something else.

(04-12-2016, 04:46 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: So, there. Compared him to all the other head coaches instead of the top 3.

No you did not.  You cherry picked which coaches you compared him to based on years of experience.


And even then by every measure you list Marvin is in the top half of ALL coaches in the league.

(04-12-2016, 05:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No you did not.  You cherry picked which coaches you compared him to based on years of experience.


And even then by every measure you list Marvin is in the top half of ALL coaches in the league.

Cherry picked? He compared him to the 11 most tenured and 15 least tenured coaches. That's 26 coaches. Marvin would make 27. What five coaches are going to significantly change the comparison?

(04-12-2016, 05:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No you did not.  You cherry picked which coaches you compared him to based on years of experience.


And even then by every measure you list Marvin is in the top half of ALL coaches in the league.

So, are you saying that when we're evaluating Marvin (a HC with 13 years of experience and 7 playoff opportunities)...we must also include the 4 1st year head coaches with no previous experience and 2 with only 1 year of experience?

I really hope that's not what you're getting at, because that would be one of the worst/silliest arguments that I've seen on this board or the mothership.

(04-12-2016, 05:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No you did not.  You cherry picked which coaches you compared him to based on years of experience.


And even then by every measure you list Marvin is in the top half of ALL coaches in the league.

Only in being the longest tenured.

There are 17 other coaches that have been to a Championship game. Only he and Fisher have not won a playoff game while being two of the twelve longest tenured head coaches on their current team. But Fisher has made it to the Super Bowl, just not with the Rams.

There have been 11 head coaches that had their first gig since 2013 and on.

4, of which, were signed this offseason. So of course they're going to be in the bottom half.

So where am I cherry picking?

Even in winning percentage Marvin ranks 16th overall. Sure, he's the 2nd longest tenured, but even guys that have been around less have more playoff success and even regular season success.

And, again, that's counting the 6 newly hired head coaches who don't have records on their team.

So Marvin ranked 16th out of 26.

Where does he rank in the top half exactly? Over 100 wins? Cool. If you're around for 13 years I'd hope you at least surpass that.

(04-12-2016, 06:48 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Only in being the longest tenured.

There are 17 other coaches that have been to a Championship game. Only he and Fisher have not won a playoff game while being two of the twelve longest tenured head coaches on their current team. But Fisher has made it to the Super Bowl, just not with the Rams.

There have been 11 head coaches that had their first gig since 2013 and on.

4, of which, were signed this offseason. So of course they're going to be in the bottom half.

So where am I cherry picking?

Even in winning percentage Marvin ranks 16th overall. Sure, he's the 2nd longest tenured, but even guys that have been around less have more playoff success and even regular season success.

And, again, that's counting the 6 newly hired head coaches who don't have records on their team.

So Marvin ranked 16th out of 26.

Where does he rank in the top half exactly? Over 100 wins? Cool. If you're around for 13 years I'd hope you at least surpass that.

It's a good thing for Marvin that Coughlin "stepped down," otherwise 17 would be 18. 

(04-12-2016, 06:48 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Even in winning percentage Marvin ranks 16th overall.

I don't see 15 coaches with a higher winning percentage.

I have him at #12 behind.  .  .  

Belicheck
McCarthy
Pagano
Tomlin
Peyton
Harbaugh
Reid
Rivera
Carroll
Fox 
Caldwell

Who else?

(04-12-2016, 06:48 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote:  Cool. If you're around for 13 years I'd hope you at least surpass that.

Yeah, right.  It is so easy to coach as many games as Marvin and have a .543 winning %.

I guess that is why in the entire history of the NFL only 23 other coaches have done it.

It is sooooo easy.