(08-12-2016, 11:40 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: I pick marvin lewis because I'm a bengals fan not a Vikings fan

I'm not sure I understand this answer.  Because you're a Bengals fan you're unable, or refuse, to look at coaches or players outside of the organization objectively? To even entertain someone outside over someone inside somehow negates your fandom?  Am I understanding this thought process correctly.

Honestly, this is good to know for future discussions.  At least you're honest.  You're going with Marvin Lewis for no reason other than that he's a Bengals employee and Zimmer is not.  Fair enough.

(08-12-2016, 04:24 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I took the liberty of providing a tad more context to your post.

If you don't mention these facts then you're not telling the whole story.  When you inherit a five win team, and then lose Adrian Peterson for the season, then that's kind of a big a deal.  Especially when you're already planning on a having to start a rookie QB.

Marvin lost the best player on his defense (Spikes) and the best player on offense (Dillon) quit on the team.

And I forgot to mention that Zimmer also had 2X Pro Bowl WR Greg Jennings.

(08-12-2016, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Zimmer inherited a team that had won 5 games and was only one year removed from making the playoffs and had a losing record.

Lewis inherited a team that had only won 2 games and had not even had a winning record in 13 years and finished at .500.

Zimmer inherited a team with multiple Pro Bowl players (OT Matt Kalil, LB Chad Greenway, K Blair Walsh, KR Cordarrell Patterson, TE Kyle Rudolph)

Lewis inherited a team with zero Pro Bowl players.


Marvin stepped into a much worse position than Mike Zimmer.

Corey Dillon was here in 2003 when Lewis took over. Granted, he became injured and that allowed Rudi an opportunity to step in.

Also, there were players on the Bengals roster before Lewis got here that became Pro Bowl players. (OT Willie Anderson, WR Chad Johnson, WR TJ Houshmandzadeh, RB Rudi Johnson, DE Justin Smith, Tory James CB).

There was talent on the team. Let's not act like Marvin had nothing to work with. Yes, Marvin coached them up and brought in players as well, but there were building blocks already here.

Both he and Zimmer brought in talent when they came in as well. I mean, the Vikings had 5 Pro Bowl players last year. 4 of them it was their first time making the Pro Bowl. 2 of which Zimmer drafted.

(08-12-2016, 04:28 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'm not sure I understand this answer.  Because you're a Bengals fan you're unable, or refuse, to look at coaches or players outside of the organization objectively? To even entertain someone outside over someone inside somehow negates your fandom?  Am I understanding this thought process correctly.

Honestly, this is good to know for future discussions.  At least you're honest.  You're going with Marvin Lewis for no reason other than that he's a Bengals employee and Zimmer is not.  Fair enough.

Lots of folks are just as unobjective when reviewing Marvin's coaching career and comparing him with a guy that is 3 years older, who has no pedigree as a HC and really only one good year as a DC before Marvin took him under his wing.

(08-12-2016, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Zimmer inherited a team that had won 5 games and was only one year removed from making the playoffs and had a losing record.

Lewis inherited a team that had only won 2 games and had not even had a winning record in 13 years and finished at .500.

Zimmer inherited a team with multiple Pro Bowl players (OT Matt Kalil, LB Chad Greenway, K Blair Walsh, KR Cordarrell Patterson, TE Kyle Rudolph)

Lewis inherited a team with zero Pro Bowl players.


Marvin stepped into a much worse position than Mike Zimmer.

The Vikes were still not as good of a team at that time as ours was IMHO. Plus he already knew the players
and had their respect, he knew the team as a whole much better than going anywhere else.

I think Zimmer would of done better here than in Minnesota right off the bat...

But this is just assumption and speculation of course.

(08-12-2016, 04:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Marvin lost the best player on his defense (Spikes) and the best player on offense (Dillon) quit on the team.

And I forgot to mention that Zimmer also had 2X Pro Bowl WR Greg Jennings.

Who was coming off a 366 yard season.  Who was coming off back to back seasons under 1,000 yards.  Who was 31 when the season started.  Who, now, hasn't had a 1,000 yard season is the last 6 years.  Point being, he wasn't anywhere near the player he was in his prime.

What point are you trying to make exactly?  The thread seemed simple enough, you answer with your opinion on who would be better for this season.  Then you change into who inherited a worse situation. (Why?)  Then you conveniently leave out things in detailing what Zimmer inherited.

It seems like we're jumping from argument to argument.  Did Marvin inherit a worse situation?  I don't know, tough call.  But I do leaving out that Zimmer lost Adrian Peterson isn't fair, nor is forgetting to mention that he had to go with Teddy Bridgewater.  And overstating Greg Jennings worth seems desperate.  But even if Marvin did indeed inherit a worse team what's that got to do with the discussion we'r having right now.

Neither made the playoffs in year 1.  Marvin went 8-8, Zimmer went 7-9.  Marvin didn't make the playoffs in year 2 either.  He went 8-8 again.  Zimmer went 11-5.  And now we're talking about year 3 vs year 14.  Who cares who inherited what?

I think it's fair to say both inherited a mess.  And really why not leave it at that?  If you have your reasons for valuing Marvin more NOW then please share them.  Because arguing about this other stuff seems completely irrelevant to the topic.  Seems like arguing only for the sake of arguing.

(08-12-2016, 04:52 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: What point are you trying to make exactly?  The thread seemed simple enough, you answer with your opinion on who would be better for this season.  Then you change into who inherited a worse situation. (Why?) 

 But even if Marvin did indeed inherit a worse team what's that got to do with the discussion we'r having right now.

  Who cares who inherited what?

Why are you addressing these commenst to me instead of these guys who brought it up first?

(08-12-2016, 02:53 PM)CageTheBengal Wrote: It took Marvin how long to be within a few plays of a playoff victory? It took Zimmer how long with less talent?

(08-12-2016, 03:32 PM)jonesy84 Wrote:  I don't think it's completely fair to say how much better Zimmer has fared with how much less he had. 

(08-12-2016, 03:46 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I think Zimmer inheriting Marv's team would of won us at least one Playoff game. Our team was set, the Vike's weren't even close. 

Why ignore all of these comments and accuse me of bringing it up for no reason?  Seems like you are just trying to pick a fught instead of having a balanced conversation.

(08-12-2016, 04:28 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'm not sure I understand this answer.  Because you're a Bengals fan you're unable, or refuse, to look at coaches or players outside of the organization objectively?  To even entertain someone outside over someone inside somehow negates your fandom?  Am I understanding this thought process correctly.

Honestly, this is good to know for future discussions.  At least you're honest.  You're going with Marvin Lewis for no reason other than that he's a Bengals employee and Zimmer is not.  Fair enough.

No dude I'm looking directly at your question which was who do I want as my head coach.   Since both are head coaches and neither are switching teams before the season starts if I want zimmer as my head coach this year I have to root for the Vikings.  If I want too root for the bengals well then marvin is still my head coach cause you know he is the head coach.


Now if you asked who would I feel better as being the head coach of the bengals in 2016 I might have answered zimmer..  I have long been behind the idea of promoting zimmer to head coach here when he was DC.  But every year after daltons draft has gotten a little better a little closer to making that step beyond the 1st round exits.  I cant fairly blame those loses on marvin who was on the field for zero snaps in all those playoff loses.    I don't know if marvin is handcuffing the playcalling or letting his coordinators handle that.. what I do know is the bengals as a whole all 53 and the whole coaching staff and owner ship has lost 4 in a row.

but that boat has sailed for zimmer being our head coach. so while its a fun topic its one that's been kinda beat to death over the last few years.  So I answered your direct question directly.

I hope this clears this up for you.


I still hope zimmer does well ill root for the Vikings this year any time they aren't playing the Bengals which I believe is all year.    I like his style of coaching.   

(08-12-2016, 04:52 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote:  If you have your reasons for valuing Marvin more NOW then please share them. 

Because The Bengals had a better year than the Vikings last year.  

The Bengals won more games.

The Bengals outscores their opponents by more than twice as many points as the Vikings (140 to 63)

The Bengals went 3-3 against teams with winning records while the Vikings only went 2-4.



Plus Marvin has made the playoffs 5 straight years while Zimmer has only done it once.

(08-12-2016, 04:11 PM)butfredtoast Wrote: Zimmer inherited a team that had won 5 games and was only one year removed from making the playoffs and had a losing record.

Lewis inherited a team that had only won 2 games and had not even had a winning record in 13 years and finished at .500.

Zimmer inherited a team with multiple Pro Bowl players (OT Matt Kalil (Very up and down career.), LB Chad Greenway (Great linebacker), K Blair Walsh (He's a kicker. A good kicker but his impact is really limited. On the other hand he was the guy who missed the chip shot victory field goal in the playoffs.), KR Cordarrell Patterson (A kick returner who had one good season and has failed miserably at being a wide out.) TE Kyle Rudolph (A great TE.) Greg Jennings also never had a Pro Bowl worthy season (As far as production his name was plenty recognizable.) outside of Green Bay.

I feel like most fans have an idea about what the Pro Bowl is about. To be brief it's a popularity contest as much (if not more) as it is a showcase for the premier talent in the NFL. Players (Like Whit and Willie) get snubbed time and time again and players with easily recognizable names will get in even if they are injured most the year (Terrel Suggs) or play like crap.



Lewis inherited a team with zero Pro Bowl players.

Corey Dillon was a pro bowler. Willie Anderson played at a pro bowl level but lacked recognition in the popularity department.


Marvin stepped into a much worse position than Mike Zimmer.

While that may be true Zimmer didn't become a head coach until 2 years ago and Marvin has had his team turned around for about 5 years now. Zimmer has turned a franchise around and achieved what Marvin has in a much shorter time. While Marvin has been a victim of his ownership at times since 2011 onwards he has had multiple Pro Bowlers and scouts have been churning out talent.

I feel like some of these arguments are reaching pretty hard.

Marvin has been here too long. I'm ready for a change. Zimmer would be great. That's my reasoning.

Jay Gruden

(08-12-2016, 04:24 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I took the liberty of providing a tad more context to your post.

If you don't mention these facts then you're not telling the whole story.  When you inherit a five win team, and then lose Adrian Peterson for the season, then that's kind of a big a deal.  Especially when you're already planning on a having to start a rookie QB.

agree but bottom  line.. the cupboard of the Bengals when Marvin took over was not just empty but destroyed... so no doubt Marvin had less to work with than Zimmer.. but lets give credit to both of them... I rather have either really as a coach than many other coaches out there now in NFL>

(08-12-2016, 11:10 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: agree but bottom  line.. the cupboard of the Bengals when Marvin took over was not just empty but destroyed... so no doubt Marvin had less to work with than Zimmer.. but lets give credit to both of them... I rather have either really as a coach than many other coaches out there now in NFL>

Marvin inherited Chad, TJ, Corey, Rudi, Levi, Willie, Braham, Justin Smith and Brian Simmons, among others. Plus he inherited the rights to draft Palmer (the consensus #1 pick).

Most of this talent was young and unable to help the team win in 2002, but the cupboard was far from bare. Unless you think these players weren't talented. 

To Wes: Yes, I would take Zimmer. Appreciate Marv changing the culture, but things have stagnated. The goal is to win championships, and if you're not making progress towards that, you need change. Zimmer would bring change and at minimum he's a proven winner in regular season, which is exactly what Marv is after 14 years.

(08-12-2016, 11:10 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: agree but bottom  line.. the cupboard of the Bengals when Marvin took over was not just empty but destroyed... so no doubt Marvin had less to work with than Zimmer.. but lets give credit to both of them... I rather have either really as a coach than many other coaches out there now in NFL>

Marvin inherited the following players:

Willie Anderson
Levi Jones
Richie Braham
Chad Johnson
Peter Warrick
TJ Houshmanzode (Championship!)
Justin Smith
Brian Simmons
Rudi Johnson

Not too mentioned he walked into a situation where he had the #1 overall pick, which would have been Palmer no matter who was the coach, and the 33 pick, which almost like a 2nd first rounder, which was used on Eric Steinbach.

By the start of camp, he had both Jon Kitna and Carson Palmer in stripes. 4/5th's of what became a dominant OL was gifted to him.  Probably would be hard pressed to find a single roster in the league at that time that had more future NFL talent at WR.

The point is, it's not like he inherited absolutely nothing.  Did he walk into an ideal situation?  Of course he didn't.  No coach does, or the job wouldn't be open.  But he did walk into a situation that actually came with a lot of talent, albeit undeveloped in some cases.  He walked into a situation with a franchise boasting a brand new stadium.  He was given some, and more than coaches prior, freedom with his staff.

So I'm sorry, but I think you guys greatly overstate just how bad his situation was.  Saying it wasn't just empty but destroyed is a bit much IMO.  Is it really worse than Zimmer?  That's a pretty tough call.  Is it worse than what Hue Jackson just walked into?  Doubtful.

To each their own, but I just don't think his situation was, without a doubt, worse than someone like Zimmer's.  He inherited a turd just like almost every other coach inherits a turd.  His turd polished up quickly because there was a lot of young talent already in place.  For that he deserves credit but not worship.  Guys have been gifted much worse turds.  Big turds sandwhiches covered in turd sauce, with a side of fried turds.  Ice cold turds to wash it down.  Jack Del Rio may have had to take on more turds than anyone of recent memory.  Marvin is not king of the turds. 

(08-12-2016, 11:46 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Marvin inherited the following players:

Willie Anderson
Levi Jones
Richie Braham
Chad Johnson
Peter Warrick
TJ Houshmanzode (Championship!)
Justin Smith
Brian Simmons
Rudi Johnson

Not too mentioned he walked into a situation where he had the #1 overall pick, which would have been Palmer no matter who was the coach, and the 33 pick, which almost like a 2nd first rounder, which was used on Eric Steinbach.

By the start of camp, he had both Jon Kitna and Carson Palmer in stripes. 4/5th's of what became a dominant OL was gifted to him.  Probably would be hard pressed to find a single roster in the league at that time that had more future NFL talent at WR.

The point is, it's not like he inherited absolutely nothing.  Did he walk into an ideal situation?  Of course he didn't.  No coach does, or the job wouldn't be open.  But he did walk into a situation that actually came with a lot of talent, albeit undeveloped in some cases.  He walked into a situation with a franchise boasting a brand new stadium.  He was given some, and more than coaches prior, freedom with his staff.

So I'm sorry, but I think you guys greatly overstate just how bad his situation was.  Saying it wasn't just empty but destroyed is a bit much IMO.  Is it really worse than Zimmer?  That's a pretty tough call.  Is it worse than what Hue Jackson just walked into?  Doubtful.

To each their own, but I just don't think his situation was, without a doubt, worse than someone like Zimmer's.  He inherited a turd just like almost every other coach inherits a turd.  His turd polished up quickly because there was a lot of young talent already in place.  For that he deserves credit but not worship.  Guys have been gifted much worse turds.  Big turds sandwhiches covered in turd sauce, with a side of fried turds.  Ice cold turds to wash it down.  Jack Del Rio may have had to take on more turds than anyone of recent memory.  Marvin is not king of the turds.  :smirk:

All this talk of turds is making me nauseous.

Just because Marvin inherited talent is meaningless. Cincinnati hadn't even sniffed a winning record record in over a decade, and Marvin came in with four straight non-losing seasons.

Pointing out the talent level Marvin inherited is irrelevant. Did those players that you mentioned play well before Marvin showed up? A few, but mostly no. So it's safe to say that Marvin's staff coached them up to get them to perform well as a team. That's more important than inheriting talent.

Your original question is also loaded, whether you'd like to admit that or not. The presumption here is that Mike Zimmer was a fan favorite and has never experienced ups and downs as the Bengals head coach, so he was not exposed to that criticism once in his life. Your question is fallacious. I always thought Zim deserved some blame watching his defense get torched by SD in the playoffs in 2014, but as DC he never received the same criticism as Marvin. I mean there were times last year that the Vikings played way below their talent level (signature of a ML coached team) and looked totally bad, and that missed field goal in the playoffs was on par with our meltdown against Pitt.

I think if Zimmer was given a full offseason, he would be more successful with this Bengals team than Marvin. I think we know what results we are getting with Marvin. He's had some great drafts, produced some great players, which has recently led to many playoff berths. However, Bengals teams have had self-control issues that have plagued them throughout Lewis' years. Zimmer, I believe would nip that in the bud.

Beyond this year, I don't have an opinion on who'd be the better option.

(08-12-2016, 11:40 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: I pick marvin lewis because I'm a bengals fan not a Vikings fan

So what?  The point of this is to imagine both of them as the Bengals HC and THEN decide which you would rather have. 

(08-13-2016, 11:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So what?  The point of this is to imagine both of them as the Bengals HC and THEN decide which you would rather have. 

 i like Mike but Im a Marvin Man 

(08-13-2016, 11:30 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote:  i like Mike but Im a Marvin Man 

Boy did you pick the right team to root for then, because he's going to be here for another decade or so...rain or come shine.  Mikey and Marvin should be what people point to when they want to exemplify a rock solid marriage that weathers any storm.

Brings a damn tear to my eye.