Here is an interesting number. According to profootballreference over the last ten years there have been 227 different rookies who started at least 14 games. Since there are 32 teams that is an average of 7.1 per team. Over the last ten years the Bengals have 7 different rookies who have started at least 14 games.

When we expand it beyond just rookie seasons it does not change very much. Looking at the first three seasons of every player's career over the last 10 years there were 785 who had at least one season with at least 14 starts in his first three years. That is an average of 24.5 per team, and the Bengals have had 24.

233 players had two seasons with at least 14 starts in their first 3 years. That is an average of 7.6 per team and the Bengals have had 7.

Only 80 players started at least 14 games in each of their first three seasons. That is an average of 2.5 per team and the Bengals have had 3.

Prepare to have this thread linked to every mention of Marvin "never plays rookies". The numbers show that Marvin starts rookies and/or young players right in line with the league average.

My argument has always been that good teams play rookies less than bad teams. But by going back 10 years I cover times when the Bengals were bad good, bad, and rebuilding. So it should all average out.

BTW the argument "0-7" does not prove you are right if you have been doing a lot of crying about how Marvin never plays rookies and/or young players.

The raw numbers don't tell the whole story. Did they trot out an under performing veteran instead of giving a rookie a shot? Were rookies playing because they were that good or because there was no choice but play them? Were rookies handed jobs they may or may not have deserved?

Probably too many factors involved to draw any real conclusions based on the numbers alone.

(03-07-2017, 04:43 PM)McC Wrote: The raw numbers don't tell the whole story.  Did they trot out an under performing veteran instead of giving a rookie a shot?  Were rookies playing because they were that good or because there was no choice but play them?  Were rookies handed jobs they may or may not have deserved?  

Probably too many factors involved to draw any real conclusions based on the numbers alone.

exactly right

How many of the "rookie" starting games by Marv player equates to Z who we are about to let go after wasting a first round pick on a position we do not value enough to give a second contract.

(03-07-2017, 04:43 PM)McC Wrote: The raw numbers don't tell the whole story.  Did they trot out an under performing veteran instead of giving a rookie a shot?  Were rookies playing because they were that good or because there was no choice but play them?  Were rookies handed jobs they may or may not have deserved?  

Probably too many factors involved to draw any real conclusions based on the numbers alone.

That is the thing, sometimes shitty coaching forces teams to play rookies as well. Or like last year when two of our
top WR's left for big dough. Or when your QB and owner are at odds so you have to draft a rookie QB and start him

(03-07-2017, 05:04 PM)bengals67 Wrote: exactly right

How many of the "rookie" starting games by Marv player equates to Z who we are about to let go after wasting a first round pick on a position we do not value enough to give a second contract.

We will be playing more rookies this year than in a long time if we lose, Whitworth, Zeitler and Burkhead i am sure.

Won't be good if this is the case.

Andy and AJ count for 2 of those 7 players.

I would love to see the numbers based on our first round picks compared to other teams first round picks.

2016 William Jackson 3rd - did not start a game his rookie year due to injury (he wouldn't have started regardless)

2015 Cedric Ogbuehi - Did not start a game his rookie year

2014 Darquez Dennard - Did not start a game his rookie year, second round pick Jeremy Hill started 8 games and had an immediate impact.

2013 Tyler Eiffert - Started 15 games. Made immediate impact. Same with Gio Bernard.

2012 Dre Kirkpatrick - Did not start a game his rookie year.

2011 AJ Greene - Started every game and we all know how that went....


Based on the above, I dont think you can honestly say that bad teams are starting rookies and good teams arent. I also dont think you can say that rookies cant have an immediate positive impact, because they can.

I think you can also conclude that Marvin values cornerback depth and is reluctant to start a cornerback or a more "learned" position that is a rookie. You can also conclude that Marvin doesn't really hesitate when its a skill position.

I think the whole "Marvin doesn't start rookies" argument is true to a degree. It matters on the position and rawness of a player more than anything though.

(03-07-2017, 04:43 PM)McC Wrote:  Did they trot out an under performing veteran instead of giving a rookie a shot?

 Were rookies handed jobs they may or may not have deserved?  

Probably too many factors involved to draw any real conclusions based on the numbers alone.

The problem is the judgment of fans who claim that every move Marvin makes is wrong based on the logic that everything Marvin does is wrong.

The same Bengals fans who claim Marvin is not playing the right players also claimed Justin Smith was garbage, Leon Hall sucked because he could not cover fast receivers, and Andrew Whitworth needed to be moved to guard because he could not handle speed rusher.

Just because a player performs well when given a chance does not mean he would have been good from the veryt first snap of the season.  The guys that you all claim should have been playing earlier may not have been as good as the guys who were playing.

But no matter how you want to spin it the fact is that marvin plays rookies and young players as much as the average NFL coach.  You may disagree with who he is playing and who he should be playing but the argument that "Marvin does not play rookies" just is not true.

(03-07-2017, 06:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The problem is the judgment of fans who claim that every move Marvin makes is wrong based on the logic that everything Marvin does is wrong.

The same Bengals fans who claim Marvin is not playing the right players also claimed Justin Smith was garbage, Leon Hall sucked because he could not cover fast receivers, and Andrew Whitworth needed to be moved to guard because he could not handle speed rusher.

Just because a player performs well when given a chance does not mean he would have been good from the veryt first snap of the season.  The guys that you all claim should have been playing earlier may not have been as good as the guys who were playing.

But no matter how you want to spin it the fact is that marvin plays rookies and young players as much as the average NFL coach.  You may disagree with who he is playing and who he should be playing but the argument that "Marvin does not play rookies" just is not true.

I killed a gopher with a stick one time..

Leon Hall, Keith Rivers, Andre Smith, Rey Malauga, Michael Johnson ?, Jermaine Gresham, Andy, AJ Green, Zietler ?, Eifert, Jeremy Hill, Bodine, Credric O.

If I left 1 or 2 off my bad. Questions marks are for guys that I cant recall if they got the start right out the gates as a rookie.


This shows me that when we draft players who are good enough to start we start them.

AKA we do the same exact thing every team does in the NFL.



Iv never been one that jumped on the play young players bandwagon. One of the few times I agree with you Fred.

Bengals play the players they feel have the best chance to win. No different than any professional sports team ever

Stop responding folks. This is all an asinine attempt to stir up drama and seek attention.

This post will be deleted by God knows who in 3... 2.... 1...  

On the whole, much of Fred's saying is correct. However, the frustration with Marvin comes from his tendency to sit 1st and 2nd round picks while throwing late rounders and UDFA's into the starting lineup.

(03-07-2017, 07:17 PM)Pat5775 Wrote: Stop responding folks. This is all an asinine attempt to stir up drama and seek attention.

This post will be deleted by God knows who in 3... 2.... 1...  

All I did was post facts.  

The fact that they prove a lot of people wrong is no basis to delete them

(03-07-2017, 06:10 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I would love to see the numbers based on our first round picks compared to other teams first round picks. 

I noticed a glitch in the records at Profootballreference.com regarding games started by rookie first round picks in '16.  So I did the 10 year period from '06-'15 instead of '07-'16.

There were 113 total first round picks that started at least 14 games their rookie season.  League average was 3.5 and the Bengals had 3.

That seems a little low to me.  I would think that more than an average of 11 first round picks started 14 games their rookie season.  Does anyone know of another research tool to cross check that number?

With the Bengals, the "earn your reps" seems to apply more on the defensive side of the ball.  Off of the top of my head, Andy, AJ Green, Zeitler, Boling, Bodine, Hill, Marvin Jones, I'm likely missing a player or two.  Defensively, it gets a bit tougher to name them.  Leon Hall, Maualuga, Keith Rivers.  Unless I am missing something, or someone, those seem to be the players that started as Rookies in the past 10 years.

I'll likely google this and find that I'm way off...

Oh, and Kevin Huber

(03-07-2017, 09:32 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All I did was post facts.  

The fact that they prove a lot of people wrong is no basis to delete them

Not talking about them deleting your thread. I get what you're doing. Apparently I'm just not allowed to say anything about it. But I'm sure you wouldn't know anything about that, would you? 

If Marvin Lewis is so great, and everything he does, and the O-line coach and everyone else does is so perfect and right on par with league average explain why the results are beneath league average.

I don't give a damn what he does stats wise, I don't care if he plays more rookies, less rookies, more vets, more guys born in the state of Iowa who were born on a ***** Thursday.

Win a damn game when it matters. You can't find any stat out there, that says Marvin Lewis or Paul Alexander or Mike Brown are good when it matters most, because...they are terrible in those situations. No one, has failed at this level in NFL history.

Defending them is saying you are happy with being mediocre and never winning a Championship. Sorry dude, but I'm not cool with that crap.

So what you are trying to say is that Marvin is just a slightly below average coach? Preaching to the choir here.

Reps for the research.

Still think giving more playing time to Vigil last year in a lost season instead of Dansby is something a good coach would have done. Same as giving Westerman any playing time at all. Activating our first round pick instead of a RB who will be out of the league. And playing one of our young interior line players instead of one armed Boling.

(03-07-2017, 04:34 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Here is an interesting number.  According to profootballreference over the last ten years there have been 227 different rookies who started at least 14 games.  Since there are 32 teams that is an average of 7.1 per team.  Over the last ten years the Bengals have 7 different rookies who have started at least 14 games.

When we expand it beyond just rookie seasons it does not change very much.  Looking at the first three seasons of every player's career over the last 10 years there were 785 who had at least one season with at least 14 starts in his first three years.  That is an average of 24.5 per team, and the Bengals have had 24.  

233 players had two seasons with at least 14 starts in their first 3 years.  That is an average of 7.6 per team and the Bengals have had 7.

Only 80 players started at least 14 games in each of their first three seasons.  That is an average of 2.5 per team and the Bengals have had 3.

Prepare to have this thread linked to every mention of Marvin "never plays rookies".   The numbers show that Marvin starts rookies and/or young players right in line with the league average.

My argument has always been that good teams play rookies less than bad teams.  But by going back 10 years I cover times when the Bengals were bad good, bad, and rebuilding.  So it should all average out.

BTW the argument "0-7" does not prove you are right if you have been doing a lot of crying about how Marvin never plays rookies and/or young players.

Yet it does prove one right when arguing that Marvin Lewis is not a good football coach.

The audacity you displayed in order to post this is unbelievable.

not trying to poke holes, but there are pretty different approaches and successes to playing rookies vs vets vets free agents. Not sure if taking a big chunk of numbers and spreading them around tells the story.

(03-08-2017, 03:00 AM)Benton Wrote: not trying to poke holes, but there are pretty different approaches and successes to playing rookies vs vets vets free agents. Not sure if taking a big chunk of numbers and spreading them around tells the story.

It doesn't.  As someone mentioned earlier, we HAD to start Andy Dalton, AJ Green, Kevin Zeitler, possibly lump Bodine in there, Tyler Boyd, and others I'm probably forgetting due to the fact there really wasn't anyone else to play at their positions.


I guess the fair way to say this is it seems he never starts many rookies on defense.  We still trot out Hockaloogie, Peko, Geathers, etc, when maybe better and younger options are on the bench. This was kinda supported when Guenther announced he was fed up with piss poor play by the vets, and would going to youth if they didn't pull it together, only to have Mediocre Marv step on his junk. People tend to generalize things on forums.....most don't feel the need to pick nits.