(01-16-2018, 02:42 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The fact that so many people here think it is an insult to say someone plays the piano proves my point about how good message boards are at judging coaches.

Chuck Knoll played classical guitar and was fond of chamber music, but a lot of people would be making fun of him as a coach because of it.

It is like a elementary school playground mentality.

Well, *Noll* didn't position coach for a shitty franchise for 24 years without moving on or up, won a couple big games as a HC, so.......


It's not really making fun of him, he's obviously a better pianist than coach.

(01-16-2018, 02:40 PM)Wyche Wrote: Nah, it was just proof Piano Pauly couldn't ID legitimate NFL talent, and played turds because they were "his" guys.  Livings flopped here too, he was horrible.

If he was horrible here then he would never have gotten such a good contract in free agency.

He was not an elite player here, but he was very far from horrible.  And he was an undrafted free agent when PA got him.

(01-16-2018, 02:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Brady, Brees, and A-Rod are very well paid. 

I don't see your point here.

Sure you do, re-read Leonard's post. :andy:

(01-16-2018, 02:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If he was horrible here then he would never have gotten such a good contract in free agency.

He was not an elite player here, but he was very far from horrible.  And he was an undrafted free agent when PA got him.

Yeah man, he was terrible, like Bodine level.  I can't help the Cowboys almost made as terrible a decision regarding their o line back then as they did this week.  Jerry Jones hasn't exactly made the most sound football decisions since running Jimmy Johnson out of town.

(01-16-2018, 02:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually it does suit my argument.  How much a player gets paid indicates how much a team values him.  People claimed that the Bengals did not care about winning because they played Peko and paid him decently.  So when the team that had just won a Super Bowl a year showed how much they valued him it was proof that paying Peko had nothing to do with "not caring about winning".

so does that mean Brock is worth 16 mil a year? 

(01-16-2018, 02:45 PM)Wyche Wrote: Well, *Noll* didn't position coach for a shitty franchise for 24 years without moving on or up, won a couple big games as a HC, so.......


It's not really making fun of him, he's obviously a better pianist than coach.

You completely missed my point.  The fact that Noll was so successful proves my pint about how stupid it is to make fun of a coach because he plays the piano.

And it is 100% making fun of him.  The only people who call him "piano man" are the ones who hate him the most. 

Like I said, it is a elementary school mentality that implies that guys who play piano are "too soft" for football.

(01-16-2018, 02:49 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: They also signed Brock Osweiler and cut him the next year...so does that mean Brock is worth 16 mil a year? 

Yeah, even the best franchises make mistakes.....look at NE letting Garrapolo (SP?) leave.  Brady can't go on forever, can he?  Too bad we cheer for one that makes quite a few of them quite regularly.

(01-16-2018, 02:49 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: so does that mean Brock is worth 16 mil a year? 

What it means is that a team that cared enough about winning to bring home a Lombardi valued Brock.  So you can't just say that signing Osweiller is proof that a team does not care about winning.

Understand now?

(01-16-2018, 02:45 PM)Wyche Wrote: It's not really making fun of him, he's obviously a better pianist than coach.

or maybe just maybe Fred is just taking everything so literally that Paul gets his nickname from those big piano keys teeth in his mouth?

(01-16-2018, 02:51 PM)Wyche Wrote: Yeah, even the best franchises make mistakes.....look at NE letting Garrapolo (SP?) leave.  Brady can't go on forever, can he?  Too bad we cheer for one that makes quite a few of them quite regularly.

Do these mistakes prove that NE and Denver "don't care about winning"?

(01-16-2018, 02:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You completely missed my point.  The fact that Noll was so successful proves my pint about how stupid it is to make fun of a coach because he plays the piano.

And it is 100% making fun of him.  The only people who call him "piano man" are the ones who hate him the most. 

Like I said, it is a elementary school mentality that implies that guys who play piano are "too soft" for football.

Says you.

As I've said numerous times, he let the game pass him by, was too stubborn to adapt to the current game, too stubborn to bench underperforming players he lobbied for, and/or too arrogant/stubborn to change his schemes to match his players' strengths.  Those assertions have been pretty much substantiated by our current OC in his presser.  I'll go with what Lazor says, especially after even Son of Paul let him walk.


As for Piano Man, it seemed like a catchy nickname, and I used it more as a knock on Mike Clown keeping him around as a "twofer".  He got a bargain....a sub average coach, and a guy to play his dinner parties!  LOL......I can't believe you think your boy was soft.

(01-16-2018, 02:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Do these mistakes prove that NE and Denver "don't care about winning"?

Nope, cause they attempt to rectify them within the decade they make them in.  


Also, they don't make near as many.

(01-16-2018, 02:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Do these mistakes prove that NE and Denver "don't care about winning"?

It proves one thing, that you weren't around all season waving and bantering how smart the Bengals are with their decision making when they were stinking it up all season. Now that the season is over you can manipulate stats and meaningless arguments to how brilliant the Bengals are at X,Y,Z. Well enjoy your time now because a new season will be here before ya know it and time to go back in hibernation till the next disappointment of a season begins all over again. 

(01-16-2018, 02:58 PM)GodFather Wrote: It proves one thing, that you weren't around all season waving and bantering how smart the Bengals are with their decision making when they were stinking it up all season. Now that the season is over you can manipulate stats and meaningless arguments to how brilliant the Bengals are at X,Y,Z. Well enjoy your time now because a new season will be here before ya know it and time to go back in hibernation till the next disappointment of a season begins all over again. 

That's true.  Had he been around, he'd know that most every poster on here calls him Piano Man after pretty much tanking two consecutive seasons with his incompetency.

(01-16-2018, 02:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually it does suit my argument.  How much a player gets paid indicates how much a team values him.  People claimed that the Bengals did not care about winning because they played Peko and paid him decently.  So when the team that had just won a Super Bowl a year showed how much they valued him it was proof that paying Peko had nothing to do with "not caring about winning".

Actually it had more to do with Malik Jackson being signed away and no one left in the middle, otherwise he likely would not have been given that contract.

(01-16-2018, 03:11 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Actually it had more to do with Malik Jackson being signed away and no one left in the middle, otherwise he likely would not have been given that contract.

Not sure what you are trying to say.

The Broncos valued Peko more than Jackson?

Peko was the only DT free agent on the market?

(01-16-2018, 02:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What it means is that a team that cared enough about winning to bring home a Lombardi valued Brock.  So you can't just say that signing Osweiller is proof that a team does not care about winning.

Understand now?

Yes sir. You're using Peko as a basis of argument for how they care about winning but ignore Whit and Z and other examples that prove otherwise (while also better at what they do).

(01-16-2018, 02:57 PM)Wyche Wrote: Nope, cause they attempt to rectify them within the decade they make them in.  


Also, they don't make near as many.

*sigh*

Here is the last time I am going to explain my position.  I don't know how I can make it any more simple.

People here claimed that it was so obvious that Peko was garbage that the only team who would pay him would be one that "did not care about winning".  That is totally different from trying to win and making a mistake.

Understand now?  The people who claimed it was so obvious that Peko was trash did not have a clue what they were talking about because a team that was trying very hard to win paid him MORE than the Bengals were paying him.

(01-16-2018, 03:02 PM)Wyche Wrote: That's true.  Had he been around, he'd know that most every poster on here calls him Piano Man after pretty much tanking two consecutive seasons with his incompetency.

Paul Alexander has landed in a dream position and may end up getting high praise next season.

When healthy, the Dallas O-line is stacked with talent and Paul may not have nearly as much influence in Dallas to hand pick the players.

Ezekiel Elliott is a Grade A pass blocker and runner.

Paul may end up looking smarter than Frank Pollack by this time next year (whether he deserves to or not) based on the situations they each landed in.

Fred may have the edge here going forward (with stats that favor Paul) based solely on the differing team situations and talent levels of each team's O-line.

Frank Pollack has some work to do in Cincy, while Paul inherits some elite lineman in Dallas plus the blocking ability of Zeke.

Pollack has a bigger mountain to climb going forward while Paul is basically teed up to succeed in Dallas.

Will be interesting to see how it plays out and what slants people take on the Board this time next year when comparing the two & based on how each team performs.

(01-16-2018, 03:19 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Yes sir. You're using Peko as a basis of argument for how they care about winning but ignore Whit and Z and other examples that prove otherwise (while also better at what they do).

Sorry but I do not recall a lot of members here being completely wrong about the talents of Whit and Z.

Do you even understand the point I am trying to make?  I am talking about how wrong the majority can be around here at times.  And I don't see what Whit an Z have to do with this because almost everyone agreed they were very good players.