(03-09-2018, 01:56 AM)Go Cards Wrote: Wonder how that stacks up against Marvin's first 4 seasons ?

Which is better 3 out of 4 playoff appearances with a win, or 1 out of 4 playoff appearances with zero wins ?

Zimmer took over a team that was just one year removed from making the playoffs.  Marvin took over a team that was over a decade removed from its last winning season.

And for all of Marvins playoff failures he has never lost by 31 at home.

(03-08-2018, 05:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess this is the big difference between me and almost everyone else here.  To me the ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl.  I would also say that making the Super Bowl would also be a great.  But short of that I don't see a huge difference between making the playoffs and losing in game one and making the playoffs and losing in round two.  

I don't understand how people can think that winning just one playoff game in one year is an amazing accomplishment that defines success, but making the playoffs multiple years is so shitty they would rather lose and not even make the playoffs. that just does not make any sense to me.

To me a team is successful if they make the playoffs, but unless you make the Super Bowl there is no huge dividing line between losing in the first round and losing in the second round.

Would you rather be 11-5 or 12-4?

I find it amazing that you define success by winning and making the playoffs, but scoff at winning in the playoffs unless it's Super Bowl or nothing. 

(03-09-2018, 11:52 AM)Hoofhearted Wrote: I find it amazing that you define success by winning and making the playoffs, but scoff at winning in the playoffs unless it's Super Bowl or nothing. 

I don't "scoff" at any win.  I just don't give 10000% more value to one playoff win in one season than to making the playoffs on a regular basis.

It is obviously better to win in the playoffs than to loose in the playoffs, but unless it is a Super Bowl win (or maybe even a Conference Championship) I am not going to trade one playoff win in one season for a decade of losing in the regular season.

I don't see anything "amazing" by that line of thought at all.

(03-08-2018, 07:43 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The Bills have not had a ten win season  in 18 years.  To me it sounds absurd to claim they are a superior franchise to the Bengals just because they won a playoff game in 1995.

Raiders have a total of 4 wining season in the last twenty four years.

Browns have only 2 winning seasons in the last nineteen years.

When I look at the big picture I think you guys are putting way too much value on one or two playoff wins over multiple decades.

So next you will tell us that fans of the Raiders, Bills and Browns have never bitched and moaned..... It's just us lowlife fans here? Btw, it isn't just us, not as intelligent fans as Fred, that talk about the Bengals not winning a playoff game. Every sports journalist or sportscaster seems to include, "haven't won a playoff game in 26 years" blurb when talking about the Bengals... They must be misinformed like everyone but you, Mike & Marvin.

(03-09-2018, 12:41 PM)sandwedge Wrote: So next you will tell us that fans of the Raiders, Bills and Browns have never bitched and moaned.

No.  I absolutely aggree that the fans of those teams ***** and moan all the time.

But I guarantee not a single Bills fan goes around claiming they are a better franchise than the Bengals because they won a playoff game in '95.  Same with the Browns fans.

(03-09-2018, 12:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't "scoff" at any win.  I just don't give 10000% more value to one playoff win in one season than to making the playoffs on a regular basis.

It is obviously better to win in the playoffs than to loose in the playoffs, but unless it is a Super Bowl win (or maybe even a Conference Championship) I am not going to trade one playoff win in one season for a decade of losing in the regular season.

I don't see anything "amazing" by that line of thought at all.

You said

Quote:But short of that I don't see a huge difference between making the playoffs and losing in game one and making the playoffs and losing in round two.

But then said it's better to win in the playoffs than lose, even if it's only one win. So there is a difference between winning one game than none. That's the "amazing" line of thought I was referring too. And why do we have to trade a decade of losing for winning a playoff game or two? Why can't we have a natural progression of winning, making the playoffs, and winning in the playoffs? 

Why is it that, if the goal is to win a Super Bowl, we can't be upset that we haven't even got past the first round in almost 3 decades while also enjoying the progression of to this point (making the playoffs)? 

(03-09-2018, 12:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  I absolutely aggree that the fans of those teams ***** and moan all the time.

But I guarantee not a single Bills fan goes around claiming they are a better franchise than the Bengals because they won a playoff game in '95.  Same with the Browns fans.

Pretty brave guarantee there Fred. I would say that is a false statement. I haven't read anyone on here making the claim we are better than those franchises either? I don't understanding the belittling of us on here for wanting a little more out of our team? This is a message board and NOT a COURT OF LAW, where opinions are plenty and can be accepted or dismissed. Not everything has to be an argument with you.

(03-09-2018, 12:56 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: You said



But then said it's better to win in the playoffs than lose, even if it's only one win. So there is a difference between winning one game than none. That's the "amazing" line of thought I was referring too. And why do we have to trade a decade of losing for winning a playoff game or two? Why can't we have a natural progression of winning, making the playoffs, and winning in the playoffs? 

Why is it that, if the goal is to win a Super Bowl, we can't be upset that we haven't even got past the first round in almost 3 decades while also enjoying the progression of to this point (making the playoffs)? 

Amen!

(03-09-2018, 12:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  I absolutely aggree that the fans of those teams ***** and moan all the time.

But I guarantee not a single Bills fan goes around claiming they are a better franchise than the Bengals because they won a playoff game in '95.  Same with the Browns fans.

So, which barometer are we using to judge Marvin's/Bengals success? Should we be looking at how we stack up versus the best teams or the worst teams of the past 15 years? 

If the goal is to say we're better than the worst...then goal accomplished.

If the goal is to say we're on par with the best teams...then we've failed.

(03-09-2018, 12:56 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: And why do we have to trade a decade of losing for winning a playoff game or two? Why can't we have a natural progression of winning, making the playoffs, and winning in the playoffs? 

Why is it that, if the goal is to win a Super Bowl, we can't be upset that we haven't even got past the first round in almost 3 decades while also enjoying the progression of to this point (making the playoffs)? 

You don't have to trade a decade of losing for one playoff win, all I am saying is that you should not say the Bengals are worse than teams who have been losing consistently for the last 10-15 years but have managed one playoff win at some point.

And you should not say that making the playoffs and losing is meaningless.

(03-09-2018, 01:56 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: So, which barometer are we using to judge Marvin's/Bengals success? Should we be looking at how we stuck up versus the best teams or the worst teams of the past 15 years? 

If the goal is to say we're better than the worst...then goal accomplished.

If the goal is to say we're on par with the best teams...then we've failed.

My goal was to say that we are not the worst team in the league just because it has been longer since we won a playoff game than any other team.

(03-08-2018, 05:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess this is the big difference between me and almost everyone else here.  To me the ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl.  I would also say that making the Super Bowl would also be a great.  But short of that I don't see a huge difference between making the playoffs and losing in game one and making the playoffs and losing in round two.  

I don't understand how people can think that winning just one playoff game in one year is an amazing accomplishment that defines success, but making the playoffs multiple years is so shitty they would rather lose and not even make the playoffs. that just does not make any sense to me.

To me a team is successful if they make the playoffs, but unless you make the Super Bowl there is no huge dividing line between losing in the first round and losing in the second round.

If we won one Playoff game atleast we would know we could win one or two.

When you don't win any 7 times in a row it is completely disheartening cause you wonder if you could ever win
just one Playoff game under the guy. One Playoff win would be a huge monkey off of this team's back and might
even propel the team to more and a Superbowl. Have to get that damn monkey off our back first.

(03-09-2018, 12:58 PM)sandwedge Wrote: Pretty brave guarantee there Fred. I would say that is a false statement. I haven't read anyone on here making the claim we are better than those franchises either? I don't understanding the belittling of us on here for wanting a little more out of our team? This is a message board and NOT a COURT OF LAW, where opinions are plenty and can be accepted or dismissed. Not everything has to be an argument with you.

I think we are maybe a little too thin skinned with Fred.  There are a lot of people who are argumentative on message boards - kind of comes with the territory.

I think his arguments and rhetoric are over the top sometimes, but I don't feel like they are abusive.

We have had some truly abusive people here before.  They always end up leaving for new message boards to toxify.

I don't always agree with his arguments, but they are usually well crafted and worth consideration.

I feel that way about everyone else on this board as well.   And he has some interesting opinions.

(03-09-2018, 02:15 PM)3wt Wrote: I think we are maybe a little too thin skinned with Fred.  There are a lot of people who are argumentative on message boards - kind of comes with the territory.

I think his arguments and rhetoric are over the top sometimes, but I don't feel like they are abusive.

We have had some truly abusive people here before.  They always end up leaving for new message boards to toxify.

I don't always agree with his arguments, but they are usually well crafted and worth consideration.

I feel that way about everyone else on this board as well.   And he has some interesting opinions.

I have pretty thick skin and actually agree with him from time to time. Just don't understand the the holier than thou attitude towards other posters at times.

(03-09-2018, 02:15 PM)3wt Wrote: I think we are maybe a little too thin skinned with Fred.  There are a lot of people who are argumentative on message boards - kind of comes with the territory.

I think his arguments and rhetoric are over the top sometimes, but I don't feel like they are abusive.

We have had some truly abusive people here before.  They always end up leaving for new message boards to toxify.

I don't always agree with his arguments, but they are usually well crafted and worth consideration.

I feel that way about everyone else on this board as well.   And he has some interesting opinions.

Fred livens up the Board but sometimes prevents conversations from developing beyond "Marvin Protection".

Seems to me that Fred is thinned skin about even the slightest hint of an anti-Marvin comment and attributes all team shortcomings that Marvin may have a part in to Mike Brown, leaving Marvin blameless.

It is all in the name of Fairness to Marvin with some good points being made by Fred but he seems to apply differing "burdens of proof" to others' comments versus some of his own at times.

I still think the Board is better off with Fred on it but a Poster needs to be in the mood to argue or to observe an argument.

Would love to have little TV sets at the stadium on the back of each seat to be viewed by each fan directly in front of them with sound sensors that pick up any Anti-Marvin comment which is then fed to Fred. Fred's face would then appear on the TV screen in front of the offending fan and Fred could tee off on them in defense of Marvin. Maybe have his own Big Screen at games if he feels the entire audience needs to recalibrate how they feel about Marvin. Each fan gets their own headset to hear Fred to keep the sound down. They can also interact real time to defend their anti-Marvin comment and Fred can then deliver more Marvin defending GOLDEN comments until that fan relents.

Any fan willing to totally retract their anti-Marvin comments will receive a Marvin bobble head signed by Fred.

(03-09-2018, 01:36 AM)Go Cards Wrote: Really do not hate Marvin and know he was saddled by MB was not given free rein.

Still think he would be a good GM for Bengals.

But do think he has taken us about as far as he can and it is time for him to get promoted to FO or replaced.

Sometimes fresh blood helps immensely.

I am assuming that some on this form were alive during the 90s but but keep in mind that some members are too young to remember the 1990s and how bad the Bengals were.

(03-09-2018, 02:46 PM)sandwedge Wrote: I have pretty thick skin and actually agree with him from time to time. Just don't understand the the holier than thou attitude towards other posters at times.

I like Fred a lot and respect him. He is never abusive.

However, he acts like a lawyer defending his client- Mike Brown.

Maybe he is?

I like Fred he's a character . But I also think he's one of them fans that defend everything about this organization lol I think it's fine to poke fun at this organization. I rather laugh about it then cry. Atleast it's entertaining where you can just laugh at this stuff. Like Joe goodberry on twitter I feel like I'm a fan like him ,I love the team I love the game but I'm pretty negative,just hoping for them to turn the corner. And do things right and actually win playoff games.

Another thing,Fred has probably seen the Bengals in the Superbowl and win playoff games. I'm sure my mindset would be a little different if I've seen it happen already when I became a real fan watching every game we was bad 2-14 bad with Gus ferrote as qb. Each year we got better ,we finally made the playoffs where that team could of won the Superbowl. But then went down again. And we haven't got past that mark since. Now it's just stale, we've seen them make the playoffs but we already know we have lost every time. It's like that's the best we can do. While watching teams be more successful.its very frustrating.the pats are ho hum another game when they when afc championships.and if they don't they talk about it's time to get rid of bill or brady.

(03-09-2018, 12:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't "scoff" at any win.  I just don't give 10000% more value to one playoff win in one season than to making the playoffs on a regular basis.

It is obviously better to win in the playoffs than to loose in the playoffs, but unless it is a Super Bowl win (or maybe even a Conference Championship) I am not going to trade one playoff win in one season for a decade of losing in the regular season.

I don't see anything "amazing" by that line of thought at all.

Who says it's one or the other?  Some teams get to the playoffs and figure, what the hell, we're here, let's just go ahead and win.  Only in your mind is it one or the other.

And stop this comparing crap.  What the Raiders do or the Bills or the Browns do means nothing.   It's pretty pathetic when you have to bring up other failures to try to paint a decent picture of Marv.

(03-08-2018, 03:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes it is 100% hindsight.

The people who made those claims back then actually said Marvin could never get the Bengals to the playoffs on any consistent basis but then they had to change their story when he did.

It is easy to be correct when you can keep changing your position after something happens.

To be frank, I don't recall a single person making that claim. Maybe 1 person did 10 years ago and now you're applying that to everyone, Nately in particular?

I seriously don't believe that this was ever a "thing". Certainly not to the level that "not winning a playoff game in 20+ years" has been a thing.

(03-08-2018, 05:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess this is the big difference between me and almost everyone else here.  To me the ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl.  I would also say that making the Super Bowl would also be a great.  But short of that I don't see a huge difference between making the playoffs and losing in game one and making the playoffs and losing in round two.  

I don't understand how people can think that winning just one playoff game in one year is an amazing accomplishment that defines success, but making the playoffs multiple years is so shitty they would rather lose and not even make the playoffs. that just does not make any sense to me.

To me a team is successful if they make the playoffs, but unless you make the Super Bowl there is no huge dividing line between losing in the first round and losing in the second round.

It's always about context within each season. Or progress.

- If a team has been to the playoffs for 10 straight seasons, winning a few championships, a playoff win will mean little.
- If a "normal" team goes 9-7 and wins a playoff game for the first time in several years, it not only validates that they can "hang with the big boys", it's also is progress towards the ultimate goal (a championship). 
- If a franchise hasn't won a playoff game in 27 years, suddenly a playoff win becomes almost a mythical achievement.

Hopefully this explains it well enough for you.

Also, I've never understood why or how some want to boast about winning regular season games, but then act like playoff games don't matter unless we win a championship. By that logic, why do regular season wins matter? We didn't win a championship, so it's all moot.