Explanation of grading:

A few years ago (on the old boards) - in response to a certain poster who claimed that Marvin Lewis was one of the most successful coaches - I created a grading system to compare Marv's entire tenure to how the rest of the teams fared over the same stretch. I graded each season and added all the points together. The grading system looked like this:

+8 points for 12-16 regular season wins
+5 points for 10-11 wins
+3 for a 9-7 season
0 points for 8-8
-3 for a 7-9 season
-5 for 5-6 wins
-8 for 4 or fewer wins

I added the following bonuses:

+10 for a division title
+10 for each playoff win
+50 for a Super Bowl title

For example, Marv accumulated +18 points in 2015 without winning a playoff game, while he got a -3 grade for 2017. A 9-7 team that fails to win it's division, but wins 1 playoff game would accumulate a +13 score. Championship teams usually rack up a +85 score or higher. Not a perfect system, but IMO it's fair. Obviously if you make a deep playoff run or win a title, you should be heavily rewarded. You can also rack up points by winning in regular season and capturing division titles.

The last 2 years, I finally took Berserker's advice, and make it more of a coach to coach comparison. In order to do this, I graded every single season by every single current Head Coach. Fortunately, Pro Football Reference has all the information I needed on each coach's page, as it made accumulating the grades go much faster. In order to make the grades fair for comparison, I took each coach's total career points and divided them by total years coached. So the grades are a per season average for their career.

So here's the grades:

UPDATED RANKINGS WITH NEW COACHES:

^ means the coach moved up in ranking
v means the coach moved down
= means they stayed the same, obviously


^ 1. Doug Pederson: +42.5 (2 seasons)
v 2. Bill Belichick: +31.9 (23 seasons with Browns, Pats)
= 3. Mike Tomlin: +21.3 (10 seasons)
v 4. Mike McCarthy: +20.1 (12 seasons)
v 5. John Harbaugh: +19.2 (10 seasons)
v 6. Pete Carroll: +18.4 (12 seasons with Jets, Pats, Seahawks)
v 7. Dan Quinn: +16.7 (3 seasons)
= 8. Sean Payton: +15.9 (10 seasons)
^ 9. Sean McVay +15 (1 season)
10. Jon Gruden +14.2 (11 seasons with Raiders, Bucs)
v 11. Andy Reid: +13.2 (19 seasons with Eagles, Chiefs)
^ 12. Doug Marrone +11.0 (3 seasons)
^ 13. Mike Zimmer: +10.0 (4 seasons)
v 14. Ron Rivera: +9.2 (6 seasons)
v 15. Bill O'Brien: +7.8 (4 seasons)
v 16. Jim Caldwell: +7.6 (7 seasons with Colts, Lions)
v 17. Jason Garrett: +5.9 (7 seasons)
^ t18. Marvin Lewis: +3.0 (15 seasons)
^ t18. Anthony Lynn +3 (1 season)
^ t18. Sean McDermott +3 (1 season)
= 21. Jay Gruden: +0.5 (4 seasons)
v t22. Adam Gase: 0 (2 seasons)
t22. Frank Reich - Colts
t22. Matt Nagy - Bears
t22. Steve Wilks - Cardinals
t22. Pat Shurmur - Giants
t22. Mike Vrabel - Titans
v 28. Dirk Koetter: -1.0 (2 seasons)
v 29. Todd Bowles: -1.7 (3 seasons)
v t30. Kyle Shannahan -5 (1 season)
v t30. Vance Joseph -5 (1 season)
= 32. Hue Jackson -5.3 (3 seasons with Raiders, Browns)
_________________

Replaced coaches who didn't get another HC gig for whatever reason:

Chuck Pagano: +10.4 (5 seasons)
John Fox: +9.2 (16 seasons with Panthers, Broncos, Bears)
Bruce Arians: +8.3 (6 seasons with Colts, Cardinals)
Ben McAdoo: +5.0 (1 season) *Fired after 2-10 start that I didn't count in grade
Mike Mularky: +1.6 (5 seasons with Bills, Jags, Titans)
Jack Del Rio: +1.1 (14 seasons with Jags, Raiders)


(Old) Notes:

- This is not a ranking of who is the better coach, it's only meant to judge past success.
- I gave Arians credit for the 2012 Colts, when he coached 12 games with Pagano out.
- keep in mind that Marv's first 8 seasons featured as many 4 win seasons as playoff berths. That hurt his grade, but it happened.

Very nice.

I can see from this that the name "Mediocre Marv" might be a little too generous.

The only reason he looks like he's near the middle is because he's ahead of 5 guys who don't have a grade as they haven't coached any games yet.

Throw in the guys who retired or aren't coaching any more and remove the new coaches and Marvin would be at spot 22.

Do we need a new name for Marv that's more fitting?

(05-21-2018, 08:10 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I can see from this that the name "Mediocre Marv" might be a little too generous.

Do we need a new name for Marv that's more fitting?

Lewis has a winning record against all other NFL coaches despite being handicapped by the worst owner in the league.

How can that be less than mediocre?

Marvin is mediocre, his stats prove it.

(05-22-2018, 08:13 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Lewis has a winning record against all other NFL coaches despite being handicapped by the worst owner in the league.

How can that be less than mediocre?

Whats his playoff record look like? That less than mediocre enough for you?

(05-22-2018, 10:23 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Whats his playoff record look like? That less than mediocre enough for you?

Making the playoffs is a good thing.

(05-22-2018, 08:13 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Lewis has a winning record against all other NFL coaches despite being handicapped by the worst owner in the league.

How can that be less than mediocre?

He has a slightly above 500 record as a coach. He doesn’t have a winning record against all Nfl coaches. Belichik and Tomlin immediately come to mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(05-22-2018, 10:26 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Making the playoffs is a good thing.

Making the playoffs is a good thing. Going 0-7 and not winning a playoff game in 15 seasons as head coach is a bad thing. 

Shake put a lot of work into this, but it is meaningless.

In order to come up with an accurate "weighted" system like this one there has to be some logical basis for the weights. This one is just totally random. We could all sit down and give different weights and come up with different rankings.

For example. I don't see how a 9-7 team that wins a weak division (13 points) should be considered almost three time better than an 11-5 wildcard team (5 pts). I disagree with giving any bonus for winning a division (unless it earns a bye) but no way a 9-7 champion of a weak division should be considered three times as good as an 11-5 wildcard team.

And under this formula a team that earns a first round bye actually gets penalized because they lose the chance to earn an extra 10 point bonus.

(05-22-2018, 10:34 AM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Making the playoffs is a good thing. Going 0-7 and not winning a playoff game in 15 seasons as head coach is a bad thing. 

Yes, I agree.

But don't you agree that it is better to make the playoffs and lose than to not make the playoffs

But how long should that be acceptable?

(05-22-2018, 08:13 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Lewis has a winning record against all other NFL coaches despite being handicapped by the worst owner in the league.

How can that be less than mediocre?

Simple, the final results

(05-22-2018, 10:48 AM)masonbengals fan Wrote: But how long should that be acceptable?

That is not the question here.

I assumed Marvin was going to be fired after this last season, and I was fine with that.  But that does not mean that I think Marvin sucks as a coach.  I actually think he is a pretty good coach, but he has been handicapped by the worst owner in the NFL.

(05-22-2018, 10:50 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: Simple, the final results

You can't just ignore handicaps.

If I have the slowest car in a race yet I still beat half of the field that does not mean I am a mediocre driver.

(05-22-2018, 10:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Shake put a lot of work into this, but it is meaningless.

In order to come up with an accurate "weighted" system like this one there has to be some logical basis for the weights. This one is just totally random. We could all sit down and give different weights and come up with different rankings.

For example. I don't see how a 9-7 team that wins a weak division (13 points) should be considered almost three time better than an 11-5 wildcard team (5 pts). I disagree with giving any bonus for winning a division (unless it earns a bye) but no way a 9-7 champion of a weak division should be considered three times as good as an 11-5 wildcard team.

And under this formula a team that earns a first round bye actually gets penalized because they lose the chance to earn an extra 10 point bonus.

We’d lose to a 9-7 team that made playoffs even if we went 11-5 and were wild card team just saying history has repeated itself 7 damn times no way you can justify Marvin still being employed as our head coach.

(05-22-2018, 10:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't just ignore handicaps.

If I have the slowest car in a race yet I still beat half of the field that does not mean I am a mediocre driver.

I fully agree Mike Brown is at the very top of the worst owners in sports. And indeed Marvin has had a giant yoke around his neck because of Mike's meddling. 

But you yourself argue that nearly every Bengal player is better than he gets credit for. In fact you argue many are/have been very good to great ! The fact is Marvin has fielded a few pretty good teams and should easily have at least a couple playoff wins.

But this team folds time and again when the heat is on, under pressure, under the lights, playoffs. Mike isn't calling the plays, changing or not the personnel on the field, wasting timeouts, going conservative before halftime, and on and on.

That stuff is on MARVIN, he doesn't get a pass or special handicap.

(05-22-2018, 10:52 AM)fredtoast Wrote: That is not the question here.

I assumed Marvin was going to be fired after this last season, and I was fine with that.  But that does not mean that I think Marvin sucks as a coach.  I actually think he is a pretty good coach, but he has been handicapped by the worst owner in the NFL.

To claim that each and every year of Marvin's 15 year tenure he was handicapped by the "worst owner" is a stretch.

There have been seasons where Mike has provided Marvin with enough spending on player salaries and good enough rosters for Marvin to NOT be able to claim during those particular seasons that his Owner was the "worst" in the entire NFL during that particular season.

Mike's overall reputation as a bad Owner may be warranted when taking into account his entire tenure as Owner, however, on a season by season basis Mike has had a number of seasons where he provided sufficient spending on player salaries and a sufficient roster not to be considered the "worst owner" in the NFL for that particular season.

Blaming Mike for each and every Marvin seasonal failure is a phony crutch during the seasons that Marvin was provided enough resources to win with.

(05-22-2018, 12:03 PM)depthchart Wrote: To claim that each and every year of Marvin's 15 year tenure he was handicapped by the "worst owner" is a stretch.

There have been seasons where Mike has provided Marvin with enough spending on player salaries and good enough rosters for Marvin to NOT be able to claim during those particular seasons that his Owner was the "worst" in the entire NFL during that particular season.

Mike's overall reputation as a bad Owner may be warranted when taking into account his entire tenure as Owner, however, on a season by season basis Mike has had a number of seasons where he provided sufficient spending on player salaries and a sufficient roster not to be considered the "worst owner" in the NFL for that particular season.

Blaming Mike for each and every Marvin seasonal failure is a phony crutch during the seasons that Marvin was provided enough resources to win with.

Mike provided nothing but draft picks, and every coach in the league gets those.  Only difference is our coaches do more scouting.  The free agents and trades were all bargain basement moves.

The credit goes to the coaches for developing that talent to create a good roster.  What were Reggie Nelson and Adam Jones doing under other NFL coaches?

(05-22-2018, 10:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Shake put a lot of work into this, but it is meaningless.

In order to come up with an accurate "weighted" system like this one there has to be some logical basis for the weights.  This one is just totally random.  We could all sit down and give different weights and come up with different rankings.

For example.  I don't see how a 9-7 team that wins a weak division (13 points) should be considered almost three time better than an 11-5 wildcard team (5 pts).  I disagree with giving any bonus for winning a division (unless it earns a bye) but no way a 9-7 champion of a weak division should be considered three times as good as an 11-5 wildcard team.

And under this formula a team that earns a first round bye actually gets penalized because they lose the chance to earn an extra 10 point bonus.

This thread has been posted a total of 4 times on 2 different boards and you're always trying to poke holes in it. I have no idea why.   

Division winners are rewarded by the NFL itself. They get a home playoff game. So why wouldn't a grading system reward this as well?

And teams that earn a BYE aren't "penalized" so much as teams that have to go further through the playoffs get rewarded. What's more impressive? A 12-4 team that goes on a 4 game tear in the playoffs? Or a 12-4 team that got a BYE and only needed 3 wins?  

(05-22-2018, 12:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Mike provided nothing but draft picks, and every coach in the league gets those.  Only difference is our coaches do more scouting.  The free agents and trades were all bargain basement moves.

The credit goes to the coaches for developing that talent to create a good roster.  What were Reggie Nelson and Adam Jones doing under other NFL coaches?

Just admit that you cannot say that Mike Brown was the "worst owner" in each and every one of Marvin's 15 seasons here.

Mike outperformed many NFL Owners during at least some of those 15 seasons.

If you want Fairness for Marvin then give Fairness to Mike.

Mike was not the 32nd (worst performing owner) each and every one of those 15 Marvin years.