https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2018/09/17/paul-daugherty-nfl-films-carson-palmer-qbs-legacy-his-rebellion/1336675002/


Even Paul thinks Brown and the front office is a complete shit show...

(09-18-2018, 11:07 AM)BengalD Wrote: I don't understand the whole cost and money thing as it relates to Mike Brown and ownership.  I mean a franchise worth is now in the billions isn't it?  If your being frugal to make an extra mil here or there - why not just sell and take your billions and be done with it.

It is a personality trait. He would be frugal if the franchise was worth $10 or $2B. He can't sell because this was his fathers startup after the Browns screwed him over. And he refuses to give up 'control' because dear old dad drilled that into him as well. 

The million dollar question is simple. Will Katie follow in her fathers footsteps when daddy is gone?

Can we move this thread. Doesn’t belong in Jungle Noise. Hasn’t been a Bengal for many years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The only line you need to hear from the show:

"You have to be aggressive in the pursuit of winning"

Something that seems to be missing in the Mike Brown discussion is that he won't let players dictate how they go about running the team.  I'm never going to defend how they run things, but I do think that as a team owner he should never be forced to let players, no matter how good they might be as players dictate personnel decisions and day to day operations. 
If any player wants to try to take over those decisions they'll quickly find themselves on the outside looking in. We don't know exactly what may have been said or not said ,but to think that the QB should be given the power to override coaching and ownership decisions is silly. 
The fact of the matter is that neither Palmer nor Boomer were ever team owners, but both tried to impose their will on the ownership. 
I'm not a fan of ownership of any team, but the bottom line is that the players don't have the power to override those kinds of things .
If any of us owned any team I seriously doubt any of us would be willing to let any player impose their desires when it's really just a business in place to make money first and winning is always going to be secondary to profits. 

(09-18-2018, 11:28 AM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: The only line you need to hear from the show:

"You have to be aggressive in the pursuit of winning"

Except that it's still a business set up to make profits for the owners and stock holders. Even teams that are in dead last place every year are in the same boat as first place teams. Their first obligation will always be to themselves and their share holders. Depressing perhaps, but it's still just a business. Us fans will always take a back seat to profitability. 

(09-18-2018, 12:48 PM)grampahol Wrote: Except that it's still a business set up to make profits for the owners and stock holders. Even teams that are in dead last place every year are in the same boat as first place teams. Their first obligation will always be to themselves and their share holders. Depressing perhaps, but it's still just a business. Us fans will always take a back seat to profitability. 

I am a businessman, I won't go through the detailed numbers but several years back on another forum I proved Mike Brown could make MORE money by spending a bit more annually and more wisely overall. He is a horrible businessman who rides the back of the oligarchy known as the NFL. He is clueless on how to market and develop a market. A winning competitive team could charge more for seats, more for club seats and other local revenue sources. 

(09-18-2018, 01:50 PM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: I am a businessman, I won't go through the detailed numbers but several years back on another forum I proved Mike Brown could make MORE money by spending a bit more annually and more wisely overall. He is a horrible businessman who rides the back of the oligarchy known as the NFL. He is clueless on how to market and develop a market. A winning competitive team could charge more for seats, more for club seats and other local revenue sources. 

Agreed.  It's more about taking risks and giving control to and trusting outsiders than it is about just being flat-out cheap.  Other NFL franchises do things/build things/hire people who go beyond the bare requirements, where Mike Brown doesn't OR if it is required he finds a friend or family member to do the job in a "loyalty over production" type manner.

I actually believe if the draft weren't required Mike Brown would be preaching the value of avoiding over-priced college talent and building through hard-nosed blue-collar players off the street.  Some fans would eat that right up...well, at least for a while.  

(09-18-2018, 12:24 PM)grampahol Wrote: Something that seems to be missing in the Mike Brown discussion is that he won't let players dictate how they go about running the team.  I'm never going to defend how they run things, but I do think that as a team owner he should never be forced to let players, no matter how good they might be as players dictate personnel decisions and day to day operations. 
If any player wants to try to take over those decisions they'll quickly find themselves on the outside looking in. We don't know exactly what may have been said or not said ,but to think that the QB should be given the power to override coaching and ownership decisions is silly. 
The fact of the matter is that neither Palmer nor Boomer were ever team owners, but both tried to impose their will on the ownership. 
I'm not a fan of ownership of any team, but the bottom line is that the players don't have the power to override those kinds of things .
If any of us owned any team I seriously doubt any of us would be willing to let any player impose their desires when it's really just a business in place to make money first and winning is always going to be secondary to profits. 

It's a QB dominant league.  QBs get all the credit and all the blame in the media and from the fans.

Imagine if your business had 1 guy that was the entire business to the outside world.  What if "Randy" was not only the face of your business but ran 50% of the business operations. And you paid Randy millions of dollars. Oh and you as an owner do nothing crucial to the success of the business. Your workers do everything.  And again, Randy is the face of the business. 

You wouldn't listen to Randy? Really? That makes no sense. Mike Brown is not above anyone, and in fact he is as poor of an owner as these players are with their money.  Don't they make rookies take financial classes (I think I remember a Hard Knocks where Chad Johnson mentioned this).  Mike Brown should take a few lessons... Hell even the Kardashians would elevate Brown.

(09-18-2018, 08:46 AM)Pat5775 Wrote: Becoming a run-first team after the 2007 season with Carson Palmer at QB was asinine    I wish old press conferences from back then were still up on the main website because I distinctly remember Marvin saying he wanted to "blow it all up" and start from scratch. I was all for blowing up the defense but why one of the best offenses in the league? Marv tried to fix something that wasn't broke... 

Anyway, it sort of worked in 2009 with sweeping and winning the AFC North. But 5 or 6 of those wins could have easily been losses... And they were in 2010. 
 

I think it was due to the shoddy pass blocking and CP coming off the elbow injury. They didn't want to risk getting him banged up again.

Not saying it was the right call, but I get it.

(09-18-2018, 11:21 AM)fullonbehavior Wrote: Can we move this thread. Doesn’t belong in Jungle Noise. Hasn’t been a Bengal for many years.

The rule is basically this...

If it's a former player who is still playing (on a different team), we move the thread.
If it's a former Bengal who is retired, it stays in Jungle Noise.

A CP thread now is no different than a thread about Boomer, Chad, Dillon, etc etc.

(09-18-2018, 11:09 AM)GodFather Wrote: https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/columnists/paul-daugherty/2018/09/17/paul-daugherty-nfl-films-carson-palmer-qbs-legacy-his-rebellion/1336675002/


Even Paul thinks Brown and the front office is a complete shit show...

What do you mean "even Paul"?  Daugherty is a notorious hater.

(09-19-2018, 08:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: What do you mean "even Paul"?  Daugherty is a notorious realist.

FTFY

(09-19-2018, 08:57 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: FTFY

People who call themselves "realist" don't know what the term means.

"Realists" in Philly said the Eagles could not win a Super Bowl last year.  Their opinion had nothing to do with reality.

You are entitled to be a "negative" fan if you want.  Just don't try to claim you are a "realist".

(09-19-2018, 09:02 AM)fredtoast Wrote: People who call themselves "realist" don't know what the term means.

Plenty do. Including yours truly.

(09-19-2018, 09:07 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Plenty do. Including yours truly.

Yep......

(09-19-2018, 09:07 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Plenty do. Including yours truly.

(09-19-2018, 09:59 AM)Wyche Wrote: Yep......

No you don't.  The claims of "realist fans" have been proven to not be connected to "reality".  See the Eagle's "realist" fans from last year.

You are entitled to have a negative outlook based on recent history.  But you don't know what is really going to happen.  So you are not "realists" you are "negative fans".

(09-19-2018, 10:44 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No you don't.  The claims of "realist fans" have been proven to not be connected to "reality".  See the Eagle's "realist" fans from last year.

You are entitled to have a negative outlook based on recent history.  But you don't know what is really going to happen.  So you are not "realists" you are "negative fans".

Nah, I'm positive when it warrants it (see my praise of the offseason moves by the FO), and negative when it warrants it (see the FOs moves last offseason when the line was a shambles).

I'd say you're a realist....and a lot of guys here are.  There are some totally negative people, which I understand, and some totally positive guys here, which I also understand.  This board features a much better mix, and more grounded posters than the old board did.  Some of the people on there were almost like trolls in their incessant negativity or conversely, straight up homer views.

I predicted a 6-10 record last season based on what I saw and felt, and a 9-7 record this year based on the same criteria.  What I didn't foresee is the ability of this team to gel so quickly with all of the new pieces and scheme/coaching changes.  I've been pleasantly surprised so far.  I can see this team competing for a division crown if they keep doing what they're doing and we stay HEALTHY.  Honestly, I felt like 9-7 would be a damn good year, all things considered, and looked for 2019 to be the year all of the moving pieces come together.

Ok, so I've basically been avoiding this thread because it's history and over with. I haven't read thru the whole thread I read the first couple pages a few days ago.

But for what it's worth here's my take:

I'll always have a love/hate feeling towards both Chad and Carson. Chad's probably 85% love 15 hate, he was more like 50-50 but I've mellowed a lot on him.

Carson is probably 65% love 35% hate. Chad and Carson put this place back on the map, more Chad but anyways.

I can still remember the mother ship in 2005 and arguing with all the Steeler fans in smack talk. Gawd it was great to be relevant again !!

Anyways there's a large part of me that doesn't blame Carson for wanting out, but I feel he could have done it better. But I understand it quickly escalated into a pissing contest so......

On to 2018

(09-19-2018, 10:44 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No you don't.  The claims of "realist fans" have been proven to not be connected to "reality".  See the Eagle's "realist" fans from last year.

You are entitled to have a negative outlook based on recent history.  But you don't know what is really going to happen.  So you are not "realists" you are "negative fans".

That's just one of your strawman arguments. I've never said the Bengals couldn't win the SB. Reality says, in the last 26 years they haven't won a playoff game and Marv is 0-7 since '03. That's reality. That's what a "realist" bases their argument on. That's what my argument is.

You should read up on things before you make comments, and go less strawman.