(01-08-2019, 03:38 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I view it in the business way of, "Well, this guy is doing solid as a director, but not ideally where we want to be. However, he's really brought the organization up a lot from where it was and has had some successful years in the past, so let's give him another shot to prove himself."

Most people (fans especially) don't want to see their favorite sports teams run like a regular business though.

For good reason. Messages tend to get stale, players/coaches tend to get complacent, success wanes (unless you're New England).

(01-08-2019, 03:45 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: Hopefully this team hires an enthusiastic coach that inspires the players. I think that Marvin's body language rubbed off on some of the players and it seemed like they were sleepwalking through games. 

That can have a major effect on moral. I remember Andy Dalton's  lame playoff pregame speech against the Chargers and I was thinking "We are losing this game". 

Taylor and Bieniemy seem to have the right amount of attitude so I hope its one of those two.  Marvin was good to the Bengals but its time for great, and its about time that the Bengals make the right choice for once. 

It may seem funny to some, but I don't think I liked how loved Marv was in the locker room. Makes me wonder if things were a little too cozy. I'm not saying I want some stone cold dictator, but players shouldn't be buddy buddy with the coach. He shouldn't be a father figure, he should be a boss.

(01-08-2019, 03:50 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Depends on how you look at it.  I can see a potential HC seeing Mike Brown's zeal for adhering to underwhelming coaches as a bit of a negative, too.  Marvin had to walk away after 3 losing seasons in a row and 16 years without a playoff win.

As I pointed out before, we can talk about it like it is a positive and we can admit that it might be but can you imagine our new HC saying "I took the job with the Bengals because it has the best job security."  Eep!

Well of course there are negatives to the job, as there is with any of the openings. That's why they're open. I don't think the Bengals job is the best opening, just showing why I think it's not as bad as some think. There are positives and negatives with all of them. 

Fwiw, I don't think this was as mutual as they're saying. Maybe it was Marv's call. Who knows? They also could be doing Marv a solid by saying it was mutual when it was really a firing. 

Also fwiw, the job security isn't the only positive. We do have some good players. A solid QB. Great skill position talent. D-line and secondary are probably better than they showed last year.

(01-08-2019, 04:09 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: To be fair, last year was pretty bad as well.

Frank Reich and Matt Nagy were really the only two coaches with recent success.
Nagy was an OC for the Chiefs after Pederson, only being an OC for two years, and Reich was fired from the Chargers, but then found success as OC with the Eagles. He was an OC for 4 years.

Vrabel was a DC for one year. Jon Gruden hasn't coached in over a decade.

Steve Wilks was fired after one season. Pat Shurmur didn't have a great season in New York.



This year there's Bruce Arians, Mike McCarthy, Eric Bieniemy, Matt LaFleur, Kris Richard, Kliff Kingsbury, Matt Eberfluss.

I feel like this year has a ton more potential than last year.

Fair enough. It's all in the eye of the beholder. I really liked Reich and Nagy last year. I don't feel as sure about the current available guys. Plus with 8 openings, it made it less likely we'd land one of "our guys". That said, it looks like half the openings were filled today (with guys that weren't on our radar), so things are looking up.

I think it is a bad year for finding a coach. There aren't a ton of names with easily discernable talent. I'm starting to wonder if we might not see hue or lazor with an "interim" hc shot. That way the browns can say they're taking their time to get the right guy ("heck, maybe he's on staff already" brown will say), and see how it goes without going all in on a 3-4 year deal .

The radio jockeys out here are saying the Cardinals have signed Kliff Kingsbury from USC as HC.

(01-08-2019, 02:43 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Obviously we all (most?) wanted him gone, but from what I've read (and I kinda felt this way already) this is a pretty weak crop of candidates, with a ton of openings (8). In years past, there's always been 2-3 hot candidates with sparkling resumes, with fewer openings. Guys like Pederson, Nagy, Reich, McVay etc.

Now it seems each of the current candidates has serious questions.

Bieniemy - Pretty green. 1 year as OC and didn't call plays.
Monken - His offense produced a lot of yards, but also a lot of turnovers. Wasn't as impressive in previous years.
Taylor - No coordinator experience
Waldron - See Taylor
McDaniels - failed miserably as a HC already, yet he's very choosy (thankfully)
Joseph - Failed miserably in Denver
Arians - Good coach, but only interested in coaching 1 team

I guess we can hope that the Bengals are waiting on a guy that's still coaching. So who is your favorite candidate that is still coaching? Do you think we're in a tough year to fill the spot?

This is a really good question actually. The biggest difficulty will be finding a HC who will accept the Bengals dysfunctional front office without demanding changes to it and is also a HC who is going to win despite Mike Brown. It's a tall order really. That's the thing I give Marvin Lewis credit for. He has some success with the team despite Mike Brown.

Coaching prospects will all see how Marvin expected the team to re-sign Whitworth only to be disappointed, and that's not the first time Mikey's low balling deals have gotten in the way of coaches.

If a coaching prospect does his homework on Mike Brown, and each of them should, then they'll discover the Akili Smith pick and passing on the mega trade from Mike Ditka, the eternal Bengals assistant coach Paul Alexander being forced on the team and many other brain farts by Mike Brown like, Carson Palmer, Corey Dillon, etc, etc, and don't forget the Carl Pickens contract clauses. Mike Brown has been a stain on football for 26 years.

Josh McDaniels is not a guy I want, but he's done his homework on Mike Brown and bowed out at the start. He's use to working on a coaching staff that has complete personnel control.

We very well may of a few down years until Mike Brown finally departs.

(01-08-2019, 05:48 PM)BengalChris Wrote: We very well may of a few down years until Mike Brown finally departs.

I believe he is 83 right now. Maybe a decade at most?

Yikes! Sends a chill down my ass just thinking that it might take that long to get better ownership!

(01-08-2019, 05:53 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I believe he is 83 right now. Maybe a decade at most?

Yikes! Sends a chill down my ass just thinking that it might take that long to get better ownership!

I keep hoping Katie pushes him out.

(01-08-2019, 05:58 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I keep hoping Katie pushes him out.

I wonder how bad it will be when the Alzheimer's starts:

"Katie! Get Dick Lebeau on the phone!! Dadbunit! He needs to start Akili this weekend!!!!"

(01-08-2019, 05:18 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: For good reason. Messages tend to get stale, players/coaches tend to get complacent, success wanes (unless you're New England).


It may seem funny to some, but I don't think I liked how loved Marv was in the locker room. Makes me wonder if things were a little too cozy. I'm not saying I want some stone cold dictator, but players shouldn't be buddy buddy with the coach. He shouldn't be a father figure, he should be a boss.


Well of course there are negatives to the job, as there is with any of the openings. That's why they're open. I don't think the Bengals job is the best opening, just showing why I think it's not as bad as some think. There are positives and negatives with all of them. 

Fwiw, I don't think this was as mutual as they're saying. Maybe it was Marv's call. Who knows? They also could be doing Marv a solid by saying it was mutual when it was really a firing. 

Also fwiw, the job security isn't the only positive. We do have some good players. A solid QB. Great skill position talent. D-line and secondary are probably better than they showed last year.


Fair enough. It's all in the eye of the beholder. I really liked Reich and Nagy last year. I don't feel as sure about the current available guys. Plus with 8 openings, it made it less likely we'd land one of "our guys". That said, it looks like half the openings were filled today (with guys that weren't on our radar), so things are looking up.

My concern (and seeing recent rumors adds to my concern) is that the Bengals aren't finding any of these outsiders particularly enticing after interviewing them and therefore decide to go with someone they are familiar with.

(01-08-2019, 03:15 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I'd be pickled tink with any of those guys.

I fell like I've said this a thousand times but the main thing I want to see is change ! We've got to go in a new direction. If we go 4-12 next season oh well.

I just want out of this 28 year rut !

I am sorry but this doesn't actually make any sense.

If we go 4-12 next season that would be the same (actually worse) as the current 28 year rut we are currently in.

I won't give up on any coach that comes here after only 1 season.  I will give 2 seasons and possibly a 3rd to cast any judgements on the HC.

If we go 4-12 two years in a row then I don't want  a 3rd year.  If we go 4-12 and then 8-8, I would be willing to give a 3rd year.  If by year 4 I don't see a playoff appearance then I will call for a new coach, unless of course the reason we don't make the playoffs is due to some crazy situation like the one that kept the 11-5 Patriots from going in 2008.

Let's be clear, he should have been replaced at least twice over the last eight years.

Having said that, no. It had to be done, and you can't hold onto a guy who has long overstayed his welcome on the hope that the following year's crop of head coaching candidates will be better. We have no idea what the head coach market could look like next year. It could be worse than this year.

(01-08-2019, 06:25 PM)YsCascadia Wrote: I am sorry but this doesn't actually make any sense.

If we go 4-12 next season that would be the same (actually worse) as the current 28 year rut we are currently in.

I won't give up on any coach that comes here after only 1 season.  I will give 2 seasons and possibly a 3rd to cast any judgements on the HC.

If we go 4-12 two years in a row then I don't want  a 3rd year.  If we go 4-12 and then 8-8, I would be willing to give a 3rd year.  If by year 4 I don't see a playoff appearance then I will call for a new coach, unless of course the reason we don't make the playoffs is due to some crazy situation like the one that kept the 11-5 Patriots from going in 2008.

That's exactly what I mean. Typically when there's a new HC and lots of change it doesn't all come together the first season. 

I don't think 4-12 will happen, we've got a decent core, but I'm not going to freak if we don't set the world on fire right from the jump.

(01-08-2019, 06:23 PM)ochocincos Wrote: My concern (and seeing recent rumors adds to my concern) is that the Bengals aren't finding any of these outsiders particularly enticing after interviewing them and therefore decide to go with someone they are familiar with.

Would be a ghost town in PBS if they did this.

(01-08-2019, 06:25 PM)YsCascadia Wrote: I am sorry but this doesn't actually make any sense.

If we go 4-12 next season that would be the same (actually worse) as the current 28 year rut we are currently in.

I won't give up on any coach that comes here after only 1 season.  I will give 2 seasons and possibly a 3rd to cast any judgements on the HC.

If we go 4-12 two years in a row then I don't want  a 3rd year.  If we go 4-12 and then 8-8, I would be willing to give a 3rd year.  If by year 4 I don't see a playoff appearance then I will call for a new coach, unless of course the reason we don't make the playoffs is due to some crazy situation like the one that kept the 11-5 Patriots from going in 2008.

I think he meant that it might take a year for the new HC to get everything together for that Playoff run.

Atleast this is what makes sense to me and it is understandable as things don't just turn around immediately with a new HC.

(01-08-2019, 06:27 PM)Big Boss Wrote: Let's be clear, he should have been replaced at least twice over the last eight years.

Having said that, no. It had to be done, and you can't hold onto a guy who has long overstayed his welcome on the hope that the following year's crop of head coaching candidates will be better. We have no idea what the head coach market could look like next year. It could be worse than this year.

Completely agree BB.

(01-08-2019, 06:23 PM)ochocincos Wrote: My concern (and seeing recent rumors adds to my concern) is that the Bengals aren't finding any of these outsiders particularly enticing after interviewing them and therefore decide to go with someone they are familiar with.

Ah, don't do this to me bro.

I may be done if they go with some lazy internal hire. 

(01-08-2019, 06:27 PM)Big Boss Wrote: Let's be clear, he should have been replaced at least twice over the last eight years.

Having said that, no.  It had to be done, and you can't hold onto a guy who has long overstayed his welcome on the hope that the following year's crop of head coaching candidates will be better.  We have no idea what the head coach market could look like next year.  It could be worse than this year.

I posted once where I showed 9 times where he should've been fired. I agree with ya, but my point wasn't so much that we should've kept Marv. 

It was more of a "we probably would've had better choices had we done it sooner".

(01-08-2019, 05:18 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Fair enough. It's all in the eye of the beholder. I really liked Reich and Nagy last year. I don't feel as sure about the current available guys. Plus with 8 openings, it made it less likely we'd land one of "our guys". That said, it looks like half the openings were filled today (with guys that weren't on our radar), so things are looking up.

Oh for sure. I wasn't too big on Reich personally, but he's obviously proven me wrong.

I just don't want any coach who has been a coach here in the past 4 years

(01-08-2019, 05:47 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: The radio jockeys out here are saying the Cardinals have signed Kliff Kingsbury from USC as HC.

They do realize they have Rosen and not Darnold, right?

(01-08-2019, 08:15 PM)Nately120 Wrote: They do realize they have Rosen and not Darnold, right?

The fans out here are kinda lukewarm (in all sports). So, the radio jockeys generally feel a need to overcompensate by spinning stories like supercheerleaders. In answer to your question, it really wouldn't matter who the QB is. They are still going to announce it as if it were the Second Coming, just like they did when the old coach came, and the coach before him, and the coach before him....

Plus, Kingsbury was PAC-10, so they have a familiarity with him. They like that.

(01-08-2019, 06:23 PM)ochocincos Wrote: My concern (and seeing recent rumors adds to my concern) is that the Bengals aren't finding any of these outsiders particularly enticing after interviewing them and therefore decide to go with someone they are familiar with.

Why is Alex Van Pelt never mentioned as HC candidate? He seems to have the resume that is envouge right now. He came from the McCarthy coaching tree; also worked under Dick Juron, have OC experience (only gets released when the HC does), GB fell apart this year after he left, and is relatively young . 

(01-08-2019, 03:35 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: If we were a normal team, I wouldn't be as worried. We may keep this guy for a long...long...long time.

Yeh, but if he sux really bad, keep him around long enough to get the #1 pick and draft the Clemson QB when he becomes eligible (lol). Back to the question, nope, not a bad year, should have happened long ago. I never encountered a bad year to get divorced! it's never a bad year to fix something that needs fixed, there may be better years, but this needs to happen NOW! Besides, a guy like I think we need (like McVay) is out there somewhere, we just have to find him. McDaniels has bowed out, looks like Arians is going to Tampa Bay, and the Cardinals took some guy who seems like a head scratcher with his college resume, and LaFleur hasn't really jumped off the page to me at least. Our guy is out there somewhere, we just have to find him!

(01-08-2019, 08:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Why is Alex Van Pelt never mentioned as HC candidate? He seems to have the resume that is envouge right now. He came from the McCarthy coaching tree; also worked under Dick Juron, have OC experience (only gets released when the HC does), GB fell apart this year after he left, and is relatively young . 

Valid. Not sure.
EDIT - Maybe the org wasn't satisfied with the production/improvement of the QBs this past year? Driskel only had a QBR of 82.2 and Dalton had 89.6. It's really the only thing I can think of right now as to why not.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(01-08-2019, 08:33 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: The fans out here are kinda lukewarm (in all sports). So, the radio jockeys generally feel a need to overcompensate by spinning stories like supercheerleaders. In answer to your question, it really wouldn't matter who the QB is. They are still going to announce it as if it were the Second Coming, just like they did when the old coach came, and the coach before him, and the coach before him....

Plus, Kingsbury was PAC-10, so they have a familiarity with him. They like that.

Kingsbury was Pac 12 for about 1 month. One of the craziest coaching paths ever.