(01-06-2019, 07:48 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Again out of 500 coaches he is 82 in win percentage , 43 percent of his seasons he had bengals in playoffs, 25 percent of his tenure he won division titles, turned around one of worse francise runs of losing in NFL history sorry again facts are facts and not a mediocre as a head coach

Marvin also had more non-winning seasons than winning. Outside of the 5 year playoff run, he only had 2 winning seasons in 11 years. He didn't even have a winning record versus his own conference, finishing 11 games below .500. 

Marvin was able to accomplish some good things during his time here, but his overall body of work as a head coach was extremely mediocre. When you put his tenure into historical context - amount of time with one team, playoff appearances, etc - he should have accomplished much more the time and opportunities he had. But he didn't. He failed at an epic rate. 

When you take everything into account - regular season, playoffs, primetime, historical comparisons - I don't see how you avoid the mediocre tag with Marvin. He was pretty damn good for that 5 year run, but didn't do much outside of that at all. 

(01-07-2019, 11:40 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: The roster was not a dumpster fire.

^^^^ This. Management (coaching) was inept. The players probably ran the locker room until Marvin arrived, Marvin probably incorporated what he learned while coaching at the steelers and ravens.

(01-06-2019, 07:19 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Yes, his playoff legacy will follow him. But, those who want to dismiss his success with coordinating defenses are full of crap. He proved it one more time taking an injured group ranked 32nd, then they were 6th while he coached them.

I will take a wait and see approach, soon we will see if it was a ML being  a bad coach or bad players or a new bad coach in 2019? If we don't make playoffs in 2019, then new guy sucks too right??

Na, he gets 15 more years and 3 re-boots to prove himself. 

(01-06-2019, 07:48 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Again out of 500 coaches he is 82 in win percentage , 43 percent of his seasons he had bengals in playoffs, 25 percent of his tenure he won division titles, turned around one of worse francise runs of losing in NFL history sorry again facts are facts and not a mediocre as a head coach

- a .500 record (usually the definition of mediocre)
- Missed the playoffs 9 times in 16 years
- 6 losing seasons - 0 playoff wins in 16 years, which is an NFL record for futility
- 8-26 (.235) record against our chief rival
- I can't find his prime-time record, but it was equally terrible
- losing record against the AFC

Only on these boards is that anything better than mediocre. 

(01-07-2019, 11:30 AM)XenoMorph Wrote: I imagine after 16 years on hes gonna take at least 1 year off..

Yeah, just like Jeff Fisher.

(01-07-2019, 11:40 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: The roster was not a dumpster fire.

That is a common misconception about the "dark" years.  Many perceived the Bengals to be a shitty team, full of shitty players.  Anyone who was a fan during those years realizes that couldn't be further from the truth.  The fact is the Bengals team had plenty of talent, the problem was the coaching and management.

(01-07-2019, 02:41 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: - a .500 record (usually the definition of mediocre)
- Missed the playoffs 9 times in 16 years
- 6 losing seasons - 0 playoff wins in 16 years, which is an NFL record for futility
- 8-26 (.235) record against our chief rival
- I can't find his prime-time record, but it was equally terrible
- losing record against the AFC

Only on these boards is that anything better than mediocre. 

Loses nearly 75% of the time when he's facing playoff teams.

2 wins at home TWO vs. Pittsburgh.

PT record is well below .500 like .275 or so.

I other NFL owners are not going to be lining up to interview Lewis, sorry.

(01-07-2019, 02:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That is a common misconception about the "dark" years.  Many perceived the Bengals to be a shitty team, full of shitty players.  Anyone who was a fan during those years realizes that couldn't be further from the truth.  The fact is the Bengals team had plenty of talent, the problem was the coaching and management.

Up until Kitna transition to Palmer our offensive lines were always terrible in the dark ages. That's what killed us.

Here we are.  Deja frickin' vu.

(01-07-2019, 02:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That is a common misconception about the "dark" years.  Many perceived the Bengals to be a shitty team, full of shitty players.  Anyone who was a fan during those years realizes that couldn't be further from the truth.  The fact is the Bengals team had plenty of talent, the problem was the coaching and management.

Bingo 

Marvin did not walk in to a crappy roster, it had a couple holes but the foundation was laid. Add in drafting the Heisman Trophy winner right from the jump and he was 85 or 90% there.

I give Marvin a lot of credit for helping to change the culture here and get us over the sucking bad hump. But let's not act like his roster was a complete disaster - it wasn't !!!!!

(01-07-2019, 02:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: That is a common misconception about the "dark" years.  Many perceived the Bengals to be a shitty team, full of shitty players.  Anyone who was a fan during those years realizes that couldn't be further from the truth.  The fact is the Bengals team had plenty of talent, the problem was the coaching and management.

Things really started to change with the hiring of Tobin. Marvin started off with Palmer, Kitna, Dillon, Rudi, Chad, Housh, Willie, Levi, Braham, Justin Smith, Brian Simmons, Warrick, etc. Not to mention Mike made a pretty unprecedented Free Agency splurge in Marv's first year, bringing in John Thornton, Kevin Hardy, Duane Clemons, Tory James, Reggie Kelly, etc. 

I'm not saying Marv should get no credit, but I wonder if he gets too much. Tobin really had the roster loaded with good young players. The 2-14 season at PBS really seemed to grab Mike's attention. Enough to where he looked at some great external coaching candidates, and splurged in free agency on some pretty good players.

ALL of these things contributed to the turnaround. Yet some only give credit to Marv, as if he arrived like some savior. He walked into unquestionably the best situation of any Bengals coach since the Super Bowl years. Does anyone think Denny Green or Tom Coughlin wouldn't have won with that roster? A franchise QB right off rip? Fantastic receivers, RB and o-line? An owner willing to spend to fix the defense?

(01-07-2019, 02:59 PM)BengalsRocker Wrote: Up until Kitna transition to Palmer our offensive lines were always terrible in the dark ages. That's what killed us.

Here we are.  Deja frickin' vu.

Not sure I can agree.  Willie Anderson was in his 7th season in '03, Richie Braham in his 9th, and Levi Jones was in his 2nd.  Eric Steinbach was the only rookie on that line.

Reminds me of the Falcons. Had the players, sucked, had the players, won ( same head coach ). It goes like that sometimes.

(01-07-2019, 03:29 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Things really started to change with the hiring of Tobin. Marvin started off with Palmer, Kitna, Dillon, Rudi, Chad, Housh, Willie, Levi, Braham, Justin Smith, Brian Simmons, Warrick, etc. Not to mention Mike made a pretty unprecedented Free Agency splurge in Marv's first year, bringing in John Thornton, Kevin Hardy, Duane Clemons, Tory James, Reggie Kelly, etc. 

I'm not saying Marv should get no credit, but I wonder if he gets too much. Tobin really had the roster loaded with good young players. The 2-14 season at PBS really seemed to grab Mike's attention. Enough to where he looked at some great external coaching candidates, and splurged in free agency on some pretty good players.

ALL of these things contributed to the turnaround. Yet some only give credit to Marv, as if he arrived like some savior. He walked into unquestionably the best situation of any Bengals coach since the Super Bowl years. Does anyone think Denny Green or Tom Coughlin wouldn't have won with that roster? A franchise QB right off rip? Fantastic receivers, RB and o-line? An owner willing to spend to fix the defense?

So many talk about changing the culture with new head coach this year well that is what Marvin did when he was hired, most of those players were on the team before marvin and we were 2-14, also 2003 drat, Marvins first as HC was solid hmmm i think the head coach deserves credit, sorry but Marvin was the savior to come in put this team on a positive path, and actually the new head coach will have a better roster to work with pre draft than all coaches in bengal history outside of forrest gregg and bob johnson.

(01-07-2019, 05:36 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: 1. So many talk about changing the culture with new head coach this year well that is what Marvin did when he was hired, 2. most of those players were on the team before marvin and we were 2-14, 3. also 2003 drat, Marvins first as HC was solid hmmm i think the head coach deserves credit, sorry but Marvin was the savior to come in put this team on a positive path, 4. and actually the new head coach will have a better roster to work with pre draft than all coaches in bengal history outside of forrest gregg and bob johnson.

1. Many coaches could've "changed the culture" with that assemblage of talent + an owner willing to spend. That's my point. You think Coughlin or Denny Green wouldn't have turned that ship around with Palmer, Chad and all them? 

2. Yeah most of them were very young though, and Dick LeBeau was possibly the worst HC in team history, so...

3. Of course it was solid. Our drafts had been solid since Tobin was hired. Including the 2001 draft, which is the best draft in team history. All the team had to do was turn in the card for Carson (considered a no-brainer) and the rest was icing. It didn't take a genius to pick Palmer, and people are mistaken (IMO) for assuming Marvin was responsible for that when most evidence suggests Tobin has had more influence on our drafts.

4. Gotta disagree there. This roster is descending and getting older. O-line is a mess. The team Marv took over was young and on the way up. All young talent in Palmer, Chad, Housh, Rudi, etc. Very good o-line. Better cap situation with more free money to spend to fix the defense. 

(01-07-2019, 05:52 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. Many coaches could've "changed the culture" with that assemblage of talent + an owner willing to spend. That's my point. You think Coughlin or Denny Green wouldn't have turned that ship around with Palmer, Chad and all them? 

2. Yeah most of them were very young though, and Dick LeBeau was possibly the worst HC in team history, so...

3. Of course it was solid. Our drafts had been solid since Tobin was hired. Including the 2001 draft, which is the best draft in team history. All the team had to do was turn in the card for Carson (considered a no-brainer) and the rest was icing. It didn't take a genius to pick Palmer, and people are mistaken (IMO) for assuming Marvin was responsible for that when most evidence suggests Tobin has had more influence on our drafts.

4. Gotta disagree there. This roster is descending and getting older. O-line is a mess. The team Marv took over was young and on the way up. All young talent in Palmer, Chad, Housh, Rudi, etc. Very good o-line. Better cap situation with more free money to spend to fix the defense. 

This.

(01-07-2019, 05:52 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. Many coaches could've "changed the culture" with that assemblage of talent + an owner willing to spend. That's my point. You think Coughlin or Denny Green wouldn't have turned that ship around with Palmer, Chad and all them? 

2. Yeah most of them were very young though, and Dick LeBeau was possibly the worst HC in team history, so...

3. Of course it was solid. Our drafts had been solid since Tobin was hired. Including the 2001 draft, which is the best draft in team history. All the team had to do was turn in the card for Carson (considered a no-brainer) and the rest was icing. It didn't take a genius to pick Palmer, and people are mistaken (IMO) for assuming Marvin was responsible for that when most evidence suggests Tobin has had more influence on our drafts.

4. Gotta disagree there. This roster is descending and getting older. O-line is a mess. The team Marv took over was young and on the way up. All young talent in Palmer, Chad, Housh, Rudi, etc. Very good o-line. Better cap situation with more free money to spend to fix the defense.

Right on !

Trying to act like Marvin walked into a hot mess of a roster in 03 and that the new HC is getting a loaded gem is........stretching things quite a bit to say the least.

The new guy will have to basically totally rebuild the Oline and LBer's and there's more to do beyond that !

It wouldnt surprise me if Mike brought him in for an interview

(01-07-2019, 03:52 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Not sure I can agree.  Willie Anderson was in his 7th season in '03, Richie Braham in his 9th, and Levi Jones was in his 2nd.  Eric Steinbach was the only rookie on that line.

I'm talking prior to that. Sorry you misunderstood.

(01-07-2019, 05:52 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 1. Many coaches could've "changed the culture" with that assemblage of talent + an owner willing to spend. That's my point. You think Coughlin or Denny Green wouldn't have turned that ship around with Palmer, Chad and all them? 

2. Yeah most of them were very young though, and Dick LeBeau was possibly the worst HC in team history, so...

3. Of course it was solid. Our drafts had been solid since Tobin was hired. Including the 2001 draft, which is the best draft in team history. All the team had to do was turn in the card for Carson (considered a no-brainer) and the rest was icing. It didn't take a genius to pick Palmer, and people are mistaken (IMO) for assuming Marvin was responsible for that when most evidence suggests Tobin has had more influence on our drafts.

4. Gotta disagree there. This roster is descending and getting older. O-line is a mess. The team Marv took over was young and on the way up. All young talent in Palmer, Chad, Housh, Rudi, etc. Very good o-line. Better cap situation with more free money to spend to fix the defense. 

3/4.  Totally disagree for a few reasons but make it simple.. We have two HOF In Green and Atkins, they still have a few years left, we have a proven veteran in QB for 2 years in Dalton, and we just had a good draft this year and at least some quality players the last couple.

In 2003, Palmer has never played a down, if drafting was that easy, no teams would ever miss on #1 picks and we know that is not true, TJ had not shown much in 2 years, hell people were writing Boyd off last year after up/down 2 seasons so no way you could predict what he would do, besides under Marvin he broke out in 2003 so did Chad.. another hmmm...how about Rudi.. nothing for 2 seasons, then breaks out in Marvins first year as coach.. another hmmm..  Tobin did a nice job drafting in 01/02 but it is not till Marvin comes in that those picks start to shine and Marvin coming in as a head coach for sure had say on draft picks no doubt in my mind.. FA have always been a big different because that is $$ MB has to shell out above and beyond rookie contracts so I agree Marvin was limited on those and he has admitted as much. 
I really believe Marvin would have left the Bengals early if he was having little say on draft picks especially after the early success he had turning the worse team around and getting to playoffs in 2005, he could have probably taken any open job after the first 3 seasons he coached here...

1.  You are assuming what might have happen with another coach.. the bottom line is Marvin did turn it around

(01-07-2019, 10:41 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: 3/4.  Totally disagree for a few reasons but make it simple.. We have two HOF In Green and Atkins, they still have a few years left, we have a proven veteran in QB for 2 years in Dalton, and we just had a good draft this year and at least some quality players the last couple.

In 2003, Palmer has never played a down, if drafting was that easy, no teams would ever miss on #1 picks and we know that is not true, TJ had not shown much in 2 years, hell people were writing Boyd off last year after up/down 2 seasons so no way you could predict what he would do, besides under Marvin he broke out in 2003 so did Chad.. another hmmm...how about Rudi.. nothing for 2 seasons, then breaks out in Marvins first year as coach.. another hmmm..  Tobin did a nice job drafting in 01/02 but it is not till Marvin comes in that those picks start to shine and Marvin coming in as a head coach for sure had say on draft picks no doubt in my mind.. FA have always been a big different because that is $$ MB has to shell out above and beyond rookie contracts so I agree Marvin was limited on those and he has admitted as much. 
I really believe Marvin would have left the Bengals early if he was having little say on draft picks especially after the early success he had turning the worse team around and getting to playoffs in 2005, he could have probably taken any open job after the first 3 seasons he coached here...

1.  You are assuming what might have happen with another coach.. the bottom line is Marvin did turn it around

- Yeah we have Geno/Dunlap plus a good core of offensive players at the skill positions and QB. Our best players are all 30+ though. The players we had in 2003 were just as good and at the beginning of their careers, not towards the end. The o-lines are also miles apart, and both defenses stunk. Not sure why you're even trying to debate me on this point.

- I don't need hindsight. I remember the 2003 draft. Palmer was the consensus #1 pick regardless of who held it. The Bengals did due diligence on Leftwich and Newman, but the pick was always going to be Palmer. Everyone knew. Again, it didn't take Marvin to see Palmer was the pick.

- Housh had 62 catches for 720 yards in his first 2 years. He showed plenty of promise...especially for a guy that had to convince everyone (being a 7th round pick). Besides, it ain't about "predicting" brother. It's about who he was. He was a talented player, and Marv had him. Why are you trying to twist that? 

- Chad had already "broke out" in 2002. 1166 yards.

- Rudi, same as Housh. He was a talented young player, stuck behind Dillon. Doesn't matter what he did pre-Marv, he was clearly a talented player, and Marv had him. 

- Ok, so we sort of agree on something. Tobin had a bigger role on who we drafted. Marv was smart enough to see (and eventually play) the talent. I think any coach worth a damn would've seen the talent in Housh and Rudi though. 

- Not sure what you were trying to say on FA. Sure, I think Mike could've spent more in the mid-later years, but as I pointed out, Mike spent plenty that first year, which helped get the ball rolling.

- Yes, Marv did turn it around...with a very talented roster. Again I'll ask: Do you think Denny Green or Tom Coughlin would've had similar results? Answer honestly.

To Marvin's credit he also pushed, pulled and dragged Mikey into some changes in the organization, not enough but some. We will never know if a different coach or coaches could have done more.

End of the day ML was paramount in moving the organization from dismal to average but could do no more.

(01-07-2019, 03:29 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Things really started to change with the hiring of Tobin. Marvin started off with Palmer, Kitna, Dillon, Rudi, Chad, Housh, Willie, Levi, Braham, Justin Smith, Brian Simmons, Warrick, etc. Not to mention Mike made a pretty unprecedented Free Agency splurge in Marv's first year, bringing in John Thornton, Kevin Hardy, Duane Clemons, Tory James, Reggie Kelly, etc. 

I'm not saying Marv should get no credit, but I wonder if he gets too much. Tobin really had the roster loaded with good young players. The 2-14 season at PBS really seemed to grab Mike's attention. Enough to where he looked at some great external coaching candidates, and splurged in free agency on some pretty good players.

ALL of these things contributed to the turnaround. Yet some only give credit to Marv, as if he arrived like some savior. He walked into unquestionably the best situation of any Bengals coach since the Super Bowl years. Does anyone think Denny Green or Tom Coughlin wouldn't have won with that roster? A franchise QB right off rip? Fantastic receivers, RB and o-line? An owner willing to spend to fix the defense?

If the roster was loaded, but not winning then how can you not give the credit to Marv.  

How can the players get any credit if they were 2-14 without Marvin?

BTW as soon as Marvin arrived he lost the best player on offense (Dillon) and the best player on defense (Spikes)