Will anyone miss the giggling?

They should put him on TV and he can giggle while Cowher spits on him

(01-08-2019, 06:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 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)

It amazes me fans will ignore a head coach comes in year one taking a 2-14 team, loses 2 best players (Spikes and Dillon), improves 6 games to 8-8 record and fans argue we had great players?????????

So our 6-10 team should go to 12-4 with a new head coach, otherwise a bad hire because a bad HC ML did it so a great HC should be minimum expectation to win 12 games in 2019.

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

If we went 2-14 this year you would say dumpster fire and i could list good to great players on this team that are proven players and give you s long list also.. you listed numerous players that had done little until Marvin took over smd molded tthat team and draft picks in 03/04

(01-08-2019, 06:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 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)

Thank you for some common simple sense reasoning,  A problem I believe with many these post is they are looking at Marvins ending years and clouding their view of the beginning of his tenure.  

(01-08-2019, 08:36 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Will anyone miss the giggling?

The ESPN documentary: "Marvin Lewis, .the day the giggles stopped."

I get wanting to move on after 16 years of Marvin but to act like he is a bad coach and to dismiss what he has done to turn this franchise around is not right.
2003 wasn't a bad roster but it wasn't that great either. With that being said; the Bengals needeed a more than a roster overhaul they need a much needed culture change and Marvin provided it.

(01-09-2019, 01:40 AM)Jakeypoo Wrote: I get wanting to move on after 16 years of Marvin but to act like he is a bad coach and to dismiss what he has done to turn this franchise around is not right.
2003 wasn't a bad roster but it wasn't that great either. With that being said; the Bengals needeed a more than a roster overhaul they need a much needed culture change and Marvin provided it.

Agreed. Unfortunately, it was a culture of "do your job, maybe we win." That was a step in the right direction from "show up, get paid, leave to get paid more" but at some point just getting by shouldn't be good enough.

(01-05-2019, 02:27 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 8 opening currently. Has he had any visits? Rumors of visits?

Maybe he wasn't the hot commodity some thought he'd be?

I thought about that but he's been an NFL head coach for 16 years straight.  He can easily retire.  Maybe he doesn't want to work. I'm not saying he's in demand by any means, but he probably isn't in any hurry to go back to work.

(01-08-2019, 06:02 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 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)

I didn't say the roster was "loaded", just that the vast majority of the core that won 11 games in 2005 was drafted pre-Marvin (and Carson was a free gift for showing up). Hard to deny this. 

As for why they went 2-14, I already answered that. LeBeau was a terrible HC and the players were very green. Some of them weren't even playing much yet. Rudi and Housh had barely played. Palmer wasn't on the 2002 team. I'm not saying Marv played zero part. People take things to extremes intentionally to discredit arguments they don't like. 

I'm saying we had a great young cast of talent ready to go for whoever the next coach was. Plus an owner willing to spend in year 1. We just needed seasoning and competent coaching. Marv was competent...but so were Coughlin and Green. People act like only Marv could've led that team to a turnaround. I'm just showing why I don't think that's the case. 

Marv never was a one-in-a-million coach. He was just competent and had a very good young core of players. Everyone wants to debate me on this, but no one will answer a simple question: Do you think Coughlin or Green could've had a similar turnaround had they been hired instead?

(01-09-2019, 07:38 AM)BonnieBengal Wrote: I thought about that but he's been an NFL head coach for 16 years straight.  He can easily retire.  Maybe he doesn't want to work.  I'm not saying he's in demand by any means, but he probably isn't in any hurry to go back to work.

Maybe he decided he no longer wanted to coach. Maybe the options aren't there. I just think if there was any real interest, we'd hear that some team reached out to him, but he's not interested. 

(01-09-2019, 01:40 AM)Jakeypoo Wrote: I get wanting to move on after 16 years of Marvin but to act like he is a bad coach and to dismiss what he has done to turn this franchise around is not right.
2003 wasn't a bad roster but it wasn't that great either. With that being said; the Bengals needeed a more than a roster overhaul they need a much needed culture change and Marvin provided it.

131-129-3 in 16 years.

1 winning season in his first 6 years.
0 winning seasons in his last 3 years.

His entire "success" is squandering the prime years of Green/Atkins/Dunlap/Whit/etc in a couple years in a row of winning 10-ish games and shitting their pants in the first round of the playoffs.

Outside of that small stretch, he has actually been a really bad coach. 7 winning years out of 16, and 5 of them came in that stretch. That means outside of the '11-'15 stretch where they had possibly the most talented teams in Bengals history (and still got 0 playoff wins), he had 2 winning seasons in the other 11 years.

I am sure Merv can get a job at the local soup kitchen, they could use some giggles and clapping to keep the lines moving.

(01-10-2019, 04:03 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 131-129-3 in 16 years.

1 winning season in his first 6 years.
0 winning seasons in his last 3 years.

His entire "success" is squandering the prime years of Green/Atkins/Dunlap/Whit/etc in a couple years in a row of winning 10-ish games and shitting their pants in the first round of the playoffs.

Outside of that small stretch, he has actually been a really bad coach. 7 winning years out of 16, and 5 of them came in that stretch. That means outside of the '11-'15 stretch where they had possibly the most talented teams in Bengals history (and still got 0 playoff wins), he had 2 winning seasons in the other 11 years.

1.)Look at the record from the previous 13 seasons from before he arrived to what he accomplished.
2.) His tenure was with the worst owner in the history of American Sports.
3.) 5 straight playoffs is one hell of an accomplishment in the Topsy turvy NFL structure. 

(01-09-2019, 01:40 AM)Jakeypoo Wrote: I get wanting to move on after 16 years of Marvin but to act like he is a bad coach and to dismiss what he has done to turn this franchise around is not right.
2003 wasn't a bad roster but it wasn't that great either. With that being said; the Bengals needeed a more than a roster overhaul they need a much needed culture change and Marvin provided it.

0 n 7 in playoffs  n a horrible primetime winning percentage suggest he's not very good  .  At least we know Michael Johnson AKA john Thornton won't be back  

(01-10-2019, 04:03 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: 131-129-3 in 16 years.

1 winning season in his first 6 years.
0 winning seasons in his last 3 years.

His entire "success" is squandering the prime years of Green/Atkins/Dunlap/Whit/etc in a couple years in a row of winning 10-ish games and shitting their pants in the first round of the playoffs.

Outside of that small stretch, he has actually been a really bad coach. 7 winning years out of 16, and 5 of them came in that stretch. That means outside of the '11-'15 stretch where they had possibly the most talented teams in Bengals history (and still got 0 playoff wins), he had 2 winning seasons in the other 11 years.

Almost every coach is going to suck if you take away their top 5 seasons.  What kind of logic is that?  If you take away Sean Payton's 5 best years he also only has 2 winning seasons.

Only difference is that Payton was not handicapped by working for the worst owner in the league.

(01-10-2019, 06:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Almost every coach is going to suck if you take away their top 5 seasons.  What kind of logic is that?  If you take away Sean Payton's 5 best years he also only has 2 winning seasons.

Only difference is that Payton was not handicapped by working for the worst owner in the league.

Payton wins playoff games, gets byes and has a ring; Lewis has none of that, while Payton is in the playoffs again. Marvin could have left if Brown was so bad and if Marvin was so great, he should have taken his talents to South Beach. Just sucked at the tit while Dalton, Green, Dunlop and Atkins carried the team.

(01-10-2019, 03:39 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Maybe he decided he no longer wanted to coach. Maybe the options aren't there. I just think if there was any real interest, we'd hear that some team reached out to him, but he's not interested. 

Could very well be.  Most coaches don't get to coach for 16 straight years in the NFL, especially when they haven't gone to the playoffs.  I'm sure he's built up a really nice retirement fund.    

(01-10-2019, 06:25 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: 1.)Look at the record from the previous 13 seasons from before he arrived to what he accomplished.
2.) His tenure was with the worst owner in the history of American Sports.
3.) 5 straight playoffs is one hell of an accomplishment in the Topsy turvy NFL structure. 

It was 12 seasons. Anywho, why do we have to look at that? Why can't we judge Marvin on his own merits, against his peers? If the Buccaneers used this logic, Tony Dungy would've never left. They were terrible before him, but couldn't take the next step in the playoffs with him. 

The Rams had a horrific 12 year stretch before McVay. So if McVay goes .500 for the next 14 years, should LA build him a statue? What about Jim Mora and the Saints? Should they look back at him like he was a hero? 

If we go on to hire Bieniemy and he does plenty of good, do we credit Marv for Bieniemy's success, or do we consider that maybe some of these crafted narratives about Marv may not be 100% true? That he wasn't the only person on the planet capable of having success in Cincy.

(01-10-2019, 07:43 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: It was 12 seasons. Anywho, why do we have to look at that? Why can't we judge Marvin on his own merits, against his peers? If the Buccaneers used this logic, Tony Dungy would've never left. They were terrible before him, but couldn't take the next step in the playoffs with him. 

The Rams had a horrific 12 year stretch before McVay. So if McVay goes .500 for the next 14 years, should LA build him a statue? What about Jim Mora and the Saints? Should they look back at him like he was a hero? 

If we go on to hire Bieniemy and he does plenty of good, do we credit Marv for Bieniemy's success, or do we consider that maybe some of these crafted narratives about Marv may not be 100% true? That he wasn't the only person on the planet capable of having success in Cincy.

We one under 30% of our games before Marvin, small scouting report, Mike Brown as a GM, and no indoor practice facility. How many coaches would be successful under that?
Mcvay has a highly touted GM who is active in getting talent in free agency and the draft. How is his situation compareable to Marvins situation at all?
By the way both Dungey and Mora are legends in the cities that they coached.

(01-10-2019, 07:43 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: It was 12 seasons. Anywho, why do we have to look at that? Why can't we judge Marvin on his own merits, against his peers? If the Buccaneers used this logic, Tony Dungy would've never left. They were terrible before him, but couldn't take the next step in the playoffs with him. 

The Rams had a horrific 12 year stretch before McVay. So if McVay goes .500 for the next 14 years, should LA build him a statue? What about Jim Mora and the Saints? Should they look back at him like he was a hero? 

If we go on to hire Bieniemy and he does plenty of good, do we credit Marv for Bieniemy's success, or do we consider that maybe some of these crafted narratives about Marv may not be 100% true? That he wasn't the only person on the planet capable of having success in Cincy.

Because they don't have anything else to use as a crutch.