(05-10-2019, 08:56 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: The Bengals are a family business. They're one of the only owners in the league that didn't become billionaires doing something else. The Bengals ARE their business, and unfortunately I think they view this team more as a business than anything else. Not saying that other owners aren't in it for money, but for many of them, owning a team is almost like a hobby...and many of them understand the "serving the public" aspect of owning a sports franchise. 

Mike couldn't give a rip about the fans or their perception of him. 

We've seen some of the quotes from Troy Blackburn on re-signing Hart. We saw the Whitworth's speak out about how Andrew wanted to play here, but was texted saying the Bengals weren't interested.

I don't know that those things are indicators of a great owner.

Katie seems to not like the spotlight. Maybe she would hire a GM like Dorsey. I think THAT is the best hope...that they actually hire a GM and then stay out of the way.

But, this is their job. They likely would stay involved.

(05-10-2019, 11:34 AM)depthchart Wrote: I would expect that Mike likely hangs his hat on the 5 straight Playoff appearances & the few AFC North Division Titles that happened during his tenure as Owner.

Seeing his part in all of this as the glass being half full and the part of the glass that isn't full is the result of Coaches not getting enough from the players he gave them -and/or- players that he had faith in falling short & now they just need replaced by Mike.

I'd bet Mike sees himself as a much better Owner/GM than the average fan sees him as.

A heavy focus on the positives by Mike (5 straight Playoffs) & surrounding himself with reminders of the positives (AFC North Title Banners) coupled with him being able to pinpoint specific Coach/player failures (fumbles/injuries etc) would make in easy for Mike to get it in his mind that he is not the problem.

Human Nature to give ones self the benefit of the doubt.

No doubt. The Model Model article was the epitome of that.

But since we last won a playoff game, something like all but 4-5 teams have WON 5 playoff games. He's 'happy' with 7 playoff appearances and 0 wins in 27 years?

Some 75% of the league has appeared in a SB over the past 27 years. That's insane. There is so much parity in the NFL and we are an outlier to it. The only ways for that to happen is freakishly bad luck...or we just do things different than EVERY other NFL Team.

How many teams would have allowed Marvin to be HC for 15 years with no playoff wins? That's one example. The Bengals valued a comfortable working relationship that would go along with how they did things.

(05-10-2019, 08:56 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: The Bengals are a family business. They're one of the only owners in the league that didn't become billionaires doing something else. The Bengals ARE their business, and unfortunately I think they view this team more as a business than anything else. Not saying that other owners aren't in it for money, but for many of them, owning a team is almost like a hobby...and many of them understand the "serving the public" aspect of owning a sports franchise. 

Mike couldn't give a rip about the fans or their perception of him. 

Revenue sharing makes that possible. They get 1/32 of the pie regardless of performance.

IF we start a business and sell a poor quality product, people won't buy it and we go out of business. Thus, there is incentive to cater to needs of consumers.

In the NFL, they are insulated from market pressures.

Other NFL owners own their team as a prestige thing and want to invest every penny. They want to try to find ways around the salary cap to spend more money. They hold coaches accountable. Not here.

(05-11-2019, 08:57 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We've seen some of the quotes from Troy Blackburn on re-signing Hart. We saw the Whitworth's speak out about how Andrew wanted to play here, but was texted saying the Bengals weren't interested.

I don't know that those things are indicators of a great owner.

Katie seems to not like the spotlight. Maybe she would hire a GM like Dorsey. I think THAT is the best hope...that they actually hire a GM and then stay out of the way.

But, this is their job. They likely would stay involved.

The Bengals never told Whitworth they weren't interested.  They told him they didn't value him at the price he was asking and they weren't increasing their offer, at least per Whit's camp.  

Successful teams let aging veterans walk all the time in FA rather than overpay to keep them.  The Bengals weren't dumb to let Whit walk.  They failed in the fact that they invested a 1st and a 2nd round pick into finding Whit's successor and they were both complete busts.  

At the end of the day, if Whit's priority was staying with the Bengals, he would still be a Bengal.  He chose to make the most money he could instead.  There's nothing wrong with that, but when money is your priority, you're probably not going to be playing for the team you want to play for and that team isn't necessarily the bad guy because they weren't the highest bidder.  

(05-11-2019, 09:05 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Revenue sharing makes that possible. They get 1/32 of the pie regardless of performance.

IF we start a business and sell a poor quality product, people won't buy it and we go out of business. Thus, there is incentive to cater to needs of consumers.

In the NFL, they are insulated from market pressures.

Other NFL owners own their team as a prestige thing and want to invest every penny. They want to try to find ways around the salary cap to spend more money. They hold coaches accountable. Not here.

That makes no sense.

If the team on the field is our "product", then a .500 team would be considered a perfectly average quality product.  Marvin had a .518 regular season win %, so basically average product quality.  The average Bengals ticket is around $78 and league average for a ticket is a little over $100.  If you're producing average quality products and charging 22% less than average, your product is a great bargain for consumers and you'll move units.  You can charge high end prices, but if you're products are average to poor quality, you'll struggle.  You can also produce crappy products, but if you charge low prices you'll have a market.

For any normal business, nobody is saying "I'm not spending my money on that because that company hasn't produced a product in the top 25% in quality in 27 years."  It's honestly a completely irrational thought process that only really happens in sports fandom.  

(05-12-2019, 03:16 AM)Whatever Wrote: That makes no sense.

If the team on the field is our "product", then a .500 team would be considered a perfectly average quality product.  Marvin had a .518 regular season win %, so basically average product quality.  The average Bengals ticket is around $78 and league average for a ticket is a little over $100.  If you're producing average quality products and charging 22% less than average, your product is a great bargain for consumers and you'll move units.  You can charge high end prices, but if you're products are average to poor quality, you'll struggle.  You can also produce crappy products, but if you charge low prices you'll have a market.

For any normal business, nobody is saying "I'm not spending my money on that because that company hasn't produced a product in the top 25% in quality in 27 years."  It's honestly a completely irrational thought process that only really happens in sports fandom.  

It's hard to compare the NFL to most businesses, because most businesses aren't operating in the odd combination of monopoly and oligopoly under which the NFL does.  

(05-11-2019, 08:54 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: As far as managements commitment to winning...which NFL Teams would allow a coach that was 0-7 in the playoffs 3 more years to try to win one?

Yeah...only 1. In most cities, if you don't win a playoff game in 3-4-5 years...they fire you.

In Cincy, you make the playoffs and lose and they write articles on the main team website about how they have developed a model that other teams will copy.

Spot on. Just the fact that Marvin kept his job for so long shows you how high (or low) this FO's standards are.

(05-12-2019, 03:16 AM)Whatever Wrote: That makes no sense.

If the team on the field is our "product", then a .500 team would be considered a perfectly average quality product.  Marvin had a .518 regular season win %, so basically average product quality.  The average Bengals ticket is around $78 and league average for a ticket is a little over $100.  If you're producing average quality products and charging 22% less than average, your product is a great bargain for consumers and you'll move units.  You can charge high end prices, but if you're products are average to poor quality, you'll struggle.  You can also produce crappy products, but if you charge low prices you'll have a market.

For any normal business, nobody is saying "I'm not spending my money on that because that company hasn't produced a product in the top 25% in quality in 27 years."  It's honestly a completely irrational thought process that only really happens in sports fandom.  

When you factor in post-season, I'm not so sure we were even average. 

Also, it's kinda silly to compare a sports franchise to a normal business. McDonald's doesn't get shared revenue with Burger King and get to pick the top cooks in the Restaurant Draft when they have a poor year. In a league designed for parity, the Bengals not having any playoff wins in almost 3 decades is a good indicator that they're doing something wrong, and fans/customers are smart enough to pick up on that. Hence poor ticket sales even with "affordable" tickets.

They've struggled to sell out games despite having one of the league's smallest stadiums.

(05-12-2019, 11:35 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Spot on. Just the fact that Marvin kept his job for so long shows you how high (or low) this FO's standards are.


When you factor in post-season, I'm not so sure we were even average. 

Also, it's kinda silly to compare a sports franchise to a normal business. McDonald's doesn't get shared revenue with Burger King and get to pick the top cooks in the Restaurant Draft when they have a poor year. In a league designed for parity, the Bengals not having any playoff wins in almost 3 decades is a good indicator that they're doing something wrong, and fans/customers are smart enough to pick up on that. Hence poor ticket sales even with "affordable" tickets.

They've struggled to sell out games despite having one of the league's smallest stadiums.

Marvin is still above .500 if you factor in playoff record... barely.

It's a terrible comparison for a number of reasons.  However, the Bengals are managed like a business in that they need to turn a profit every year due to a lack of fall back income for the Brown family. That won't change unless they invest their football money in another business.  

If the NFL worked more like a traditional business, Mike would have moved the team to another market years ago. The Bengals make the lowest amount of money per fan in the league. The revenue sharing that everyone bemoans for allowing Mike to be complacent is the only thing keeping the team economically viable in the city of Cincinnati.

(05-12-2019, 02:28 AM)Whatever Wrote: The Bengals never told Whitworth they weren't interested.  They told him they didn't value him at the price he was asking and they weren't increasing their offer, at least per Whit's camp.  

Successful teams let aging veterans walk all the time in FA rather than overpay to keep them.  The Bengals weren't dumb to let Whit walk.  They failed in the fact that they invested a 1st and a 2nd round pick into finding Whit's successor and they were both complete busts.  

At the end of the day, if Whit's priority was staying with the Bengals, he would still be a Bengal.  He chose to make the most money he could instead.  There's nothing wrong with that, but when money is your priority, you're probably not going to be playing for the team you want to play for and that team isn't necessarily the bad guy because they weren't the highest bidder.  

You do have to add that there were already clear signs that Ogbuehi would be a bust when they did this.

(05-12-2019, 01:37 PM)Joelist Wrote: You do have to add that there were already clear signs that Ogbuehi would be a bust when they did this.

It’s even worse when you consider how bad n horrible Ogbuehi was on the field that the Bengals should have gave Whit whatever he wanted. Oh well we can only hope they change somehow.

(05-12-2019, 01:36 PM)Whatever Wrote: Marvin is still above .500 if you factor in playoff record... barely.

It's a terrible comparison for a number of reasons.  However, the Bengals are managed like a business in that they need to turn a profit every year due to a lack of fall back income for the Brown family. That won't change unless they invest their football money in another business.  

If the NFL worked more like a traditional business, Mike would have moved the team to another market years ago.  The Bengals make the lowest amount of money per fan in the league.  The revenue sharing that everyone bemoans for allowing Mike to be complacent is the only thing keeping the team economically viable in the city of Cincinnati.

I don't look at record alone to determine success. You have to put a heavier weight on things like 28 years without a playoff win, or 0-7 under Marv. Those are pretty embarrassing achievements that hurt the reputation of the franchise. Whether we like it or not, it does hang over like a dark cloud. 

I totally agree that without revenue sharing, this team would probably be gone. If not in 1995, then whenever this lease is up. As it stands, I'm not too worried about the Bengals leaving. Mike makes great profit without the bigger expectations that would come in other cities. Imagine him going to New York and talking about how he's "not keen" on a practice facility, or running a tiny scouting/personnel department littered with family. Imagine sticking with guys like Paul Alexander for 20 years. Sticking with Marv after 0-7. 

None of that would fly in a big city that isn't used to that crap.

(05-12-2019, 03:16 AM)Whatever Wrote: That makes no sense.

If the team on the field is our "product", then a .500 team would be considered a perfectly average quality product.  Marvin had a .518 regular season win %, so basically average product quality.  The average Bengals ticket is around $78 and league average for a ticket is a little over $100.  If you're producing average quality products and charging 22% less than average, your product is a great bargain for consumers and you'll move units.  You can charge high end prices, but if you're products are average to poor quality, you'll struggle.  You can also produce crappy products, but if you charge low prices you'll have a market.

For any normal business, nobody is saying "I'm not spending my money on that because that company hasn't produced a product in the top 25% in quality in 27 years."  It's honestly a completely irrational thought process that only really happens in sports fandom.  

Under Mike Brown’s reign as owner/GM, the team has a .418 winning percentage. That’s 27 years of below average product, which has been inflated by Marvin’s tenure. Saving 22 bucks on a ticket doesn’t erase the failure.

(05-12-2019, 02:43 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I don't look at record alone to determine success. You have to put a heavier weight on things like 28 years without a playoff win, or 0-7 under Marv. Those are pretty embarrassing achievements that hurt the reputation of the franchise. Whether we like it or not, it does hang over like a dark cloud. 

I totally agree that without revenue sharing, this team would probably be gone. If not in 1995, then whenever this lease is up. As it stands, I'm not too worried about the Bengals leaving. Mike makes great profit without the bigger expectations that would come in other cities. Imagine him going to New York and talking about how he's "not keen" on a practice facility, or running a tiny scouting/personnel department littered with family. Imagine sticking with guys like Paul Alexander for 20 years. Sticking with Marv after 0-7. 

None of that would fly in a big city that isn't used to that crap.

All those things are fair criticisms in the running of the franchise as a competitive sports team for sure.  As a business, not so much.

If the team moved, they would have that honeymoon period for a few years in most markets.  They would move a lot of tickets, a ton of merchandise, and make tons of money with corporate sponsorships.  That would mean more money to invest into the team and would potentially lead to an Art Modell type situation where he can win that title early and solidify the fan base.  As it stands, it's basically Mike and the fans in a game of don't blink.  Mike won't spend with the big boys because he needs to maintain profitability and he isn't getting enough income to do so and the fans won't spend until they they see that playoff win drought ended.  Both sides are working against each other.

(05-12-2019, 11:35 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Spot on. Just the fact that Marvin kept his job for so long shows you how high (or low) this FO's standards are.


When you factor in post-season, I'm not so sure we were even average. 

Also, it's kinda silly to compare a sports franchise to a normal business. McDonald's doesn't get shared revenue with Burger King and get to pick the top cooks in the Restaurant Draft when they have a poor year. In a league designed for parity, the Bengals not having any playoff wins in almost 3 decades is a good indicator that they're doing something wrong, and fans/customers are smart enough to pick up on that. Hence poor ticket sales even with "affordable" tickets.

They've struggled to sell out games despite having one of the league's smallest stadiums.

I think I looked at the numbers a while back and our record was something like the 14-16th best from 2010 to present. That's average. Yes - the absolute peak of our franchise's success was average.

From 2000 to 2010 we were something like 24th.

From 1990 to 2000 we had something like the worst record.

Just going off of memory here.

But, to call the franchise's performance 'Average' is very generous and requires a look at the absolute best 10 year span in it's history.

Any way you slice and dice the numbers, in 50 years this franchise has won 5 playoff games. That's not good.

(05-12-2019, 01:36 PM)Whatever Wrote: Marvin is still above .500 if you factor in playoff record... barely.

It's a terrible comparison for a number of reasons.  However, the Bengals are managed like a business in that they need to turn a profit every year due to a lack of fall back income for the Brown family. That won't change unless they invest their football money in another business.  

If the NFL worked more like a traditional business, Mike would have moved the team to another market years ago.  The Bengals make the lowest amount of money per fan in the league.  The revenue sharing that everyone bemoans for allowing Mike to be complacent is the only thing keeping the team economically viable in the city of Cincinnati.

Other NFL Teams sell out games. Some have streaks where they sell out for decades in a row. The Bengals don't sell out because they are a small market. They sell out because they don't win playoff games and fans generally know the team will disappoint.

You can't just be terrible from 1991 to 2010 and expect fans to be fully invested just because you are now 'average'. Yes the Bengals were terrible for around 19 years. They basically lost an entire generation of fans due to this.

As far as the small market excuse. Cincy is a bigger market than Green Bay and some other cities.

On this list, when looking at nearby cities...Cincy is actually a bigger market than Pittsburgh, Seattle, Baltimore, Indy, Kansas City, etc.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/wt1sr/list_of_nfl_teams_by_media_market_size/

(05-12-2019, 01:37 PM)Joelist Wrote: You do have to add that there were already clear signs that Ogbuehi would be a bust when they did this.

Indeed. And they drafted him with an ACL injury. Even his scouting reports in college talked about how he gave up a lot of sacks and was basically a project. There were red flags all over this pick.

(05-12-2019, 03:22 PM)Whatever Wrote: All those things are fair criticisms in the running of the franchise as a competitive sports team for sure.  As a business, not so much.

If the team moved, they would have that honeymoon period for a few years in most markets.  They would move a lot of tickets, a ton of merchandise, and make tons of money with corporate sponsorships.  That would mean more money to invest into the team and would potentially lead to an Art Modell type situation where he can win that title early and solidify the fan base.  As it stands, it's basically Mike and the fans in a game of don't blink.  Mike won't spend with the big boys because he needs to maintain profitability and he isn't getting enough income to do so and the fans won't spend until they they see that playoff win drought ended.  Both sides are working against each other.

But, that's just it because this year they did spend a decent amount of money...they just didn't upgrade the roster. They essentially overpaid on a bunch of backups.

I know Cleveland hasn't won anything yet, and they stumbled around for years without knowing what they were doing...but look what bringing in Dorsey as GM did. The Bengals need to find a Dorsey-type GM. With that, they could probably make better decisions in free agency and start to win.

The model where you draft and retain your own and shun free agency...takes soo many things to work to succeed. IF you miss on any 1st Round picks, it can be devastating. It also puts a ton of pressure on coaching.

I don't advocate going out and signing the absolute highest priced free agents, but man imagine what our roster would look like if instead of signing Miller who is mediocre and Hart who is bad, if we brought in a Rodger Saffold and/or a good LB like Hicks.

Instead, we spent all that money and still have question marks on the offensive line and at LB. That's all on the Bengals.

Then, fans get all excited by the draft...but EVERY TEAM drafts and feels the same.

(05-12-2019, 03:22 PM)Whatever Wrote:   Mike won't spend with the big boys 

Mike spends as much as the rest of the teams on players.

(05-12-2019, 03:53 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Mike spends as much as the rest of the teams on players.

Yeah...that touched on my point that he actually does spend...it's just who they spend it on that is skewed.

(05-12-2019, 02:28 AM)Whatever Wrote: The Bengals never told Whitworth they weren't interested.  They told him they didn't value him at the price he was asking and they weren't increasing their offer, at least per Whit's camp.  

I see you are not used to how certain members here spin everything to shit on the Bengals.

Like you said, lots of teams would have made the exact same move.  The stategy was not the problem.  The problem was the execution.  The replacement they drafted was a bust.

But it is not good enough for people to just say Mike Bropwn is not smart at football.  Instead they have to make him evil and greedy.