(09-05-2019, 09:18 PM)Whatever Wrote: Riiigggghhhhttt....I'm sure Hue didn't want the job.

Yay...It was ZT or the guy who went 0-16. Great options!

Are you sure you guys are fans because the stuff you post is depressing.

(09-05-2019, 10:42 PM)NKURyan Wrote: You'd think somebody who trashes the offensive line as much as you would welcome a new position coach considering how bad they were last year.

I'm sure you won't put it solely on the players shoulders, not after blaming Zac alone for UC's offensive woes. Because that'd make you a hypocrite.

re: UC's players being the issue - One of the main narratives on this board is that ZT would be an improvement over Marvins coaching. If he could make UC's offense better than 123rd how does he improve teams?

(09-05-2019, 10:38 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: All of the DC's that turned down jobs here is also a red flag.

As is Pollack declining to stay and coach the line.

If these people were excited about ZT as the HC...more guys would likely come here and Pollack would stay.

Didn't Z and Pollack come from two different schemes? Maybe that's why Pollack is here but that is just gossip on my part.
Also the D coordinator situation is meh to me. The Gator guy wanted to stay in Gainesville and I don't know what happened with Del Rio but there seemed to be a dis agreement. Anyways Lou seems like a good coach who knows what he is talking about.

(09-05-2019, 10:45 PM)NKURyan Wrote: I did, repeatedly. You have yet to address any of it because you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

Again, did the UC offense instantly kick into gear and rocket up the rankings after ZT was gone? Spoiler: no.

Funny the year before Taylor came they averaged 33.8 ppg. And I believe Tuberville was the HC then too.

2015: 33.8 ppg (37rd ranked offense. The year before Taylor came.)
2016: 19.6 ppg under Taylor
2017: 20.9 ppg
2018: 34.9 ppg (23rd ranked offense)

Seems their worst season was with Taylor as OC.

(09-05-2019, 10:38 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: All of the DC's that turned down jobs here is also a red flag.

As is Pollack declining to stay and coach the line.

If these people were excited about ZT as the HC...more guys would likely come here and Pollack would stay.

It's been reported forever that Pollack being out was Taylor's call.  Pollack was under contract for this year.  If they wanted him as the OL coach, he would be the OL coach or retired.

(09-05-2019, 10:58 PM)Jakeypoo Wrote: Didn't Z and Pollack come from two different schemes? Maybe that's why Pollack is here but that is just gossip on my part.
Also the D coordinator situation is meh to me. The Gator guy wanted to stay in Gainesville and I don't know what happened with Del Rio but there seemed to be a dis agreement. Anyways Lou seems like a good coach who knows what he is talking about.

Do you think any other teams would have hired Lou as DC this year? How about Callahan as OC?

These were guys with no options that came here because they were friends with Taylor. Same with Turner.

Haslett got bashed here for not developing LB's. Well the team gave up on Jefferson already so the new LB coach and DC obviously weren't able to salvage him.

(09-05-2019, 10:59 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Funny the year before Taylor came they averaged 33.8 ppg. And I believe Tuberville was the HC then too.

2015: 33.8 ppg (37rd ranked offense. The year before Taylor came.)
2016: 19.6 ppg under Taylor
2017: 20.9 ppg
2018: 34.9 ppg (23rd ranked offense)

Seems their worst season was with Taylor as OC.

It's almost like their leading rusher and top four receivers graduated after 2015, before Tuberville shoved the starting QB into the doghouse.

Can't imagine why the offense would take a step back.  You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

Tommy Tuberville wasn't even here in 2017 and 2018, they had an actual head coach who gave a shit and could recruit. Hence the offense *finally* improved in 2018 when they had actual talent again.

(09-05-2019, 11:00 PM)Whatever Wrote: It's been reported forever that Pollack being out was Taylor's call.  Pollack was under contract for this year.  If they wanted him as the OL coach, he would be the OL coach or retired.

Yeah...incorrect. Pollack wanted out and apparently the Bengals would have had to agree to let him go:



We’re getting some clarity on the Frank Pollack situation.


Apparently, it was not the Bengals who didn’t want Pollack back. Instead, it was Pollack who didn’t want to remain in Cincinnati.

It’s still unfortunate news, but at least the Bengals didn’t make the mistake of firing one of the NFL’s best offensive line coaches. 

http://totalbengals.com/bengals-rumors-ol-coach-frank-pollack-leaves-team/

(09-05-2019, 11:02 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Haslett got bashed here for not developing LB's. Well the team gave up on Jefferson already so the new LB coach and DC obviously weren't able to salvage him.

Because he was garbage. Someone should fire the coaches that drafted him.

(09-05-2019, 10:50 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yay...It was ZT or the guy who went 0-16. Great options!

Are you sure you guys are fans because the stuff you post is depressing.

Well, if Fred's right, Bienemy wouldn't take the job, so that's another possibility off your list of more qualified candidates.  Apparently, Zac was the most qualified guy that would take the job.

Of course, I think we both know Fred's just throwing bs at the wall and seeing if he can get something to stick.

(09-05-2019, 11:04 PM)NKURyan Wrote: It's almost like their leading rusher and top four receivers graduated after 2015, before Tuberville shoved the starting QB into the doghouse.

Can't imagine why the offense would take a step back.  You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

So IF a genius OC can't squeeze more than a 123rd ranked offense out of players...how is he going to do different here?

Let's face it, we're not the most innovative team from a player drafting and signing standpoint...so scheme will have to be what makes us.

How will ZT improve over what Marvin did?

(09-05-2019, 11:06 PM)NKURyan Wrote: Because he was garbage. Someone should fire the coaches that drafted him.

Do you think coaches do drafting on most teams?

Spoiler alert: Nope - That's what scouts and GM's do.

(09-05-2019, 11:05 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yeah...incorrect. Pollack wanted out and apparently the Bengals would have had to agree to let him go:



We’re getting some clarity on the Frank Pollack situation.


Apparently, it was not the Bengals who didn’t want Pollack back. Instead, it was Pollack who didn’t want to remain in Cincinnati.

It’s still unfortunate news, but at least the Bengals didn’t make the mistake of firing one of the NFL’s best offensive line coaches. 

http://totalbengals.com/bengals-rumors-ol-coach-frank-pollack-leaves-team/

So again - The offensive line was awful last year with Pollack as the coach. I know you're going to blame the players for that mere posts after putting ZT's UC offense solely on his shoulders, so by all means go ahead.

According to the "logic" you've employed in this thread, if the offensive line was the worst in the league than the coach alone must be held to blame. Why should we have brought him back?

(09-05-2019, 11:07 PM)Whatever Wrote: Well, if Fred's right, Bienemy wouldn't take the job, so that's another possibility off your list of more qualified candidates.  Apparently, Zac was the most qualified guy that would take the job.

Of course, I think we both know Fred's just throwing bs at the wall and seeing if he can get something to stick.

Maybe the Bengals interviewed all 122 OC's from college that had a better offense than him and they turned us down?

There was some hating on college coaches coming to the NFL like the idea of Lincoln Riley with statements that all have failed but Pete Carroll.

Does anyone have any stats on guys that were QB Coaches becoming HC with little OC experience?

(09-05-2019, 11:01 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Do you think any other teams would have hired Lou as DC this year? How about Callahan as OC?

These were guys with no options that came here because they were friends with Taylor. Same with Turner.

I think they would have been eventually hired. Only one I would question would be Turner for the bully scandal.

(09-05-2019, 11:07 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: So IF a genius OC can't squeeze more than a 123rd ranked offense out of players...how is he going to do different here?

Let's face it, we're not the most innovative team from a player drafting and signing standpoint...so scheme will have to be what makes us.

How will ZT improve over what Marvin did?

What did the UC offense do after ZT left? Nothing. They were still bad. It was a player issue. It's not difficult to understand. You have no idea what the scheme was like at UC because you clearly didn't watch a game they played. You're just assuming that despite the fact they had virtually no talent and were extremely young it *had* to be a scheme issue no matter what. As someone who actually a) watches UC pretty religously and b) actually went to 2 games that year, I'm telling you you're jumping to your own conclusions.

(09-05-2019, 11:10 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Maybe the Bengals interviewed all 122 OC's from college that had a better offense than him and they turned us down?

How could a young inexperienced offense on a Tommy Tuberville coached mid-major team struggle one year after losing it's top rusher and top four recievers? I can't imagine. 

What a great point.  

(09-05-2019, 11:05 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yeah...incorrect. Pollack wanted out and apparently the Bengals would have had to agree to let him go:



We’re getting some clarity on the Frank Pollack situation.


Apparently, it was not the Bengals who didn’t want Pollack back. Instead, it was Pollack who didn’t want to remain in Cincinnati.

It’s still unfortunate news, but at least the Bengals didn’t make the mistake of firing one of the NFL’s best offensive line coaches. 

http://totalbengals.com/bengals-rumors-ol-coach-frank-pollack-leaves-team/

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/nfl/bengals/2019/01/18/bx-pollack-departure-illustrates-ownership-investing-taylor-cincinnati-bengals/2603273002/

"[color=var(--body-5_-_color)]Despite keeping some of the coaches from the previous staff around, the Bengals are allowing Taylor to bring in his own guy on the line and getting rid of someone they believe in means Taylor is getting what he wants. As he should.[/color]

[color=var(--body-5_-_color)]It could have gone the other way. Ownership could have put their foot down and stood behind a proven in-house commodity. They didn't."[/color]


[color=var(--body-5_-_color)]The article you're citing even titles itself a rumor, meaning nothing concrete.  [/color]