(10-21-2020, 04:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't see how that makes any difference at all.  Marvin was under contract and they fired him after winning 6 games.

They know that if Taylor just wins 4 games this year PBS will be empty next season.

They also know it will be hard to sign free agents to work under a coach with 7 wins in two seasons and zero respect form his players.  You think he has problems with vets speaking out now.  Just wait until he ends this season with a 7-24-1 record.

They didn't fire Marvin. Both Mike and Marvin said that they decided it was better to go their own ways during their meeting. If Marvin had decided he was willing to stay for the final year of his deal, do you think Mike would've said no? I don't. Mike retained Marvin after that playoff debacle against the Steelers and allowed him to stick around for 3 straight losing seasons. He was in no hurry to get rid of Marvin. 

The vets who are speaking out aren't Taylor's guys. They are remnants of the previous regime. Not only that, but Mike doesn't like players speaking out. That will make him side with and defend the coach even more. You always have to account for the 'Mike factor' with these things, because it's always there.

BTW, I hope it doesn't sound like I'm defending Zac. I'm not sold on him at all. I just think the front office has invested so much in him and bought so much into his plan, that they will stick it out at least into next season.

(10-21-2020, 05:02 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: They didn't fire Marvin. Both Mike and Marvin said that they decided it was better to go their own ways during their meeting. If Marvin had decided he was willing to stay for the final year of his deal, do you think Mike would've said no? I don't. Mike retained Marvin after that playoff debacle against the Steelers and allowed him to stick around for 3 straight losing seasons. He was in no hurry to get rid of Marvin. 

The vets who are speaking out aren't Taylor's guys. They are remnants of the previous regime. Not only that, but Mike doesn't like players speaking out. That will make him side with and defend the coach even more. You always have to account for the 'Mike factor' with these things, because it's always there.

BTW, I hope it doesn't sound like I'm defending Zac. I'm not sold on him at all. I just think the front office has invested so much in him and bought so much into his plan, that they will stick it out at least into next season.

I don't believe for a second Mike fired Marvin. 

Marvin enters office "Mike I've had enough"

Mike " you sure dawg" ?

Marvin "yes I'm sure"

Mike "you wanna think about it"

Marvin "no"

Mike "are you really sure, sure" ?

Marvin "yes"

Mike "well if you change your mind over next couple months just let me know"

Unless the Brown's hire a President of Football Operations, who in turn hires a capable GM, who in turn puts together an NFL caliber FO WITH an NFL caliber scouting staff......THEN hires an NFL capable Head Coach and Coaching staff all this money thrown at FA's and such is just being wasted. Honestly it takes alot more than "throw some money at the problem" to fix this mess! Sorry just saying.

(10-21-2020, 01:49 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I'm seeing a lot of talk about how it's a forgone conclusion that Zac Taylor will get a 3rd year.  I've seen explanations range from team history (Dave Shula getting 5 years) to coaches getting 2 years with 1st round QB's.

In any other time I might agree with a lot of these points made, and think the chances of us are moving on are slim to none.  But there is something very different about the time we're currently in....

The Stadium lease renewal.  For those that don't know, the lease on PBS with the county ends in 2026. (There are potential extensions and particulars, but we're still nearing a very important date)  At that time, any county funds will cease being made to the Bengals for upgrades and matenance.  Hamilton County and the Bengals have until then to come to agreement on how to proceed.

Some of you might be thinking, 2026 is awhile away, it's only 2020.  Well, the county and the team are expected to begin formal talks in 2022.  2022 is only 14 months away.

Without going into too much crazy detail, just now a couple things.  The county isn't in the best of shape right now as far finances.  The two stadiums (PBS + GAB) won't be paid off until 2032.  The current .05 levy is expected to continue for pretty much forever.  We also just committed 1.2 BILLION dollars to a transportation levy, that runs for, I think, 12 years.

What this means is simple.  The county isn't sitting on a mountain of cash.  Nor can they easily gain support for additional taxes.  Hamilton County is now one of the highest taxed counties in the entire state.

So all of this means the Bengals really need to present themselves in the very best light possible.  The better product they have, the stronger their leverage.  If they continue to roll out the product they are, they're going to be really hurting themselves.

And if you think the answer is, "well, the Bengals will just leave if the county can't be meet their demands", this could very well be true.  But the same logic applies to negotiations with other cities.  The better their team performs the more leverage they can use.  

No one wants to go into negotiations with a bottom of the barrel franchise.

The average cost for rennovating and upgrading aging stadiums, in these type of deals, is 214 million dollars.  The average cost for new stadiums is creeping pasy 1 BILLION.  This means there are hundreds of millions to past billion dollars at stake.

What does Mike Brown and his family take very seriously, maybe more than anything else?  Money.  And there's a lot of money on the line.

So when you consider all of the above, and couple it with simple pride and 30 years of proven failure, I think you may see this team operate differently from their previous norm.  And I actually believe this played a big hand in what we saw in free agency.  Now is not the time to be stubborn.

This team desperately needs fan support.  They need the city's support.  The last thing they want is a half empty stadium to continue to be a reality going into all of this.  And unfortuanately for them, the excitment that is Joe Burrow's first year, which would drive ticket sales, is lost to Covid.

I hope I didn't bore anyone to death with this.  I think it's a very valid angle to consider.

I think the issue is that in the current climate, trying to get tax money out of Hamilton County is like bleeding a turnip.  Plus, the county has defaulted on numerous payments to the team through the years.  Even if a deal could be reached that involved tax money, Mike is reasonablly assured that the county isn't going to come through with everything promised.  

What I think will most likely happen is Mike will make an offer to buy PBS outright from the county, then renovate with his own money as well as finds from the NFL stadium fund.

(10-21-2020, 04:36 PM)Bengalholic Wrote:  The huge free agency doesn't happen without Zac. This front office has never believed in spending big in free agency...until Zac.

I know a lot of people on here think this, and my opinion is in the minority.  But I don't really buy this at all.

That's not to say Zac didn't have some say in the process, or input on who to target.  I'm sure he was invlolved.

What I think really drove this change in approach was the following:

1.) Tons of empty seats.

There were times last season where I would guess that actual attendance was around 20k.  The stadium was about 1/3 of the way full.  Now, we've seen empty seats before, but nothing like this in the PBS era. 

And it had been getting steadily worse over the last few years.  This wasn't a fan reaction to just one historically bad season, it had been building.

This was a team that enjoyed sellouts, I think, for 8 straight years from when PBS opened.  We've had lean years before, and the Marvin reign was all together rather mediocre.  But from 2000-2016 attendance was relatively strong and consistent.

Something changed around late in 2016.  It's had been getting worse and worse.  And I think their hope was that having a new head coach, and a  "New Day" would help reverse that trend.  Yet it still got worse.

2.) Obvious spending from obvious cuts.

Everyone knew Andy Dalton was as good as gone.  There was no way they would bring him back with the pick they had, and with fans being upset.

Cordy Glenn basically forced their hand, and was an obvious cut.  Same goes with Dre Kirkpatrick.  These are clear cap casualities.

We're already going into free agency with a decent amount of room, before these moves.  When you add them, you're adding another 30+ million in space.

Money had to spent somewhere.  Even AJ's tag, and Mixon's deal weren't going to do much in using it up.  And there's really no one left we could have paid a ton to internally to close the gap.

To each their own, but I think this is more of front office reacting to disgruntled fans and being forced to use freed up cap space than it Zac Taylor going in and changing the approach.

I just don't buy Zac having more say or more pull after one 2-14 year than Marvin did in any of his 16 years.  And if Zac does have the power to force a change like this, where was the spending in 2019?

(10-21-2020, 05:12 PM)bengalfan74 Wrote: I don't believe for a second Mike fired Marvin. 

Marvin enters office "Mike I've had enough"

Mike " you sure dawg" ?

Marvin "yes I'm sure"

Mike "you wanna think about it"

Marvin "no"

Mike "are you really sure, sure" ?

Marvin "yes"

Mike "well if you change your mind over next couple months just let me know"

Real version

Mike:  "I am going to let you go, but since we have such a good relationship I'll give you a chance to say it was your decision."

Marvin:  "I only lost one more game than last year when I signed a two year extension.  Why would anyone believe I would want to give it up now?"

Mike:  "They aren't very smart."

(10-21-2020, 05:46 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote:  And if Zac does have the power to force a change like this, where was the spending in 2019?

This.


Mike thought that a new coach would stoke the excitement of the fans and bring back the crowds, but it didn't work.

They spent because the stadium was empty.  I f Zac had any say then he would have signed a bunch of free agents in 2019.  We had obvious holes all over our roster when he took over.

(10-21-2020, 05:46 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I know a lot of people on here think this, and my opinion is in the minority.  But I don't really buy this at all.

That's not to say Zac didn't have some say in the process, or input on who to target.  I'm sure he was invlolved.

What I think really drove this change in approach was the following:

1.) Tons of empty seats.

There were times last season where I would guess that actual attendance was around 20k.  The stadium was about 1/3 of the way full.  Now, we've seen empty seats before, but nothing like this in the PBS era. 

And it had been getting steadily worse over the last few years.  This wasn't a fan reaction to just one historically bad season, it had been building.

This was a team that enjoyed sellouts, I think, for 8 straight years from when PBS opened.  We've had lean years before, and the Marvin reign was all together rather mediocre.  But from 2000-2016 attendance was relatively strong and consistent.

Something changed around late in 2016.  It's had been getting worse and worse.  And I think their hope was that having a new head coach, and a  "New Day" would help reverse that trend.  Yet it still got worse.

2.) Obvious spending from obvious cuts.

Everyone knew Andy Dalton was as good as gone.  There was no way they would bring him back with the pick they had, and with fans being upset.

Cordy Glenn basically forced their hand, and was an obvious cut.  Same goes with Dre Kirkpatrick.  These are clear cap casualities.

We're already going into free agency with a decent amount of room, before these moves.  When you add them, you're adding another 30+ million in space.

Money had to spent somewhere.  Even AJ's tag, and Mixon's deal weren't going to do much in using it up.  And there's really no one left we could have paid a ton to internally to close the gap.

To each their own, but I think this is more of front office reacting to disgruntled fans and being forced to use freed up cap space than it Zac Taylor going in and changing the approach.

I just don't buy Zac having more say or more pull after one 2-14 year than Marvin did in any of his 16 years.  And if Zac does have the power to force a change like this, where was the spending in 2019?

The fans have been extremely disgruntled before, attendance has been in the crapper before, they had a lot of cap room before...yet it never resulted in a free agent spending spree. Literally, the only thing that is different in this situation is Zac. When Mike says that 'People accept what he says' when it comes to Zac's ideas, I don't think it's much of a stretch to think one of those 'ideas' was to change the free agency approach. 

(10-21-2020, 05:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This.


Mike thought that a new coach would stoke the excitement of the fans and bring back the crowds, but it didn't work.

They spent because the stadium was empty.  I f Zac had any say then he would have signed a bunch of free agents in 2019.  We had obvious holes all over our roster when he took over.

Which seems more logically realistic:

Mike all of a sudden wakes up, looks at the evidence and just decides to do something he always been opposed to, which is spending big time in free agency...something he simply doesn't believe in?

The new head coach, who's plan they've bought into, convinces them after a year of where the defense was horridly bad and the run D was all-time terrible, that they have to spend big in free agency? 

The fact that it didn't happen in the 1st offseason makes me think it's the case even more. It may have taken Zac time to convince the ultra-stubborn Brown. If it was just Mike and the crew wanting to do it, why didn't they just do it after they hired a new coach?

I mentioned the Stadium deal factor in another thread but it pointed to the need for Mike Brown to retire angle and Katie moving into position of running the team and the Bengals hiring a real GM. I still think Katie will negotiate the new stadium deal but I also think Brown will retire by 2022; at least that is my fantasy. He will be close to 87 years of age.

Bengals have their QB of the future; not sure they have their coaching staff. They will probably give Taylor another year to win. Not improve, but win. If he and the team underperforms in year 3 of his contract, I think he is gone.

(10-21-2020, 06:43 PM)Bengalholic Wrote:  If it was just Mike and the crew wanting to do it, why didn't they just do it after they hired a new coach?

Because they thought hiring a new coach would be enough to excite the fans and sell more tickets.  When attendance got even worse they knew they had to try something else.

How the hell would Zac not have the ability to get Brown to spend when he first showed up but then GAIN credibility and authority after the worst season in team history?  That makes no sense at all.

(10-21-2020, 06:32 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: The fans have been extremely disgruntled before, attendance has been in the crapper before, they had a lot of cap room before...yet it never resulted in a free agent spending spree. Literally, the only thing that is different in this situation is Zac. When Mike says that 'People accept what he says' when it comes to Zac's ideas, I don't think it's much of a stretch to think one of those 'ideas' was to change the free agency approach. 

Probably both. He wants to support his new coach and show fans he cares. How much or what Katie and other siblings do matter here to. We don’t know to what extent they play in all this and since when. I’m of the belief he’s shifted some of that to Duke/Katie/etc. but who knows

(10-21-2020, 06:32 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: The fans have been extremely disgruntled before, attendance has been in the crapper before,

Never this bad

https://www.cincyjungle.com/2020/1/2/21046904/bengals-clinch-worst-attendance-in-paul-brown-stadium-history

]It's official. With a paid attendance of 47,759, this is the lowest total season attendance since Cincinnati's Paul Brown Stadium opened in 2000. Total of 377,342 is lowest since 1993.

That was a drop in attendance of almost 30 thousand from 2018 (406,028)

(10-21-2020, 06:32 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Literally, the only thing that is different in this situation is Zac.

Zac was not different. He was here in 2019.

(10-21-2020, 05:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This.


Mike thought that a new coach would stoke the excitement of the fans and bring back the crowds, but it didn't work.

They spent because the stadium was empty.  I f Zac had any say then he would have signed a bunch of free agents in 2019.  We had obvious holes all over our roster when he took over.

The problem with this logic is that the U.S. was dealing with the coronavirus pandemic when FA began.  It makes no sense to spend big in FA to pack the stands in a year where it was reasonably assumed that attendance would be seriously capped.

The bigger factors are likely the arrival of Burrow and the desire to build quickly around him while he's on his rookie deal and the drama in 2018.  Remember, Marvin essentially said in his presser when Teryl Austin was fired that the players were responsible for his firing.  This leads me to believe that players went over Marvin's head to the Brown family and sold them on coaching being the problem.  A similar thing may have happened the prior year with Zampese.  After all this coaching swapping, it's very possible that Mike started to believe the roster is the issue given their lack of success under multiple regimes.

(10-21-2020, 06:32 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: The fans have been extremely disgruntled before, attendance has been in the crapper before, they had a lot of cap room before...yet it never resulted in a free agent spending spree. Literally, the only thing that is different in this situation is Zac. When Mike says that 'People accept what he says' when it comes to Zac's ideas, I don't think it's much of a stretch to think one of those 'ideas' was to change the free agency approach. 

I believe market dynamics have changed and are different than anything we have experienced in the past. There is less incentive than ever before to go and support a team in person these days. Fans have the option to see every game at home or just watch some other form of entertainment; why pay a premium price to solely watch a crappy product? The bengals pivot in philosophy this offseason is not Zach’s doing, this is a new reality and I think the Bengals know it.

At least the Bengals have an identity unlike whatever Washington is calling itself today.

The county will never be in a stronger negotiating position. COVID has butchered county finances and no relief in sight. They can’t pay more, quite the contrary.

The Bengals can’t move to greener pastures, there are no cities with deep pockets wanting the Bengals. COVID has destroyed more than lung tissue, cities have unsolvable budget problems thanks to COVID. Subsidies to move a football team aren’t possible.

What about “the fans”? COVID and poor play has wiped them out. Far fewer fans today than when that deal was done.

The county can lose money with the Bengals playing or with them at loggerheads fighting over a new deal. If I’m the county I am determined to do a deal on my terms, worst case is I have a unused stadium on valuable land I’m not paying much to maintain it. Best case is the county makes money off the Bengals. That’s the deal I go for.

My thoughts on this...
Columbus will never happen, too close to Cincinnati, and too much competition with OSU.
San Antonio would be my guess, no state taxes in Texas.
If they give Taylor less than 3 years, that tells whoever they want to replace them they are on the hot seat from the beginning. Not the way to attract coaches to a less than desirable position. Any HC position is desirable, but some are better than others. The big draw for the Bengals was MB's willingness to give a coach a number of years.
I really don't think Hamilton County will let the Bengals go... that leaves a huge loss of revenue to local businesses and a big unused football stadium sitting on prime real estate. I'd be more willing to bet on a deal to build a multi-use dome.
If the Bengals do leave, who becomes your home team, Cleveland or Indianapolis. I don' believe I could go with either. Probably have to look at Tennessee as a home team since I know live in Louisville, but I guess I would root for Zim in Minny. I don't know that I could follow the team to a different city.... it's hard enough when they're here.

The WhoDey UK podcast with Elise Jesse is well worth a listen. She says multiple insiders (and she's well connected) have told her there's a big disconnect in places with coaching staff. However, it's not necessarily with Zac who seems still liked but with the position coaches.

I reckon there could be a change of position coach coming at the bye-week. Apparently Turner has already moved up into the booth with Ben Martin coaching on the sideline. Al Golden has been calling plays on 3rd down/passing downs as well.

I would expect Nick Eason to be a casualty of the Dunlop and Atkins situation at the end of the season as well. I've also long maintained that Zac would give up play calling duties to save himself being fired - it's too easy a move to make - and appoint a new co-ordinator at the end of this season. Not sure which, but there will be a change for change's sake.

(10-21-2020, 03:44 PM)SladeX Wrote: I don't see st. Louis or Columbus as viable landing spots.
St. Louis can't support 2 teams
Columbus has ohio state, too much competition
Milwaukee too much competition between bears, Vikings and packers

Portland,  OR
Tulsa/OKC
San Antonio

Outside shots
San Diego
Oakland
Mexico city
Along with jax, a cornerstone for a European division?

That's about all I have.

It would be kind of funny if they ended up in San Diego given the history between Chargers-Bengals. St. Louis is not in good enough shape to get an NFL team again.

(10-22-2020, 09:22 AM)TJHoushmandzadeh Wrote: The WhoDey UK podcast with Elise Jesse is well worth a listen. She says multiple insiders (and she's well connected) have told her there's a big disconnect in places with coaching staff. However, it's not necessarily with Zac who seems still liked but with the position coaches.

I reckon there could be a change of position coach coming at the bye-week. Apparently Turner has already moved up into the booth with Ben Martin coaching on the sideline. Al Golden has been calling plays on 3rd down/passing downs as well.

I would expect Nick Eason to be a casualty of the Dunlop and Atkins situation at the end of the season as well. I've also long maintained that Zac would give up play calling duties to save himself being fired - it's too easy a move to make - and appoint a new co-ordinator at the end of this season. Not sure which, but there will be a change for change's sake.

This is kind of my thoughts as well. I don't see them firing Taylor. What I CAN see them doing is making Taylor hire different assistants and giving up play calling duties until he has more experience.