Crazy how Bengal fans lose it every time a player voices any support whatsoever for coaches.

"Wait, it can't be! No way somebody with a vastly better perspective than I do contradicts me! That would make me admit I might not have full information here!"

(12-10-2020, 02:04 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: And we're fooling ourselves. We're not a coordinator or 2 away from success.

The Elise Jesse article shows that Zac has no clue how to build a winning culture. No clue. Changing a coordinator or position coach is just going to delay the inevitable.

The Dolphins gutted their roster and were winning games the 2nd half of last year and are 8-4 this year. 2 years into the Taylor era, we are worse than we were the season before he took over. We had 6 wins then.

In no way am I defending Zac Taylor but the Dolphins did switch out both their OC and DC from Flores' first year. Not saying that's applicable here because I don't believe Zac has what it takes to be a successful head coach, but coordinator changes did help propel the Dolphins a bit.

(12-10-2020, 02:45 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: Crazy how Bengal fans lose it every time a player voices any support whatsoever for coaches.

"Wait, it can't be! No way somebody with a vastly better perspective than I do contradicts me! That would make me admit I might not have full information here!"

Except 

a) Burrow didn't voice support in this quote of Taylor or anyone else 

and

b) The players don't necessarily have "vastly better) perspective, just different perspective.  If you go out in public and trash your boss, good luck with your career.  Players sometimes open up after a change.  But very rare is the player (especially a leader) who will say the "wrong" thing even if it's the truth.

(12-10-2020, 02:45 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: Crazy how Bengal fans lose it every time a player voices any support whatsoever for coaches.

"Wait, it can't be! No way somebody with a vastly better perspective than I do contradicts me! That would make me admit I might not have full information here!"

Not that he even said this, mind you, but I'd love to ask Burrow what has him convinced that a 4-23-1 head coach is irreplaceable.  

During the Super Bowl era, a team has won 4 or less games over the span of 2 seasons 17 times.

Only 4 head coaches managed to survive and coach every game during those 2 seasons.

Two were the first coaches for their expansion teams, McKay with the Bucs and Hecker with the Falcons.

The other 2 were Rich Kotite with the Jets and Hue Jackson during the Browns epic dumpster fire. 

Jackson, McKay and Hecker were brought back for a 3rd year, with Hecker and Jackson being fired during the season.

So, if Zac loses out, and the Bengals bring him back, they will join the Browns as the ONLY times ever during the SB era that a head coach of a non-expansion team has won a total of 4 games or less in 2 seasons and the franchise brings him back for a 3rd year.

(12-10-2020, 02:49 PM)kacymcbryant18 Wrote: In no way am I defending Zac Taylor but the Dolphins did switch out both their OC and DC from Flores' first year. Not saying that's applicable here because I don't believe Zac has what it takes to be a successful head coach, but coordinator changes did help propel the Dolphins a bit.

Both teams started 0-7...then by the end of last year Flores had them playing much better.

Here, I can't see any sign of the team playing better for more than a quarter or 2 here or there. And usually against the worst of the worst teams. Like Jacksonville who is 1-11.

So 1 of our 2 wins was against a 1-11 team. We somehow lost to the Chargers with Manuel as the QB. 0 wins against a REALLY weak NFC East so far.

Zac has yet to win a single road game in 2 years. Not 1. Not 1 single road win.

We did beat the Titans. That's about the only thing I can point to as impressive in 2 years.

(12-10-2020, 02:50 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: Except 

a) Burrow didn't voice support in this quote of Taylor or anyone else 

and

b) The players don't necessarily have "vastly better) perspective, just different perspective.  If you go out in public and trash your boss, good luck with your career.  Players sometimes open up after a change.  But very rare is the player (especially a leader) who will say the "wrong" thing even if it's the truth.

They have the Carl Pickens clause in their contracts too I believe...which makes them not be able to badmouth the team without repercussions.

(12-10-2020, 02:45 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: Crazy how Bengal fans lose it every time a player voices any support whatsoever for coaches.

"Wait, it can't be! No way somebody with a vastly better perspective than I do contradicts me! That would make me admit I might not have full information here!"

It's a coach with 4.5 wins in 2 years. What more information do you need than that?

It's also a franchise that has the WORST record in the NFL over the last 30 years.

(12-10-2020, 02:38 PM)Whatever Wrote: IIRC, there was no real indication Marvin would be gone until he was. The Brown family plays these things very close to the best.  Pretty much any take on the situation is just speculation at this point.

There's some real debate on if Marvin was fired or stepped down too. I think there's a good chance that MB wanted him back, but Marvin was done here.

I'll be shocked if taylor is gone. Coordinators and position coaches may change, but I'd say no hc changes likely for a year. And if we get to marvin's bar of 8-8 without a playoff win (or appearance), then he probly gets an extension.

(12-10-2020, 02:50 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: Except 

a) Burrow didn't voice support in this quote of Taylor or anyone else 

and

b) The players don't necessarily have "vastly better) perspective, just different perspective.  If you go out in public and trash your boss, good luck with your career.  Players sometimes open up after a change.  But very rare is the player (especially a leader) who will say the "wrong" thing even if it's the truth.

But the fact that it he said anything positive at all should be regarded by fans as good news. And yet it's not. The immediate reaction is to assume he's not being truthful. I don't think the onus is on me to prove that he's telling the truth, but on you (or other naysayers) to prove that he must be lying. 

Just ask yourselves, why are we all not collectively breathing a sigh of relief? Oh good, the players and coaches are on the same page! The immediate assumption that it's bull is the telling part. 

(12-10-2020, 02:03 PM)Trademark Wrote: If Zac is back next year i'm not. This organization is a joke

Awe, we'll miss ya.....

(12-10-2020, 04:00 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: But the fact that it he said anything positive at all should be regarded by fans as good news. And yet it's not. The immediate reaction is to assume he's not being truthful. I don't think the onus is on me to prove that he's telling the truth, but on you (or other naysayers) to prove that he must be lying. 

Just ask yourselves, why are we all not collectively breathing a sigh of relief? Oh good, the players and coaches are on the same page! The immediate assumption that it's bull is the telling part. 

My reaction is that it doesn't really matter if Joe or other players like Zac or not. The front office needs to look at the actual results to make their determination on Zac's future. If Zac loses out, he will have a .141 win %. How do you sell to your fan base that you're trying to win while bringing back a guy who owns the worst win % in franchise history? 

I posted earlier in this thread a historical example of how laughable it would be to bring Zac back if he loses out. The only non-expansion franchise stupid enough to do it was the Browns. 

(12-10-2020, 03:23 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Both teams started 0-7...then by the end of last year Flores had them playing much better.

Here, I can't see any sign of the team playing better for more than a quarter or 2 here or there. And usually against the worst of the worst teams. Like Jacksonville who is 1-11.

So 1 of our 2 wins was against a 1-11 team. We somehow lost to the Chargers with Manuel as the QB. 0 wins against a REALLY weak NFC East so far.

Zac has yet to win a single road game in 2 years. Not 1. Not 1 single road win.

We did beat the Titans. That's about the only thing I can point to as impressive in 2 years.

To be clear, I never wanted to hire ZT in the first place due to his lack of experience. I just think this comparison to Miami is misplaced. 

Dolphins IR list: Davon Godchaux, Preston Williams, Vince Biegel.

Bengals IR list: Trae Waynes, DJ Reader, Joe Burrow, Joe Mixon, John Ross, Auden Tate, CJ Uzomah, Renell Wren, until recently XSF, and Jonah for parts of the year. That's not including Geno, who for all practical purposes might as well be on IR. And our $18M #1 WR who's suddenly awful. And I don't put that (nor Dunlap) on the coaches. 

In the offseason the Dolphins brought in the likes of Byron Jones, Emmanuel Ogbah, Kyle Van Noy, Shaq Lawson, and more, AND THE ALL STAYED HEALTHY. Imagine. We had a good offseason too, but anybody we're paying any money to is either hurt or an over the hill vet. But that is the type of thing that can change next year, whereupon we catch up with the Dolphins. 

And I assume you mean Tyrod Taylor, not Manuel. 

(12-10-2020, 04:08 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: My reaction is that it doesn't really matter if Joe or other players like Zac or not. 

I doubt the Front Office listens to other players much, but you can bet your bottom dollar they are going to do whatever they can to keep Joey Burrow happy here in the Jungle.

(12-10-2020, 04:11 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I doubt the Front Office listens to other players much, but you can bet your bottom dollar they are going to do whatever they can to keep Joey Burrow happy here in the Jungle.

The one thing we know, without a doubt, that Burrow likes is winning. Bring in a quality HC and staff, revamp the o-line, give him a couple more weapons...and something tells me he won't miss Zac all that much.  

(12-10-2020, 03:36 PM)Benton Wrote: I'll be shocked if taylor is gone. Coordinators and position coaches may change, but I'd say no hc changes likely for a year.  And if we get to marvin's bar of 8-8 without a playoff win (or appearance), then he probly gets an extension.

I'd say 6-10 or 7-9 in year 3 and they probably extend him or give him a Year 4.

Burrow should have no say who is coach, he is green behind the ears still and a bit naïve of the NFL. He can provide the FO his 2 cents, but that's about it. Let's hope they get him a real good HC to have a chance of winning.

(12-10-2020, 04:15 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: The one thing we know, without a doubt, that Burrow likes is winning. Bring in a quality HC and staff, revamp the o-line, give him a couple more weapons...and something tells me he won't miss Zac all that much.  

Well, you can surmise that, but just wait and see what the FO does. My guess is they revamp the oline with new player(s) and a new coach and Taylor gets his 3rd year.

In general, I don't think ZT is likely to be fired. The only way I can see it happening (even if we lose out), is if the front office is livid about the following criticism. And it is a valid criticism.

When we hired Taylor, it was said that his scheme was OL friendly because it was based on play action. So, besides drafting Jonah, the idea is that you can allocate resources elsewhere and get by with a bunch of mid round picks on the OL. Outside of Whit, the Rams didn't have a lot of big names on their OL when ZT was there. I remember interviews with Callahan where he flat out said sometimes you can get around lesser lineman by having backs and TEs chip, etc.

So the front office says sure, we'll get you your version of whit and just guys like Hart and a 4th round rookie in Jordan, etc, and you scheme to make them look good. Then we draft Burrow who played a bunch of empty sets in college, who said he liked empty sets, and ZT got so enamored with an offense looking like LSU's, that he just ran empty sets. We don't even run much, let alone use play action. Empty sets by definition mean we don't keep many backs/TEs in. So then we had Burrow overexposed behind an OL built for play action and other types of protection that is no longer there.

So, if the front office is livid that they were told to find one thing based on scheme, and then the scheme changes and gets their #1 QB killed, sure they might fire ZT. It might not fall under the "growing pains" they expected.

To be clear, while this is definitely dysfunction between coaches and front office, I don't think it's a type of dysfunction that necessarily needs a new coaching staff to be fixed. Not that I would be disappointed if the whole staff is fired, but I also know they do a thorough autopsy after every year. The bigger question I have is what the results of that autopsy will be organizationally. ZT has made mistakes as we knew he would (hence I didn't want to hire him), but that doesn't necessarily mean the same mistakes will keep holding us back indefinitely.