(12-10-2020, 03:18 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: 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.

Yeah...and your point in there is that those guys usually get FIRED DURING the 2nd season.

Here, the debate is IF he's brought back for Year 3 and it looks like he will be.

(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. 

You're basically asking 'Why don't we think it's a good thing that players are ok with winning 4.5 games over 2 years?'

(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. 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. 

Exactly! And 'culture' doesn't matter what is said. It is created by what is accepted.

Like IF I manage employees and I'm like 'Being late won't be tolerated', then when people come in late I do nothing. Guess what culture I created? One of being late.

To create a winning culture, you can't give a coach with a 14.1% winning percentage a 3rd year. You just can't. You tell the players you are a loser org. (Which this franchise is with the worst record over the past 30 years.)

(12-10-2020, 04:21 PM)Sled21 Wrote: 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.

Similar to my guess. I actually think they'll fire Callahan and Eason. Bring back Lou and Turner.

Maybe draft Sewell. But, they may go WR or CB even at 3. And they love Bobbie Hart. I wouldn't be surprised if he's their RT next year.

They'll sign a moderate priced Guard. Probably not Thuney. Probably keep Spain.

They'll sign a better backup.

Between Jackson, Lawson, and Alexander...they'll likely keep 2 or 2.

(12-10-2020, 02:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: One of the main reasons fans want Taylor fired is because he had Burrow throwing the ball 45-50 times a game often from an empty backfield set.

One of the main reasons Burrow wants Taylor to stay is because he had him throwing the ball 45-50 times a game often from an empty backfield set.

That is why the players job is to play instead o making front office decisions.  The confidence that everyone loves in Burrow is also a reason he might make some stupid decisions.  He still thinks he is good enough to win games by himself.

:andy:

(12-10-2020, 04:23 PM)Geno_Can_Dunk Wrote: 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.

Taylor had no scheme when he was hired. He was the Rams QB Coach. He basically copied McVay's scheme and brought it here. He obviously doesn't know when to call a play under what circumstances, etc.

But, yeah he's a used car salesman.

I could come up with about 20 more reasons he should be fired, but you're probably right. He won't be.

(12-10-2020, 04:36 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: But, yeah he's a used car salesman.

"I’ve never seen someone who wants to win as badly as Mike Brown," Taylor said. "I just can’t tell you how much I’ve learned from him and how much respect I have for him. And I’m not saying that because he’s the owner of the team I’m the head coach for. It’s something that people come to you here – head coaches, GM – the respect they have for Mike Brown is off the charts. When he says something you better pay attention because there’s a lot of history and experience behind everything that he says."

(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. 

I didn't say he's not being truthful.  But I'm also not sure (because I'll be honest, I don't go through and read transcriptions of all the interviews) whether Burrow volunteers his love for Taylor out of the blue, or whether it's just in answer to questions he's getting from reporters looking for scoop and some potential locker room unrest.  

So I don't have to prove anything, because there's nothing I think needs proof.  I'm simply saying I highly doubt Burrow is going to come in here year one and pull a Dunlap, Palmer, Dillon, or anyone else we've seen implode talking about the coach and teammates.  

I think the Zac era proves the adage "It can't be any worse" wrong.

(12-10-2020, 04:55 PM)MileHighGrowler Wrote: I didn't say he's not being truthful.  But I'm also not sure (because I'll be honest, I don't go through and read transcriptions of all the interviews) whether Burrow volunteers his love for Taylor out of the blue, or whether it's just in answer to questions he's getting from reporters looking for scoop and some potential locker room unrest.  

So I don't have to prove anything, because there's nothing I think needs proof.  I'm simply saying I highly doubt Burrow is going to come in here year one and pull a Dunlap, Palmer, Dillon, or anyone else we've seen implode talking about the coach and teammates.  

No doubt. It's going to take him several more years to get disgruntled.

Palmer became disgruntled and he had a coaching staff who actually were NFL caliber.

(12-10-2020, 02:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: One of the main reasons fans want Taylor fired is because he had Burrow throwing the ball 45-50 times a game often from an empty backfield set.

One of the main reasons Burrow wants Taylor to stay is because he had him throwing the ball 45-50 times a game often from an empty backfield set.

That is why the players job is to play instead o making front office decisions.  The confidence that everyone loves in Burrow is also a reason he might make some stupid decisions.  He still thinks he is good enough to win games by himself.

And as the head coach, part of the job is doing what is best for the team to win. Just because it is what Burrow wants doesn't mean it was for the best. Maybe deferring to his wants means he isn't a HEAD coach, but just a coach. All the Hall of Fame ( and future HOF ) coaches are not greatly know for doing whatever it takes the QB happy. Brady and Bill had a working relationship into a gloves of SB rings. 

Those saying Burrow supports him are following the wrong thing. Joe won't speak bad of the coach. World would be absolutely shocked if he came out and said that Taylor is making bad decisions and the team needs to look elsewhere. That is very rare and is usually reserved to prima donna WRs and Twitter using immature players. Burrow is a pro. 

(12-10-2020, 04:36 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Taylor had no scheme when he was hired. He was the Rams QB Coach. He basically copied McVay's scheme and brought it here. He obviously doesn't know when to call a play under what circumstances, etc.

Well that's completely absurd. 

(12-10-2020, 04:25 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Yeah...and your point in there is that those guys usually get FIRED DURING the 2nd season.

Here, the debate is IF he's brought back for Year 3 and it looks like he will be.

Holy s**t...this is playing out almost exactly how Hue Jackson's regime did in Cleveland.
Hue won just 1 game in his first two seasons with CLE, but he was kept for the third season because the front office believed the team just had no talent. Their teams were much more devoid of talent than what Taylor's been working with.
They gave him 8 more games into the third season until they finally said enough is enough after he went 2-5-1. They not only got Landry but they also drafted Baker, Chubb, and Njoku in Hue's final season. Yet they just couldn't put together hardly any wins.

One would think all the franchises in the league noticed what went down in CLE during that time and would have learned to never follow that same sequence...except the Bengals? Could we be seeing the Hue Jackson scenario play out in Cincy?

(12-10-2020, 04:43 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: "I’ve never seen someone who wants to win as badly as Mike Brown," Taylor said. "I just can’t tell you how much I’ve learned from him and how much respect I have for him. And I’m not saying that because he’s the owner of the team I’m the head coach for. It’s something that people come to you here – head coaches, GM – the respect they have for Mike Brown is off the charts. When he says something you better pay attention because there’s a lot of history and experience behind everything that he says."

This is the biggest crock of shit I've ever heard in my entire life.

How could anyone say this with a straight face?

(12-10-2020, 01:51 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: There’s an underrated factor in the talk around Zac Taylor’s job with the Cincinnati Bengals and what the future might hold:

Joe Burrow.

No stats, reasoning or evidence would seem to mean much in the conversation if Burrow wants Taylor to stay because he thinks they can win together.

And it sure seems to be trending that way. A new coaching deep dive from ESPN’s Jeremy Fowler and Dan Graziano suggests as much:

“This quote from a source close to Burrow is a good sign: “He loves it there and thinks he can win a Super Bowl with them.”

Questions persist about whether Taylor did enough with a maligned offensive line to protect Burrow. But the Bengals are in the process of phasing out older veterans, which takes time, and five of their losses this season were by five points or fewer. They were in almost every game they played prior to the Burrow injury. Because of all that, there’s a loose belief that Taylor could get another year. But a spirited finish would certainly help erase the doubt.”

That supposed quote doesn’t actually say anything about Taylor. But Burrow and Taylor have been blatantly on the same page since Day 1, so this isn’t too much of a surprise.

Granted, how much credit Taylor should receive for merely working well with a generational quarterback prospect is hard to say — but plenty of franchises have failed miserably by pairing the wrong coach with a first-round passer. Still, Taylor is 4-23-1 as he nears the end of his second season.

It’s on the Bengals front office to decide if the right coach-passer pairing is more important than overall performance, and if that pairing will eventually compensate for the rest.

https://sports.yahoo.com/joe-burrow-save-zac-taylor-141814617.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw&tsrc=twtr

Burrow isn't going to come in here as a rookie and start ruffling feathers with the head coach, he's not that type of a player. I bet if Mike Brown said he was hiring his LSU college coach away from the Panthers he would be thrilled.

(12-10-2020, 05:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think the Zac era  proves the adage "It can't be any worse" wrong.

You may wanna replace Pratt with Logan Wilson in your sig.
As much as I liked Pratt coming out of college, I think Wilson already looks better. Pratt's really not developed into anything TBH.

(12-10-2020, 04:43 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: "I’ve never seen someone who wants to win as badly as Mike Brown," Taylor said. "I just can’t tell you how much I’ve learned from him and how much respect I have for him. And I’m not saying that because he’s the owner of the team I’m the head coach for. It’s something that people come to you here – head coaches, GM – the respect they have for Mike Brown is off the charts. When he says something you better pay attention because there’s a lot of history and experience behind everything that he says."

No way, you have to be yankin my chain!! He said that!? Lmaoooo

(12-10-2020, 07:14 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: This is the biggest crock of shit I've ever heard in my entire life.

How could anyone say this with a straight face?

It is true.  Marvin Lewis, Chris Collingsworth, Boomer all have stated similar quotes.  I stated this in another thread but I will paraphrase it again here.  Mike Brown does not measure progress in the dichotomy of W-L.  My opinion is that he accepts losing as part of the process of becoming competitive.  

In addition, this perception only works if he is compartmentalizing the last 3 decades so that his leadership is not evaluated in its totality.  Similarly, the end score of the game does not indicate how competitive the team performs;  It may be a play here or play there that causes a team to lose.  In Mike Brown's world, W-L record may cost the team from reaching the playoffs and cause the fans, media angst.  But W-L record is not a valid measure for the pulse of a team.

IMO, what needs to happen to get Taylor fired is for the Bengals to lose completely and utterly in the last few games.   Steelers and Ravens will destroy the Bengals.  I do not think Dallas and Texans will dominate the Bengals.    

At this point if Tobin stays, then what really matters.

Until they are willing to welcome fresh eyes to the FO, we may just be in for it for awhile.

We are looking at coordinator and staffing changes at best. Which may be our only hope of getting rid of Zac.

Good vibes in the air that he bangs the table for "like family" Turner and won't want to fire him forcing MB's hand!

Honestly how crazy is it that people get asked in interviews if MB wants to win? THATS how bad this franchise has been.

Then the fact that they are trying to win puts it all in context.