+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: What exactly was the problem with play calling? (/thread-23957.html)
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 08:14 AM)Sled21 Wrote: The final say may go to the front office, since they have to pony up the money, but if you think the HC has no say in who they go after then you're highly mistaken.
If you don'tthink Marvin Lewis wanted more talented free agents then you are highly mistaken.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Au165 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 09:59 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If you don'tthink Marvin Lewis wanted more talented free agents then you are highly mistaken.
I do wonder at times if Marvin preferred "his guys". I don't think they gave him a bank like what Taylor had this year, but i do think at times Marvin looked at player in house more favorably then people on the outside did causing us to pass on guys who would be moderate upgrades at reasonable prices.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - bengalfan74 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 09:59 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If you don'tthink Marvin Lewis wanted more talented free agents then you are highly mistaken.
What does ML have to do with this ?
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Pat5775 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:14 AM)Au165 Wrote: I do wonder at times if Marvin preferred "his guys". I don't think they gave him a bank like what Taylor had this year, but i do think at times Marvin looked at player in house more favorably then people on the outside did causing us to pass on guys who would be moderate upgrades at reasonable prices.
Exactly. Marvin and Paul Alexander were especially stubborn about subpar offensive linemen back in the day
I believe Marvin’s ego had him convinced he could coach just about any player to be good enough, they just needed to play better
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:23 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: What does ML have to do with this ?
Sorry you could not keep up. Let me help you.
Some people were trying to claim Zac Taylor gets the credit for spending so much more in free agency this year.
Others said that the Head Coach does have control over who we sign.
So I pointed out that it was absurd to believe that Marvin (along with EVERY prior Bengal head coach) did not want better players in free agency.
You are welcome.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Sled21 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 09:59 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If you don'tthink Marvin Lewis wanted more talented free agents then you are highly mistaken.
You're missing the point Fred. A huge part of being a good Head Coach is the ability to get ownership to listen to you and buy in, and the ability to get them to get you the pieces you need to be successful. Obviously Zac Taylor has done this, while Marvin Lewis was never able to pull it off.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:35 AM)Sled21 Wrote: You're missing the point Fred. A huge part of being a good Head Coach is the ability to get ownership to listen to you and buy in, and the ability to get them to get you the pieces you need to be successful. Obviously Zac Taylor has done this, while Marvin Lewis was never able to pull it off.
Yeah, right, that is why Zac had so many great signings LAST YEAR.
The front office was just more desperate than they have ever been this year. None of Marvin's teams were as shitty as Zac's was last year. Attendance was never as low when Marvin was HC. So the front office was never this desperate when Marvin was HC.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - bengalfan74 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:33 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sorry you could not keep up. Let me help you.
Some people were trying to claim Zac Taylor gets the credit for spending so much more in free agency this year.
Others said that the Head Coach does have control over who we sign.
So I pointed out that it was absurd to believe that Marvin (along with EVERY prior Bengal head coach) did not want better players in free agency.
You are welcome.
My point is you look for any and every opportunity to throw ML and the past into nearly every single thread ! Let it go and you'll feel better.
You are welcome
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Wes Mantooth - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:35 AM)Sled21 Wrote: You're missing the point Fred. A huge part of being a good Head Coach is the ability to get ownership to listen to you and buy in, and the ability to get them to get you the pieces you need to be successful. Obviously Zac Taylor has done this, while Marvin Lewis was never able to pull it off.
Perhaps the lowest attendance in PBS history, the lowest % of tickets sold in the entire league, and pending negotiations with Hamilton County for the lease renewal in 2026, helped motivate the front office to spend more.
To just simply say, Zak Taylor obviously has already gained more influence, or was better able to convince the team to spend in FA than Marvin Lewis is such a simple-minded, ill-informed way of looking at the situation.
That's not to say Taylor wasn't able to make his case here and there, nor does it mean that he hasn't gained influence. It simply means that there is much more to consider in explaining the change in approach, and recent splurge.
The fact of the matter is you have no idea who Marvin Lewis pushed for, or how Taylor's influence compares to Marvin's. And neither do I, or anyone else that isn't in that building.
Sure, we can all speculate. But you should at least put forth the effort to consider other plausible reasons for why this may be.
IMHO, I find it hard to believe that Taylor, or any other coach could come in here and in two years gained greater influence than Marvin. It's clear that Mike Brown greatly respected him, and that was built on a 16 year relationship.
The team really had no choice but to spend this season. the team had a decent amount of space entering the offseason. You then had obvious roster moves made with Dalton and Cordy Glenn, that would free up an enormous amount of space. And you now have a minimum spending requirement in the cap floor that Marvin didn't work with until he was a decade into his tenure. Again, spending was inevitable.
When you consider all of this, and couple it with a half empty stadium, it seems reasonable to believe that perhaps this could also explain why 2020 resulted in record spending.
To ignore all of it, and simply attribute it to "Obviously Zak Taylor got it done, when Marvin couldn't" seems incredibly short-sided.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - sandwedge - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:33 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sorry you could not keep up. Let me help you.That is exactly what wasn't said. "A coach having a say in FA" is a whole lot different than "A coach has control over who we sign"....
Some people were trying to claim Zac Taylor gets the credit for spending so much more in free agency this year.
Others said that the Head Coach does have control over who we sign.
So I pointed out that it was absurd to believe that Marvin (along with EVERY prior Bengal head coach) did not want better players in free agency.
You are welcome.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 11:21 AM)sandwedge Wrote: That is exactly what wasn't said. "A coach having a say in FA" is a whole lot different than "A coach has control over who we sign"....
Of course the coaches have always "had a say". They get to pick from a list they were given. Zac did not do anything to change the level of players on that list except coach us to a 2-win season with the worst attendance in PBS history.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:48 AM)bengalfan74 Wrote: My point is you look for any and every opportunity to throw ML and the past into nearly every single thread ! Let it go and you'll feel better.
You are welcome
My point is that if people did not say stupid things then I would not have to bring him up.
You may be happier with your head in the sand, but I would not be.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - sandwedge - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 11:31 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Of course the coaches have always "had a say". They get to pick from a list they were given. Zac did not do anything to change the level of players on that list except coach us to a 2-win season with the worst attendance in PBS history.
That's not what you pointed out. You said control, not a say. So you don't think the Bengals killed it with FA this year? I think they did pretty damn good with the list they were given......
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Sled21 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 10:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yeah, right, that is why Zac had so many great signings LAST YEAR.
The front office was just more desperate than they have ever been this year. None of Marvin's teams were as shitty as Zac's was last year. Attendance was never as low when Marvin was HC. So the front office was never this desperate when Marvin was HC.
FFS Fred, he barely got here last year in time to start the season. He had no idea where he needed to improve and was just starting his relationship with ownership. This year he did, and he got the Browns to do it. Why do you have to deny what he's accomplished just because Marvin couldn't?
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Sled21 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 11:12 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Perhaps the lowest attendance in PBS history, the lowest % of tickets sold in the entire league, and pending negotiations with Hamilton County for the lease renewal in 2026, helped motivate the front office to spend more.
To just simply say, Zak Taylor obviously has already gained more influence, or was better able to convince the team to spend in FA than Marvin Lewis is such a simple-minded, ill-informed way of looking at the situation.
That's not to say Taylor wasn't able to make his case here and there, nor does it mean that he hasn't gained influence. It simply means that there is much more to consider in explaining the change in approach, and recent splurge.
The fact of the matter is you have no idea who Marvin Lewis pushed for, or how Taylor's influence compares to Marvin's. And neither do I, or anyone else that isn't in that building.
Sure, we can all speculate. But you should at least put forth the effort to consider other plausible reasons for why this may be.
IMHO, I find it hard to believe that Taylor, or any other coach could come in here and in two years gained greater influence than Marvin. It's clear that Mike Brown greatly respected him, and that was built on a 16 year relationship.
The team really had no choice but to spend this season. the team had a decent amount of space entering the offseason. You then had obvious roster moves made with Dalton and Cordy Glenn, that would free up an enormous amount of space. And you now have a minimum spending requirement in the cap floor that Marvin didn't work with until he was a decade into his tenure. Again, spending was inevitable.
When you consider all of this, and couple it with a half empty stadium, it seems reasonable to believe that perhaps this could also explain why 2020 resulted in record spending.
To ignore all of it, and simply attribute it to "Obviously Zak Taylor got it done, when Marvin couldn't" seems incredibly short-sided.
Are you a new fan? Did you not live through the 90's? If those empty stadiums and losing records didn't make MB change, what makes you think last season did? The only new factor in this equation is Zac Taylor, whether you guys want to admit it or not.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 01:25 PM)Sled21 Wrote: The only new factor in this equation is Zac Taylor, whether you guys want to admit it or not.
He is not new. He was here last year.
Unless. . .
wait for it. . .
Last year does not count and 2020 is really his rookie head coach season.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 01:23 PM)Sled21 Wrote: FFS Fred, he barely got here last year in time to start the season.
Yeah, right, he did not show up at the office from February when he was hired until July.
Then he dazzled the Browns with his ability to coach the Bengals to their worst record in almost 20 years.
Why didn't I think of that?
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - fredtoast - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 01:20 PM)sandwedge Wrote: That's not what you pointed out. You said control, not a say. So you don't think the Bengals killed it with FA this year? I think they did pretty damn good with the list they were given......
I am not arguing semantics. I am just saying it is crazy to think a coach who led us to our worst record in almost 20 years would somehow impress the front office more than any Bengal HC in the history of free agency.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Sled21 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 01:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote:
Yeah, right, he did not show up at the office from February when he was hired until July.
Then he dazzled the Browns with his ability to coach the Bengals to their worst record in almost 20 years.
Why didn't I think of that?
He had to put his staff together, which took time, and did not have a season of evaluation to know who he wanted replaced. It's not rocket science Fred. You can resist the argument that a young energetic new coach could make an impression on an old owner and reinvigorate him to want to win, while an old coach who just told Brown year after year that "we have to coach better and play better.... giggle, could not, but it is what it is.
RE: What exactly was the problem with play calling? - Pat5775 - 05-07-2020
(05-07-2020, 01:23 PM)Sled21 Wrote: FFS Fred, he barely got here last year in time to start the season. He had no idea where he needed to improve and was just starting his relationship with ownership. This year he did, and he got the Browns to do it. Why do you have to deny what he's accomplished just because Marvin couldn't?
I’m fairly certain last season was an extension of training camp for Zac Taylor. He wanted to see what he had with Marvin’s players. Well, it obviously wasn’t much. And he did something about it.
I don’t know if Zac earned Mike’s trust after one season or if he begged and pleaded with Mike to be aggressive in FA... but whatever he did (if anything at all), it worked. The fact of the matter is Zac did more with free agency after one season than Marvin ever did in 16 years. The lackadaisical approach with free agency during Marvin’s tenure is a mystery. But it’s not out of the realm of possibly that Marvin was just going through the motions.