(04-08-2016, 10:37 AM)Devils Advocate Wrote: I disagree that Jay walked into a QB controversy. He was hand picked to develop RG, not Kirk Cousins. Only he Quickly found out, as his predecessor did, that RG was not multidimensional.  Either way, that franchise was certainly a mess as the rumor goes, in large part because of RG. Jay's done a fine job for them but that division is whack. I honestly don't believe he'll last more than another coupla years there. If it weren't for Cousins being competent, I'd say Jay would already be in danger. 

Mike Zimmer is a fine coach. Not surprised he's had success. 

Marvin's done some nice things here and although some draft choices were more obvious than others, he gets some credit for finding some decent players even some all pros. 

This organization was in as much dysfunction as any have ever been when Marvin took over. We haven't had to wear bags over our head in many years. Even when our all world QB 'retired'. You can say Jay chose Andy but that decision at some point had to be approved by Marvin, at least initially. Because I guarantee that without his approval, no way Mike Brown doesn't go after that other QB he wanted. 

Maybe no other coach would get as many chances to rebuild a team like Marvin has, but he's answered the call each time. By my estimation, he's (re)built this team 3 times. 

In case it hasn't been posted, someone in the FO said that the OP was bunk. 

(04-08-2016, 11:50 AM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: How is it not a quarterback controversy when you have to bench your number two overall pick, the guy who was chosen to be the face of the franchise?  It took real balls to stand up to Daniel Snyder and not play RGIII.  Also, any coach without a competent quarterback is in danger... it is a quarterback driven league.  If you don't have one, you are desperately trying to find one.

(04-08-2016, 01:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: If you don't think there was any QB controversy in Washington, I'm really not sure how to convince you otherwise. There was arguably controversy from the moment Kirk Cousins was drafted. RGIII was benched for the last 3 games of '13. While Shanny claimed it was to rest RGIII and "prevent injury", many viewed it as an excuse to get Cousins on the field. 

You're right that Jay was picked to resurrect RGIII's career (Dan Snider was pretty much in RGIII's back pocket), but that doesn't mean there wasn't a groundswell of support for Cousins. Either way, for Jay to stand up to Snyder and play Cousins took serious guts, and it paid off. Jay deserves a lot of praise for getting the Skins through that storm. It very well could've turned out much worse, and honestly I thought it was headed that way. No one expected the Skins to go 9-7 last year. 

No doubt the Bengals had been bad for a long time when Marv came along, but it's really undeniable that most of the key pieces were already there for him. Carson Palmer was the consensus #1 pick and would've been a Bengal with or without Marvin. Plus all the other players I mentioned. So I'm not sure how Marv rebuilt the Bengals when most of the core was already there. 

Marv was definitely the best coach we'd had since Wyche, but I tend to believe that a team with Palmer, Chad, TJ, Warrick, Rudi, Willie, Levi, Justin, Brian Simmons, etc would've been competitive with any competent HC. Does anyone really think we would've went 4-12 with that group had we hired Coughlin or Denny Green instead? The Bengals were bad because they'd been drafting poorly through the 90's. 

But right before Marv arrived, the Bengals started hitting on several draft picks. Those picks were green in 2002, but we started seeing rewards in 2003 and beyond. Palmer was also the best QB prospect we ever had the opportunity to take. I know this idea takes away from the "Marv is a hero" narrative, but I believe the Bengals were in much better shape for the future than their record indicated at the time.

To finally wrap this up, I think Marv is a fine coach who really brought a steady hand to the organization, but I really think he gets to too much credit for "rebuilding". (3 rebuilds? When was the 3rd one?)

(04-08-2016, 01:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: If you don't think there was any QB controversy in Washington, I'm really not sure how to convince you otherwise. There was arguably controversy from the moment Kirk Cousins was drafted. RGIII was benched for the last 3 games of '13. While Shanny claimed it was to rest RGIII and "prevent injury", many viewed it as an excuse to get Cousins on the field. 

You're right that Jay was picked to resurrect RGIII's career (Dan Snider was pretty much in RGIII's back pocket), but that doesn't mean there wasn't a groundswell of support for Cousins. Either way, for Jay to stand up to Snyder and play Cousins took serious guts, and it paid off. Jay deserves a lot of praise for getting the Skins through that storm. It very well could've turned out much worse, and honestly I thought it was headed that way. No one expected the Skins to go 9-7 last year. 

No doubt the Bengals had been bad for a long time when Marv came along, but it's really undeniable that most of the key pieces were already there for him. Carson Palmer was the consensus #1 pick and would've been a Bengal with or without Marvin. Plus all the other players I mentioned. So I'm not sure how Marv rebuilt the Bengals when most of the core was already there. 

Marv was definitely the best coach we'd had since Wyche, but I tend to believe that a team with Palmer, Chad, TJ, Warrick, Rudi, Willie, Levi, Justin, Brian Simmons, etc would've been competitive with any competent HC. Does anyone really think we would've went 4-12 with that group had we hired Coughlin or Denny Green instead? The Bengals were bad because they'd been drafting poorly through the 90's. 

But right before Marv arrived, the Bengals started hitting on several draft picks. Those picks were green in 2002, but we started seeing rewards in 2003 and beyond. Palmer was also the best  2nd best behind Greg Cook, QB prospect we ever had the opportunity to take. I know this idea takes away from the "Marv is a hero" narrative, but I believe the Bengals were in much better shape for the future than their record indicated at the time.

To finally wrap this up, I think Marv is a fine coach who really brought a steady hand to the organization, but I really think he gets to too much credit for "rebuilding". (3 rebuilds? When was the 3rd one?)

(04-08-2016, 01:58 PM)WrongVerb Wrote: I tend to think of Lewis' tenure in two segments: pre-2010 with Palmer and post-2010 with Dalton. And Brown is right, this Lewis-Dalton era should have gone further than it has. This season should be put up or shut up for Lewis.

My only fear is that if Lewis is fired and there isn't consistency going forward, you're going to wind up with something like what they're seeing in Philly. Hopefully PG or KZ will take over.

My only other comment is that I still think the team should have hired Zimmer as HC and moved Lewis upstairs to help with player personnel decisions.

(04-07-2016, 04:21 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The Redskins had the #5 defense in the league the year Marvin was there



Everyone that followed Marvin benefittied from the defense that MARVIN built.  That defense was ranked 24th the year before he arrived and 30th in his first year.  Marvin was the one that built it into one of the greatest in history.


Zimmer took over a team that was one year removed from making the playoffs and had a losing season.

Gruden took over a team that was one year removed from making the playoffs and only won 4 games.

Marvin took over a team that had not had a winning record in 13 years and had a .500 season.

(04-08-2016, 11:12 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: Guess we can all make fun of the d bag that wrote this article now. Wonder who his "sources" were?

(04-08-2016, 02:06 PM)Devils Advocate Wrote: No, I agree with what you and OB say. I just don't really think 'QB controversy' accurately describes the situation to what Jay walked into. I guess it's just my contrarian nature. 

I give Marvin credit for turning this franchise around regardless of who he had on the roster. I can't say things woulda been different if any other coach were hired. I do know how things were right up to the point Marvin first stepped onto the field. For that, I don't see how he doesn't deserve credit. So for me, that counts as 1 build.

 Around 08/09 I give him credit for a rebuild because this team was falling apart. I realize many may not agree. But at least agree that despite all the chaos in those days, Marvin managed to hold it together and even squeeze into the playoffs a coupla times. Yeah there was still talent on the roster but looking back at it its a wonder the wheels didn't fall completely off, like they eventually did. 

 I don't know, I just think those few years were crazy and he managed to keep it together, so That's 2.  

Of course he gets credit for This 3rd and our current era. 

(04-08-2016, 05:25 PM)PDub80 Wrote: - They were #5 in yards, Fred. You should get a temporary ban for all of the trolling you do. You took a specific sliver of a statistical category and are putting it out there as an overall rating. Why don't you just list what they ranked in turn overs and say that's their overall defensive ranking, too? Or sacks? Does this work in the backwoods hills you allegedly practice law in?

The Redskins were #21 in points allowed meaning they ranked 21st in overall/total defense. As Marvin, Guenther, and Zimmer have all pointed out in previous interviews: Points allowed is the king stat on D. There is no close 2nd. To bring up yards is just trolling and being contrarian. Strangly, Fred, in 2001 the Redskins D was ranked 13th overall http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2001/opp.htm and then Marvin showed up for one season in 2002 and they dropped like a rock down to 21st http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2002/opp.htm

(04-08-2016, 05:25 PM)PDub80 Wrote: - Other people already swatted away the fart cloud of nonsense you spewed out championing how good the Redskins and Vikings were before Gruden & Zimmer. SO good they fired their coaches.   

(04-08-2016, 05:25 PM)PDub80 Wrote: And, after Carson publicly took a dump all over him and Mike Brown, the organization finally changed for the better. That was more of a function of Carson's public shaming for their failures more than it is a product of an average coach achieving a shade above mediocrity year after year.

(04-08-2016, 05:25 PM)PDub80 Wrote: - Honestly, you turn almost every thread on these forums into a virtual troll fest of a shit sandwich - all centered around you. I hope a mod takes a half hour to go through oh, I don't know, the current 2 pages of topics to take a look at how they all end up centered around you basically trolling and taking a virtual dump in them and at least considers a temporary vacation for you so you can focus on your personal life and get your head straight.

(04-09-2016, 12:34 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Obviously I don't totally agree, but I respect your opinion. I think this last reboot is the one he deserves the most credit for, but even then, I think a lot of people give too much credit to Marv and not enough to those around him. Tobin deserves a lot of praise for finding gems like Atkins, MJ, Iloka and Marv Jones in later rounds. 

And as I pointed out, I think the Bengals started drafting better before Marv arrived. I just don't think the turnaround should be 100% credited to Marv. Think about this: we hired Duke Tobin in 1999. By 2003, we really started seeing the benefits of his first few drafts.