(03-16-2017, 04:38 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.  But "re-examined" should not mean "accept message board myth that is not supported by fact".

I'll give you a perfect example.  People here constantly cry about how the Bengals lose so many games because Marvin is too conservative.  But when I ask for examples of games we have lost because Marvin is too conservative the response I often get is "0-7" or "0-13" instead of an actual list of games we lost because he was too conservative.  I post statistics about where the Bengals rank as far as "throwing the ball with a lead in the second half".  I post examples of the Bengals and other teams losing games because they were so aggressive.  I post stats from games where Bill Belichick ran the ball consistently with a lead in the second half.  But none of this matters.  I guarantee that there will still be lots of postrs this year about how Marvin loses a bunch of games because he is too conservative and how he should be more like Belichick who never takes his foot off the gas.


So I am glad to "re-examine" any approach.  All I ask is that people use some sort of logical argument to support their position.

(03-16-2017, 04:14 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Why would I base my opinion on "net negative" when it has been positive for the last few years.

I honestly thought the bengals had a championship caliber team before Dalton went down in '15.  The '05 team, while not as good overall as the '15 team, was a threat to win any game they played.

I don't see what the teams from the '90's have to do with the teams of the last several years. 

People who act like nothing has changed in 26 years just have not paid attention.

(03-16-2017, 04:26 PM)Wyche Wrote:  Blow it up and get winners.  See, it really is kind of a simple concept.

(03-16-2017, 04:26 PM)Wyche Wrote: This shit of sticking with the status quo, isn't getting it done.

(03-16-2017, 04:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it is such a simple concept then why has no team in history turned over its entire roster and coaching staff to start over.

It is easy to say change, but what exactly are the details.  Change for the sake of change does not fix anything.  you have to identify the specific problems in order to improve them.  Otherwise you will probably change tonnew problems or just keep repeating the old ones.




Then why are so many people squealing about all the recent turnover on the roster?

(03-16-2017, 04:44 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: We both see that they had a championship caliber team for a few years. I see it as squandered opportunity that they didn't win 1 playoff game over that span. You see it is a positive that they played well during the regular season.

(03-16-2017, 04:05 PM)Wyche Wrote: I mean.....there was no hyperbole between you and I there....you said if something doesn't work for 30 years, maybe it's time to try something else.  I noted that it really is that simple.  Like.....I don't know, hire some more freakin scouts,  hire a freakin GM, shit can some lifers....you know, simple.

(03-16-2017, 04:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Actually I am capable of seeing as BOTH a squandered opportunity to be upset over and a good sign that they played well enough to make the playoffs.

Too bad so many people are limited and unable to see both sides like me.

(03-16-2017, 04:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it is such a simple concept then why has no team in history turned over its entire roster and coaching staff to start over.

It is easy to say change, but what exactly are the details.  Change for the sake of change does not fix anything.  you have to identify the specific problems in order to improve them.  Otherwise you will probably change tonnew problems or just keep repeating the old ones.




Then why are so many people squealing about all the recent turnover on the roster?

(03-16-2017, 04:55 PM)OrlandoBengal Wrote: I may not have been clear, I did not mean to imply there was.  You and I are on the same page.  If you've been following a system for three decades without achieving your ultimate goal (assuming Wild Card losses are not that goal) then one would logically assume you would make radical changes in philosophy and approach.

(03-16-2017, 04:59 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Because people are seeing the turnover in the form of the good players leaving, not improving the weaknesses. The fans want to see the turnover with the lower performing players and/or "problem children", e.g. Rey Maualuga, Adam Jones, Russell Bodine, Michael Johnson.

(03-16-2017, 04:43 PM)Wyche Wrote: I haven't said a word about Marv being too conservative since you showed those numbers.  That said, logic says, if it's broken, fix it.  The Bengals need to find out what the root cause is here....and address it.  They are the professionals, they are the ones making millions.  Win a damn playoff game already.

One thing that seems to be lacking, from the outside looking in, is lack of accountability.  There is so much secrecy surrounding this team, it's hard to get a read.  THAT is a big reason you see so much speculation on here.....what the hell else is there to go by?

(03-16-2017, 04:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If it is such a simple concept then why has no team in history turned over its entire roster and coaching staff to start over.

It is easy to say change, but what exactly are the details.  Change for the sake of change does not fix anything.  you have to identify the specific problems in order to improve them.  Otherwise you will probably change tonnew problems or just keep repeating the old ones.

(03-16-2017, 04:48 PM)Wyche Wrote:  We've had essentially three rosters during Marv's tenure, with the same results.

(03-16-2017, 05:08 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: In my opinion, and yes I know I'm just a 'message board poster'...there are 3 things that the Bengals could try, which they haven't to this point, that would definitely be a change in approach and that could 'potentially' lead to better overall results:

Mike retires as Bengals President and gives Katie the opportunity to freely run the franchise.

Hire an experienced/respected football person (from outside the organization) to be a true GM.

Take a chance in free agency (when needed) as far as signing a top tier player now and then. 

(03-16-2017, 05:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I believe that one (and possibly 2) of those rosters would have bee successful in the postseason if they had kept their starting QBs healthy.

I certainly would not have complained if they had let Marvin go.  But I don't believe it is impossible for us to win a Championship with him as HC.  He has won a Super bowl before.  He has seen how has seen how it is done.  Over the last few years he has started beating the better teams in the league.  Almost all of his playoff losses have been to better teams.  The '14 loss was a nightmare, but other than that the other team was usually better.

(03-16-2017, 05:14 PM)Wyche Wrote: 'holic....that's truly all I've wanted to see done for the better part of a decade.  Maybe send some lifers packing.....

(03-16-2017, 05:20 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: I think that's honestly where the majority of the frustration in the fanbase comes from. There's no good reason why these things can't or shouldn't happen...except that one very stubborn old man refuses to let it happen.

(03-16-2017, 05:17 PM)Wyche Wrote: .....and that's where your GM comes in with giving you the pieces to complete the puzzle, instead of the annual dumpster dive.  I go back and forth on Marvin in my head......on one hand, I want to lay it all solely at his feet, while acknowledging his deliverance.  On the other, I think...."what if he's truly being handcuffed"?  As I alluded to earlier, there's so much secrecy as to who actually does what in this side show, it's hard to get a handle on just who is (mostly) to blame.

(03-16-2017, 05:08 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: In my opinion, and yes I know I'm just a 'message board poster'...there are 3 things that the Bengals could try, which they haven't to this point, that would definitely be a change in approach and that could 'potentially' lead to better overall results:

Mike retires as Bengals President and gives Katie the opportunity to freely run the franchise.

Hire an experienced/respected football person (from outside the organization) to be a true GM.

Take a chance in free agency (when needed) as far as signing a top tier player now and then. 

(03-16-2017, 12:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Can we all please stop with this little game where you pick a player or coach with a good reputation and try to claim he agrees with you? 

Whit just left the Bengals who had made the playoffs 6 of the last 8 years for a team that has not even had a single winning season in 13 years, and you claim he left because he wants to play for a team that is serious about winning a Super Bowl? 

Do you realize how stupid that sounds?

Whit said he loves the Bengals.  he respects them so much that he wants to retire as a Bengal.  Yet you cite him as a fellow hater that claims the Bengals do not even want to win a Super Bowl.

You are entitled to your opinion.  But this little game of claiming that guys like Whit agree with you is just silly.