Marvin Lewis Number 1 failure

[Hoofhearted]

(10-10-2016, 12:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it was not clear at all.

If it was that cut and dried then Marvin would be getting long contract extensions instead of just one year at a time.

Did they interview anyone else?


Giving one year deals is not a ringing endorsement, but going against nobody at all gives it little credence. 

[fredtoast]

(10-10-2016, 01:13 PM)Hoofhearted Wrote: Did they interview anyone else?


Giving one year deals is not a ringing endorsement, but going against nobody at all gives it little credence. 

I have never in my life heard of an NFL team interviewing other head coaching candidates before giving their current coach an extension.

Have you?

[PDub80]

(10-10-2016, 12:49 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it was not clear at all.

If it was that cut and dried then Marvin would be getting long contract extensions instead of just one year at a time.

Fred,

It has been well reported over the years that Marvin is the one not going for long term deals. Similar to LeBron holding Cleveland over a barrel. Stop interpreting that to mean Mike Brown is some sort of contract savant. Marvin is holding management by the balls (smart in his part) not the other way around. They love him there.

Also, to address your saying I fail at logic a few pages back... YOU literally brought up the Pats and their record against bad teams in one paragraph and then in the same paragraphed brought up the Bengals being allowed to do the same. That is called a comparison. For you to come back and tell me you weren't comparing is moronic. You clearly were and then decided you weren't after I pointed out how stupid that would be. I'm not some backwoods mouth breather from whatever part of TN or WV you reside. Please HD yourself accountable for all of the lead paint chips you ate as a kid that make you try and double back in stuff you say or don't post dumb shit.

I swear, man, sometimes I think you sniff glue before you log on.

[Antares]

(10-06-2016, 12:01 PM)mhbsavant Wrote: The biggest problem with Marvin Lewis is how he continues to make the statement that "we need to do better." He acts as if the guys on the other team are not lifting weights and collecting paychecks. Could it be that the other coach saw fitting that the "we need to do better" ship needs to sail on and decided to just out-coach the man across the field from him? Has Bellicheck ever said we need to do better?

Every time "Mr. LET'S GO" says we need to do better is like he is acknowledging the team's failures as the player's fault only along with their inability to will their way on their opponent regardless of the other coaches half time adjustments. He has always been POOR in his adjustments because he figures we should just do better the next time, why adjust anything!

Exactly.

He can't beat Pittsburgh.
He can't win a playoff game.
He struggles big time against quality opponents.
He NEVER goes as far as his teams talent should take him.

So why is he here? What's the point?

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-09-2016, 11:11 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: When do players get held accountable? ML and the staff had this team in position to win against a very good Steelers team with a backup QB? Did ML fumble that shot away? No, he did not. Our players have to figure a way to win playoff games too, not just the head coach. As far as only real winner each year is the Super Bowl winner, it is true, but I can tell you it is a lot more fun cheering for our team in January and losing than ignoring them by mid October because they had not shot at the playoffs. As a season ticket holder in those down years, I could not give away my 2 seats to a Bengals fan and I found other things to do on game day.

We hashed this out on the mother ship.  Are we to believe that we constantly draft, sign, and trade for players that just so happen to be choke artists?  Or, do we have a problem with piss poor coaching teaching situational football?

[Benton]

(10-10-2016, 10:54 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I have to agree here.  When we kept Marvin after 2010 it was clear he was going to be here for life, good or ill.

I dunno.

I think part of the Marvin situation (that finally may have a light at the end of the tunnel for those not liking Marvin), is the people in place. His first several years, a lot of the guys in place weren't Marvin's guys. Those were weeded out and Marvin's guys (or at least the guys installed during his tenure) were put in place. And we had success with that staff. Enough success that those  coaches have been picked off here and there.

But they haven't been replaced with the same level of coaching.

Completely my opinion, but I think part of the reason Mike has left Marvin in control so much was because there was a good structure in place. One of the first hurdles you have to overcome with a new HC is getting him and the current staff on board or cleaning house and getting a staff in place that compliments what he's trying to do.

With several of the better parts of the staff gone, I think it would be easier to transition.

[*Nately120*]

(10-10-2016, 02:56 PM)Benton Wrote: With several of the better parts of the staff gone, I think it would be easier to transition.

It's possible.  I've said it may be better to replace a HC BEFORE we are 3-13 and have no QB, but the Bears kicked out Lovie Smith when they were 10-6 and Cutler wasn't an abortion and they just slid right down the hill since.  

[JumboTron]

Marvin all but earned the "Job For Life" title in 2005. His first two seasons in '03 and '04 he went 8-8. Those seasons came on the heels of the atrocity that was the 90's (Shula and Coslet) and very early 2000's under the LeBeau regime. He next followed those years up with the 2005 season which had both the fans and franchise reliving the magic of '88 and allowed both to dare to realistically dream about holding a Lombardi, (we won't go down the road of what ended up happening that season).

Point is after that 2005 season I believe the thought in and around the organization was Lewis is the guy and will be the guy until Lewis himself wants out. A clunker or two of a season will be tolerated or all but brushed aside as Marvin has pulled us out of the embarrassing sh*t-storm that was the decade+ prior.

Mike Brown is really not interested in moving on from Lewis and this may be born out of equal parts laziness and fear. One way of thinking is what many of us fans subscribe to, and that is the franchise may be just one head coach hire away from a championship or at the very least a substantial upgrade from yearly one-and-done exits from the postseason.

The other way is that we also may be one hire away from returning to being THE laughingstock of the NFL. The result of that is maintaining the status-quo and just living with Lewis be it good, bad or ugly. Lewis is just "good enough" during the season and that means he is just "good enough" for this organization because it could be worse right? The latter of which is seems to be the one that Mike Brown operates on.

Just my two cents.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-10-2016, 02:56 PM)Benton Wrote: I dunno.

I think part of the Marvin situation (that finally may have a light at the end of the tunnel for those not liking Marvin), is the people in place. His first several years, a lot of the guys in place weren't Marvin's guys. Those were weeded out and Marvin's guys (or at least the guys installed during his tenure) were put in place. And we had success with that staff. Enough success that those  coaches have been picked off here and there.

But they haven't been replaced with the same level of coaching.

Completely my opinion, but I think part of the reason Mike has left Marvin in control so much was because there was a good structure in place. One of the first hurdles you have to overcome with a new HC is getting him and the current staff on board or cleaning house and getting a staff in place that compliments what he's trying to do.

With several of the better parts of the staff gone, I think it would be easier to transition.

.....but even Marv was saddled with ol Liberace, and he's STILL here.

[*Nately120*]

(10-10-2016, 03:56 PM)Wyche Wrote: .....but even Marv was saddled with ol Liberace, and he's STILL here.

Here is a pic of him working with TO and Chad from 2010!

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(10-10-2016, 04:03 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Here is a pic of him working with TO and Chad from 2010!

Taken shortly before he vouched for "Nasty" Nate Livings.....one of the most vile villains ever.....the human turnstile!

[Antares]

(10-06-2016, 04:48 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: In my opinion the lack of success in the post season may be due to Marvin Lewis treating playoff games as "Just another game" when clearly it is not. If the coach treats playoff games as "Just another game" then the rest of the team will as well.

And the 21 losses to Pittsburgh? Are those simply another game too?

[Pat5775]

(10-10-2016, 02:45 PM)Antares Wrote: Exactly.

He can't beat Pittsburgh.
He can't win a playoff game.
He struggles big time against quality opponents.
He NEVER goes as far as his teams talent should take him.

So why is he here? What's the point?

Hmm... I wonder... Does he even want to beat Pittsburgh? He is from the area and likely grew up a fan of the team. Maybe beating the steelers isn't high on his priority list? 



 

[fredtoast]

(10-10-2016, 02:36 PM)PDub80 Wrote: Also, to address your saying I fail at logic a few pages back... YOU literally brought up the Pats and their record against bad teams in one paragraph and then in the same paragraphed brought up the Bengals being allowed to do the same. That is called a comparison. For you to come back and tell me you weren't comparing is moronic. You clearly were and then decided you weren't after I pointed out how stupid that would be. I'm not some backwoods mouth breather from whatever part of TN or WV you reside. Please HD yourself accountable for all of the lead paint chips you ate as a kid that make you try and double back in stuff you say or don't post dumb shit.

I swear, man, sometimes I think you sniff glue before you log on.

this is classic comedy.  PDub bragging about how he is so much smarter than everyone else from where I live yet totally failing to recognize a critique of a logical argument and instead calling it a "comparison".

My post was a critique of the logic being used to prove that the Bengals did not look like a Super Bowl team because they lost to the Texans.  I proved that this logic failed because other teams like the Broncos and Patriots actually lost to worse teams than the Texans.  You can't try to make a logical argument but then claim that the logic only applies to one team and not others.

If loosing to a lesser team is proof that a team does not look like a Super Bowl team then that logic has to apply to all teams.   Otherwise the logic fails.

And if Pdub wants to insist that his logic is still sound I will destroy that claim with a long list of Super Bowl teams that lost to lesser teams during the regular season.

What do you say Pdub?