Hey Zac pay attention to Kliff Kingsbury

[*ochocincos*]

(10-19-2020, 10:36 PM)impactplaya Wrote: Watching Kyler Murray run that Kingsbury offense like a machine.
Kingsbury has a natural feel for the game.
He studies tendacies on the defense and exposes it. He is the anti-Zac Taylor.
Christian Kirk did a suttle motion and realigned himself and just smoked
The Cowboys CB on a go.route. Cards up 21 0 now.
At least one NFL team wont choke away a 3 TD lead.

Difference is Kingsbury had documented success in college prior to becoming a HC, so you had a better idea what to expect.
With Taylor, it was much more potential and saying the right things. You hoped he would be good, but his resume didn't give you as much confidence he would be.

[impactplaya]

(10-20-2020, 01:09 PM)ochocincos Wrote: Difference is Kingsbury had documented success in college prior to becoming a HC, so you had a better idea what to expect.
With Taylor, it was much more potential and saying the right things. You hoped he would be good, but his resume didn't give you as much confidence he would be.

Taylors resume is very underwheling. 
And 2 years after him leaving the Rans, its still business as usual with the Rams. Nobody is missing him.in LA.
Especially McVay. 

[corpjet]

(10-20-2020, 10:15 AM)TheFan Wrote: Is your "has won where ever he has gone" comment based off his losing percentage as an NCAA coach or his losing percentage as an NFL coach? 

It's no doubt Zach isn't a good head coach and never should have even been considered for HC. But posts like this and threads like these show just how much people don't watch most games outside of the Bengals. Who can watch the Cardinals and think Kyle Murray is having a good year? The Cowboys are as bad as we are. Should anyone think their coach is the next Billy B. because of a dominating win against us?

Kyler's a worse Lamar Jackson and worse in every single way. In a system designed specifically for him since the day he was drafted.

Disagree, Kliff is "scheming" Kyler well for what he does, Kyler doesn't have to throw for 350 yards to win the game and lets be honest their O-Line isn't much better than ours

He led Texas Tech which was a "dead" program in the Big 12 and not only did he have their offense in the top 25 for several years he led them to 3 Bowls

He's 9-12-1 in his short time in Arizona, that's triple the wins of Zac and took over a team far worse roster than what the Bengals had

[impactplaya]

(10-20-2020, 10:15 AM)TheFan Wrote: Is your "has won where ever he has gone" comment based off his losing percentage as an NCAA coach or his losing percentage as an NFL coach? 

It's no doubt Zach isn't a good head coach and never should have even been considered for HC. But posts like this and threads like these show just how much people don't watch most games outside of the Bengals. Who can watch the Cardinals and think Kyle Murray is having a good year? The Cowboys are as bad as we are. Should anyone think their coach is the next Billy B. because of a dominating win against us?

Kyler's a worse Lamar Jackson and worse in every single way. In a system designed specifically for him since the day he was drafted.

Tell ya what smart guy....switch coaches between the Cards and Bengals which team has a better record now ?

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(10-21-2020, 09:20 AM)corpjet Wrote: Disagree, Kliff is "scheming" Kyler well for what he does, Kyler doesn't have to throw for 350 yards to win the game and lets be honest their O-Line isn't much better than ours

He led Texas Tech which was a "dead" program in the Big 12 and not only did he have their offense in the top 25 for several years he led them to 3 Bowls

He's 9-12-1 in his short time in Arizona, that's triple the wins of Zac and took over a team far worse roster than what the Bengals had

1-2 in those bowls, but a, "dead program?" Huh? Did you even look at the link I posted?

He had, at Texas Tech:

- losing record in bowls, both losses when he didn't take over someone else's team
- 2 winning seasons out of 6, where the first one was an inherited team (outside of QB)
- doing all this in arguably the weakest of the power-5 conferences

Stop ignoring the truth I'm posting; he didn't, "win everywhere," and is far from proven, not to mention TT is still a, "Dead Program."

[TheFan]

(10-21-2020, 10:03 AM)impactplaya Wrote: Tell ya what smart guy....switch coaches between the Cards and Bengals which team has a better record now ?

Me and you could have probably coached this team to a better record. That's just how bad Zach Taylor is as a head coach not because Kliff is some savior. He might end up being the next greatest thing but he's not done anything so far to prove coaches should start modeling after him. 

[TheFan]

(10-21-2020, 09:20 AM)corpjet Wrote: Disagree, Kliff is "scheming" Kyler well for what he does, Kyler doesn't have to throw for 350 yards to win the game and lets be honest their O-Line isn't much better than ours

He led Texas Tech which was a "dead" program in the Big 12 and not only did he have their offense in the top 25 for several years he led them to 3 Bowls

He's 9-12-1 in his short time in Arizona, that's triple the wins of Zac and took over a team far worse roster than what the Bengals had

Are you kidding me? He had Patrick Mahomes. Obviously they're going to put up some huge numbers. Outside of you who claimed they were a dead program? The only time that may have been mentioned is once he left them. 

In the 6 years Kilff was there they went 35-40.

In the 6 years prior to Kliff they went 50-27.

[impactplaya]

(10-21-2020, 12:28 PM)TheFan Wrote: Me and you could have probably coached this team to a better record. That's just how bad Zach Taylor is as a head coach not because Kliff is some savior. He might end up being the next greatest thing but he's not done anything so far to prove coaches should start modeling after him. 

Well said. Rep.time 

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(10-20-2020, 12:30 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: Didn't make it any easier on Zac Taylor when he started out with a 21-0 lead.

We got outscored 31-6 from that point on.

Some coaches stay aggressive, and some coaches piss thier pants.  And our HC/OC had a big old wet spot on his trousers, and a puddle surroudning him like a moat.

Reminds me of our last HC, but probably even worse. Hell the record speaks for itself under this clown.

[jj22]

It's going to be a long 16 years.

[corpjet]

for all the hate on Kliff K, how about a win in Seattle last night, last time I checked he's doing a lot better in the same time frame as ZT.

Admit KK is twice the coach ZT is

[TheFan]

(10-26-2020, 09:42 AM)corpjet Wrote: for all the hate on Kliff K, how about a win in Seattle last night, last time I checked he's doing a lot better in the same time frame as ZT.

Admit KK is twice the coach ZT is

I'm not sure wins on the road are all that impressive this year seeing as there's basically no home field advantage. 

That said, again, Kliff could end up being a great coach but why do people think being better than Taylor makes you good? That's like saying Taylor has done better than Hue did in Cleveland so that makes him impressive. 

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(10-26-2020, 09:42 AM)corpjet Wrote: for all the hate on Kliff K, how about a win in Seattle last night, last time I checked he's doing a lot better in the same time frame as ZT.

Admit KK is twice the coach ZT is

1. It was a win at home. Nice try.
2. His defence actually created turnovers, from a QB that has been the best in the league this year; chalk this up to a bad game by Russell
3. Yup, great offense that can't move the ball unless the QB runs or there is quite a bit of dink and dunk.

You're a Kingsbury-lover, fine. But the guy is not some savior and his team did not look that great, yesterday evening.

On a side-note, Fitzgerald looks horrifically-slow and just a complete shell of his former self; found it preposterous that they were coming him to Rice last night, especially since Rice put up 2 more 1,000 yard seasons, *2 YEARS AFTER FITZGERALD'S CURRENT AGE-37 YEAR,* and played in an era when the run game was much more-important.

[corpjet]

(10-26-2020, 11:36 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: 1. It was a win at home. Nice try.
2. His defence actually created turnovers, from a QB that has been the best in the league this year; chalk this up to a bad game by Russell
3. Yup, great offense that can't move the ball unless the QB runs or there is quite a bit of dink and dunk.

You're a Kingsbury-lover, fine. But the guy is not some savior and his team did not look that great, yesterday evening.

On a side-note, Fitzgerald looks horrifically-slow and just a complete shell of his former self; found it preposterous that they were coming him to Rice last night, especially since Rice put up 2 more 1,000 yard seasons, *2 YEARS AFTER FITZGERALD'S CURRENT AGE-37 YEAR,* and played in an era when the run game was much more-important.

1.  Road/Home, does it matter this year??
2.  So you mean he hired a Defensive coordinator who is capable unlike our hire of Sweet Lou?  Man genius idea!
3.  Do what you have to?  Who cares if they dink and dunk, a W is a W and he has 3x plus what ZT has.

When we lose to TN next week Zac will have the worst start to a NFL coaching career ever.

Larry Fitz is getting long in the tooth like AJ, both HOF'ers whose careers are coming to an end.

[TheFan]

(10-26-2020, 11:36 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: On a side-note, Fitzgerald looks horrifically-slow and just a complete shell of his former self; found it preposterous that they were coming him to Rice last night, especially since Rice put up 2 more 1,000 yard seasons, *2 YEARS AFTER FITZGERALD'S CURRENT AGE-37 YEAR,* and played in an era when the run game was much more-important.

I feel like Rice putting up those numbers in an era when most defenses schemed and had players to stop the run actually makes players today look more impressive. It's not like Rice was putting up those numbers with fewer touches. He was getting just as many targets as pretty much any top receiver in today's game except he was going against completely different defenses that weren't specifically designed to stop the pass. 

In the 12 years of his career they kept track of targets, in 6 of them Rice had over 150 Targets. AJ Green has seen that many targets twice in his entire career. 

[corpjet]

(10-26-2020, 10:08 AM)TheFan Wrote: I'm not sure wins on the road are all that impressive this year seeing as there's basically no home field advantage. 

That said, again, Kliff could end up being a great coach but why do people think being better than Taylor makes you good? That's like saying Taylor has done better than Hue did in Cleveland so that makes him impressive. 

Being better than ZT doesn't, I think in this scenario we were comparing the 2 as new NFL head coaches.

Joe Reedy shared a stat today on his Twitter account thats not in ZTs favor, basically said if/when we lose to the Titans it will be the worst start of any NFL coaches career. The last coach to do that (Jim Ringo) got fired before his 24th game.

[Wes Mantooth]

If you can't admit that Kliff Kingsbury has done a nice job with the Cardinals then you're not being fair, or you're ill-informed. Same goes for not easily admitting that he's clearly been superior to Zac Taylor thus far.

--- Zac Taylor took over a 6-10 team and proceeded to go 2-14 in year 1. Thus far he's 1-5-1 in year 2. (3-19-1 overall record)

--- Kliff Kingsbury took over a 3-13 team and proceeded to go 5-10-1 in year 1. Thus far he's 5-2 in year 2. (10-12-1 overall record)

There's been steady growth there in Arizona. And if you watch their games, their offense is both creative and exciting.

Murray is currently on pace for 4,221 yards, with 30 passing TD's. He's on pace for 999 yards rushing, with 16 rushing TD's. He's on pace for a total yardage season that's equal to that of Lamar Jackson's MVP year in 2019. He's on pace for more total TD's.

You cannot scoff at the level of development. Their QB, along with their entire offense is looks very good right now. They have the highest ranked offense in the NFL right now at 420 yards a game.

I just don't why anyone would argue against the idea that's done a good job. Does that mean it's guaranteed to continue forever, and he's a HOF coach? No, of course not. But you can't ignore the results thus far.

Lastly, I saw someone mention that he had Patrick Mahomes, as if that was the only reason for his perceived success. Does he not get some credit for recruiting that kid, ultimately getting him to that school, and then helping him develop into a top 15 pick? Mahomes was a 3 star recruit, who only had other offers from Oklahoma State and Rice.

I would argue that bringing up Mahomes is only another feather in the cap, in the idea that this guy is one of the best young offensive minds in the game.

[Wes Mantooth]

(10-26-2020, 11:36 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: 3. Yup, great offense that can't move the ball unless the QB runs or there is quite a bit of dink and dunk.

An offense that is #1 in the NFL in yards per game?

That offense?

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(10-26-2020, 05:48 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: An offense that is #1 in the NFL in yards per game?

That offense?

They aren't #1.

And anyways, the fanboy I'm responding has made (false) claims about a coach he clearly has a hard-on for, that's the only reason I posted ITT to begin with.

[corpjet]

Updating those that still want to hate on Kliff K, he currently has the less talented Cardinals tied for 1st place in the tough NFC West and 3 times the wins of Zac.

Can those haters admit that he may be a better coach than Zac.

Listen Zac isn’t going anywhere we know that, he will have another year to right the ship, but this team hasn’t turned the corner.