Marvin Lewis Number 1 failure

[*rfaulk34*]

(10-07-2016, 12:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: From what I can see it is not just one single thing.  Personally I don't think that coaching in the postseason is that much different than coaching in the regular season.  Pretty much the best regular season coaches are also the best post season coaches.  Marvin is an anomaly.  If there really was some super secret to being a better post season coach than regular season coach then I think we would see a lot more examples of coaches like Marvin who have strikingly different records in the post season than in the regular season.  

Most of his career Marvin has not had the talent to win championships.  His '05 team had an elite offense but did not have the defense to win a championship.  

'05 team was destroyed by injury and suspension in just two seasons.  By '08 ..... Braham-gone, Pollack-gone, Thurman-gone, Henry-gone, Deltha Oneal-gone, Rudi-gone, Levi Jones-never returned to pre-injury level,  Willie Anderson-never returned to pre-injury form.  Plus they lost Justin Smith and Eric Steinbach to free-agency.

'09 team was smoke an mirrors.  Marvin did a great job getting 10 wins out of a team with so little talent, but when Chris Henry was lost to injury our entire passing game collapsed and the offense crashed.  But Marvin brought back the unbalanced line (mainly because 3 of his starters were undrafted free agents with just 6 total NFL starts), and got some decent production form cheap cast offs (Benson, Dhani Jones, Tank Johnson).  Plus Mike Zimmer arrived and fixed our defense.  Marvin was hired as a defensive guru, but he never had a good defense until Zimmer arrived.  However by the end of the year that team was running on fumes.  Over their last 5 games they were 1-4 and outscored 65-118.  They were 2.5 point favorites in the playoff game, but that team really didn't have the talent to win a playoff game against a team that both the #1 defense in the league and the #1 rushing game.

'10 was a dumpster fire.  Because of all the drama and magic surrounding the '09 team (multiple come-from-behind last minute wins, the Vicki Zimmer game, the Chris Henry game) many people did not realize how deeply flawed they were.  TO was seen as the missing piece for a Super Bowl contender.  Then the wheels fell off.  I really can not argue with anyone who called for Marvin to be fired after the '10 season.  At that point he had had 8 years and he did not look close to winning a championship.

However, even though many experts claimed we wopuld be the worst team in the league in '11 Marvin made the playoffs with a rookie starting QB.  But the Bengals were 4 point underdogs on the road in both the '11 and '12 playoffs.

'13 was the first time that the Bengals were favored to win a playoff game and they laid a big egg at home.  I was there and as disgusted as everyone else, but at that point the Bengals were winning against good teams during the regular season.  I really felt that we had what it took to beat good teams in the playoffs.  

'14 team was destroyed by injury.

'15 team was missing starting QB but lost in a melt down.

Marvin is obviously not an elite NFL, coach but he does not deserve much of the criticism he gets around here for certain issues.  He struggles a bit with clock management, but that has never cost us a game.  He is criticized for not "making adjustments", but the numbers show that his teams do well in the third quarter and come form behind to win more than most other teams.  He gets criticized for being too conservative with a lead, but again the numbers show that he is about league average when it comes to running the ball with a lead int he second half.  In fact one loss I blame on coaching was against Tampa Bay in '10 when the Bengals threw the ball when they should not have.  He gets criticized for using time out  early but I see other teams do that all the time.  

But the criticism for his sideline demeanor and press conferences is just ridiculous.  In fact it proves my point that many people here have a personal hatred for Marvin more because of his personality than how he coaches.  Personally I don't care about a coaches demeanor as long as he is not embarrassing the team.  Screaming and yelling is not as effective as many people here think.  It might work with high school kids, but you don't win at the NFL based on your ability to scream.

So I think Marvin does not have one big weakness.  Instead it is a lot of little things.  

Finally I think too many people around here give coaching all the blame and credit for everything, but in fact, except for a couple of rare exceptions pretty much every coach has an up and down career that include winning seasons and losing seasons.  Marvin has not had "the most talented roster in the league" like some people claim.  The players who vote for the top 100 players do not agree.  the fans who vote for the pro Bowl do not agree.  The media members who pick the All-pro teams do not agree.  In fact the only people making that claim are usually trying to make up a reason to blame Marvin.

It might be a very simplistic answer, but my belief has always been that Marv's approach has always been the issue. There are obviously different kinds of coaches and the way they approach, teach and react to things. Fiery coaches, quiet coaches and all coaches somewhere in between. Marv is  smart guy and i believe he's a good coach when it comes to schemes and Xs and Os. But his personality has always been lukewarm, from an outsiders perspective. 

Being a fiery guy doesn't guarantee you're going to win big games. If you have the right personnel, not necessarily elite talent, i think you can win big with this type of coach based on his attitude towards in-game decisions and how he inspires his players in practice and games. 

Being a quiet, or somewhere in the middle coach, doesn't guarantee you're not going to win big games. I do believe these types of coaches need elite players in key positions to win big though. 

Marv has has some very good to elite players throughout his coaching career and he's been hamstrung with bad luck (injuries, bounce of a ball) along the way. He's also had the players in place to at least win a playoff game once or twice. 

I know you will talk about his record of going for it on 4th down, but on the big picture, i don't think he takes chances on near the level some other successful coaches have, when the decision could effect the outcome of a game, late. 

When you combine his overall 'by the book', conservative coaching style with his mostly laid back demeanor, i think you have a team that resembles him. Good in the beginning and middle, but not as good at the end, when it matters. That goes for in-game and season; start off strong, get a lead, try to hold on for the win. 

You can't deny the success he's had, but you can't call him a great coach because he routinely comes up short in primetime and playoff games. IMO, it's all due to his approach, how he acts and how he coaches in-game.