Was this a bad year to replace Marv?

[Shake n Blake]

(01-08-2019, 03:38 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I view it in the business way of, "Well, this guy is doing solid as a director, but not ideally where we want to be. However, he's really brought the organization up a lot from where it was and has had some successful years in the past, so let's give him another shot to prove himself."

Most people (fans especially) don't want to see their favorite sports teams run like a regular business though.

For good reason. Messages tend to get stale, players/coaches tend to get complacent, success wanes (unless you're New England).

(01-08-2019, 03:45 PM)bengalhoel Wrote: Hopefully this team hires an enthusiastic coach that inspires the players. I think that Marvin's body language rubbed off on some of the players and it seemed like they were sleepwalking through games. 

That can have a major effect on moral. I remember Andy Dalton's  lame playoff pregame speech against the Chargers and I was thinking "We are losing this game". 

Taylor and Bieniemy seem to have the right amount of attitude so I hope its one of those two.  Marvin was good to the Bengals but its time for great, and its about time that the Bengals make the right choice for once. 

It may seem funny to some, but I don't think I liked how loved Marv was in the locker room. Makes me wonder if things were a little too cozy. I'm not saying I want some stone cold dictator, but players shouldn't be buddy buddy with the coach. He shouldn't be a father figure, he should be a boss.

(01-08-2019, 03:50 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Depends on how you look at it.  I can see a potential HC seeing Mike Brown's zeal for adhering to underwhelming coaches as a bit of a negative, too.  Marvin had to walk away after 3 losing seasons in a row and 16 years without a playoff win.

As I pointed out before, we can talk about it like it is a positive and we can admit that it might be but can you imagine our new HC saying "I took the job with the Bengals because it has the best job security."  Eep!

Well of course there are negatives to the job, as there is with any of the openings. That's why they're open. I don't think the Bengals job is the best opening, just showing why I think it's not as bad as some think. There are positives and negatives with all of them. 

Fwiw, I don't think this was as mutual as they're saying. Maybe it was Marv's call. Who knows? They also could be doing Marv a solid by saying it was mutual when it was really a firing. 

Also fwiw, the job security isn't the only positive. We do have some good players. A solid QB. Great skill position talent. D-line and secondary are probably better than they showed last year.

(01-08-2019, 04:09 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: To be fair, last year was pretty bad as well.

Frank Reich and Matt Nagy were really the only two coaches with recent success.
Nagy was an OC for the Chiefs after Pederson, only being an OC for two years, and Reich was fired from the Chargers, but then found success as OC with the Eagles. He was an OC for 4 years.

Vrabel was a DC for one year. Jon Gruden hasn't coached in over a decade.

Steve Wilks was fired after one season. Pat Shurmur didn't have a great season in New York.



This year there's Bruce Arians, Mike McCarthy, Eric Bieniemy, Matt LaFleur, Kris Richard, Kliff Kingsbury, Matt Eberfluss.

I feel like this year has a ton more potential than last year.

Fair enough. It's all in the eye of the beholder. I really liked Reich and Nagy last year. I don't feel as sure about the current available guys. Plus with 8 openings, it made it less likely we'd land one of "our guys". That said, it looks like half the openings were filled today (with guys that weren't on our radar), so things are looking up.