Three years ago.

[fredtoast]

(11-10-2021, 05:11 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: If Zac isn't the answer, that doesn't = Marv was.

Marvin coached under a whole different set of rules than Zac.  Give Marvin the big free agent spending Zac got and we would have won much more.

But like i said before, even though I supported Marvin I don't want to bring him back.

[fredtoast]

(11-10-2021, 05:06 PM)BengalChris Wrote: I wonder what changed?

A bad run of drafts and zero help from the front office in free agency.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-10-2021, 05:15 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Oh, I agree 100% on Marvin. It was past time for him.

We aren't going to get the "answer" until Taylor is gone though. Marvin > Taylor.

 

Ah, I misread you because there's been some "bring back Marv" sentiments in this thread. Apologies. Also, I agree Marv was probably the better coach.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-10-2021, 05:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Marvin coached under a whole different set of rules than Zac.  Give Marvin the big free agent spending Zac got and we would have won much more.

But like i said before, even though I supported Marvin I don't want to bring him back.

I'm really not sure much has changed, Fred. When Marv was hired, we brought in John Thronton, Reggie Kelly, Tory James, Duane Clemons, Kevin Hardy, Kim Herring, Deltha O'Neal, Nate Webster, etc in the first 2 years.

They completely reshaped the defense and brought in a #1 overall QB to pair with an electric WR.

The scenario sounds pretty familiar, doesn't it?

[jj22]

(11-10-2021, 05:27 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Ah, I misread you because there's been some "bring back Marv" sentiments in this thread. Apologies. Also, I agree Marv was probably the better coach.

I think Marvin attracted a better coaching staff (from experience or reputation which ZT lacked). 

As a coach I don't have nearly the problem with ZT honestly. I have no problem how he manages the game, and until last week, his teams do come to play more often then not.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-10-2021, 05:45 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think Marvin attracted a better coaching staff (from experience or reputation which ZT lacked). 

As a coach I don't have nearly the problem with ZT honestly. I have no problem how he manages the game, and until last week, his teams do come to play more often then not.

I'm more concerned about Lou than Zac, I will say that.

[*jason*]

(11-10-2021, 05:45 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think Marvin attracted a better coaching staff (from experience or reputation which ZT lacked). 

As a coach I don't have nearly the problem with ZT honestly. I have no problem how he manages the game, and until last week, his teams do come to play more often then not.

They come to lose more often than not.

[fredtoast]

(11-10-2021, 05:40 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I'm really not sure much has changed, Fred. When Marv was hired, we brought in John Thronton, Reggie Kelly, Tory James, Duane Clemons, Kevin Hardy, Kim Herring, Deltha O'Neal, Nate Webster, etc in the first 2 years.

They completely reshaped the defense and brought in a #1 overall QB to pair with an electric WR.

The scenario sounds pretty familiar, doesn't it?

There is no way you can compare the level of the guys we signed when Marvin arrived to the free agents we have signed over the last two years.

John Thornton was was a highly rated free agent for the Bengals, but nothing compared to Reader or Hendrickson.

Tory James and Nate Webster were decent players but they were not even starters when we signed them.

Delthea O'Neal was a hell of a good player, but even he was in the doghouse on the bench when we traded for him.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-10-2021, 07:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no way you can compare the level of the guys we signed when Marvin arrived to the free agents we have signed over the last two years.

John Thornton was was a highly rated free agent for the Bengals, but nothing compared to Reader or Hendrickson.

Tory James and Nate Webster were decent players but they were not even starters when we signed them.

Delthea O'Neal was a hell of a good player, but even he was in the doghouse on the bench when we traded for him.

I don't care what they did before we got them. That amounts to a hill of beans. What matters is they were good players, and we landed them. I'd say Zac got better d-linemen, but Marv got better corners.

Either way, the Bengals did splurge to completely reshape that defense.

[Murdock2420]

(11-11-2021, 01:07 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I don't care what they did before we got them. That amounts to a hill of beans. What matters is they were good players, and we landed them. I'd say Zac got better d-linemen, but Marv got better corners.

Either way, the Bengals did splurge to completely reshape that defense.

So isn't it time to really start pointing the finger where it truly belongs?

It was Marvin's fault, or not spending in FA or the D Coordinator or the OC, or now Zac, or...

The team has been under performing, underwhelming or just flat out bad since 1991. There is only one consistent part to the team all those years, and it is the family that runs the show. The family that employs the smallest scouting department around, that just refuses to do things anyway besides their own and just never seems committed to placing a championship product on the field. 

We can blame bad drafts, or bad draft strategies, or bad coaching, or not signing the right guys but at the end all those roads lead right back to the Brown family and the lack of a real GM.

Not a shot at you Shake or anyone and yes I know we all have blamed the Brown family before but then the draft rolls around and we argue about how this QB fixes everything or the WR makes the team a Super Bowl team, or we get into the season and start saying the DC sucks or the coach sucks and it's like we forget the puppet master pulling the strings, cashing checks and laughing all the way to the bank.

[fredtoast]

(11-11-2021, 01:07 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Either way, the Bengals did splurge to completely reshape that defense.

No they did not "splurge".  They signed a bunch of mid to low level free agents.  Marvin was able to coach them up and get some wins.

Taylor, on the other hand, has been handed some of the highest paid players in the league.

The fact that Marvin got winning teams out of mid level free agents does not mean that he would not have gotten a lot more out of the top level players Zac is getting.

[Shake n Blake]

(11-11-2021, 01:18 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No they did not "splurge".  They signed a bunch of mid to low level free agents.  Marvin was able to coach them up and get some wins.

Taylor, on the other hand, has been handed some of the highest paid players in the league.

The fact that Marvin got winning teams out of mid level free agents does not mean that he would not have gotten a lot more out of the top level players Zac is getting.

The salary cap was $75 million in 2003.
It's $182 million now.

We gave Thornton a 6 year, $22.5 million contract ($3.75 million average)
We gave Hardy a 4 year, $14 million contract ($3.5 million average)
We gave Tory a 4 year, $14.4 million contract ($3.6 million average)

By today's standards, that would be like signing 3 guys for $8.5 to $9 million each.

We also signed:

Reggie Kelly for 4 years, $6.6 million ($4.0 million average today)
Duane Clemons for 2 years, $2.18 million ($2.8 million average today)

And that was just year one. Not even looking at the guys we signed and traded for in 2004, which included Deltha (5 years, $8.5 million), Kim Herring (5 years, $11.3 million), and several other players that I don't feel like looking up because I'm getting bored.

It was a similar splurge, and unprecedented at the time.

[Bengal Dude]

(11-11-2021, 01:07 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I don't care what they did before we got them. That amounts to a hill of beans. What matters is they were good players, and we landed them. I'd say Zac got better d-linemen, but Marv got better corners.

Either way, the Bengals did splurge to completely reshape that defense.

That was an out of character offseason for Marvin. After reading that Athletic article, our quiet free agency times were more Marvin than Mike Brown.

[fredtoast]

(11-11-2021, 02:12 AM)Bengal Dude Wrote:  After reading that Athletic article, our quiet free agency times were more Marvin than Mike Brown.

So how exactly did Marvin control our free agency policy from 1991 until he became coach in 2003?

It is absurd to argue that Marvin ( and Coslet, and Shula, and LeBeau) did not want better players in free agency.

[grampahol]

(11-11-2021, 01:14 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: So isn't it time to really start pointing the finger where it truly belongs?

It was Marvin's fault, or not spending in FA or the D Coordinator or the OC, or now Zac, or...

The team has been under performing, underwhelming or just flat out bad since 1991. There is only one consistent part to the team all those years, and it is the family that runs the show. The family that employs the smallest scouting department around, that just refuses to do things anyway besides their own and just never seems committed to placing a championship product on the field. 

We can blame bad drafts, or bad draft strategies, or bad coaching, or not signing the right guys but at the end all those roads lead right back to the Brown family and the lack of a real GM.

Not a shot at you Shake or anyone and yes I know we all have blamed the Brown family before but then the draft rolls around and we argue about how this QB fixes everything or the WR makes the team a Super Bowl team, or we get into the season and start saying the DC sucks or the coach sucks and it's like we forget the puppet master pulling the strings, cashing checks and laughing all the way to the bank.

Oh c'mon.. By the end of this season's super bowl victory you'll be ready to chip in for that 70 foot tall solid gold statue of Mikey and family on Fountain Square..The statue will have em all hugging Zac with no mention of Burrow on it..He'll be with Texas in exchange for getting Findley back..

[fredtoast]

(11-11-2021, 01:55 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: The salary cap was $75 million in 2003.
It's $182 million now.

We gave Thornton a 6 year, $22.5 million contract ($3.75 million average)
We gave Hardy a 4 year, $14 million contract ($3.5 million average)
We gave Tory a 4 year, $14.4 million contract ($3.6 million average)

By today's standards, that would be like signing 3 guys for $8.5 to $9 million each.

We also signed:

Reggie Kelly for 4 years, $6.6 million ($4.0 million average today)
Duane Clemons for 2 years, $2.18 million ($2.8 million average today)

And that was just year one. Not even looking at the guys we signed and traded for in 2004, which included Deltha (5 years, $8.5 million), Kim Herring (5 years, $11.3 million), and several other players that I don't feel like looking up because I'm getting bored.

It was a similar splurge, and unprecedented at the time.

Thornton ($9.1) + Hardy ($8.5) + James ($8.7) + Kelly ($4.0) + Clemmons ($2.8) + Herring ($5.5) + O'Neal ($4.1) + Nate Webster ($5.4) = $48.1

Hendrickson ($15.0) + Trae Waynes ($14.0) + Reader ($13.3M) + Riley Reiff ($7.5M) + Awuzie ($7.3M) + Ogunjobi ($6.2 M) + Bell ($6.0) + Hilton ($6.0) = $75.3

Not even in the same ballpark. Almost an extra $30 million per year.

[*ochocincos*]

This could have been posted a week earlier too, as the 2018 Bengals were 5-3 as well, just like the 2021 Bengals were before the Browns game.
If Taylor's crew only gets 1 more win the rest of this season, they absolutely need to be replaced.

[reuben.ahmed]

[Shake n Blake]

(11-11-2021, 10:29 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Thornton ($9.1) + Hardy ($8.5) + James ($8.7) + Kelly ($4.0) + Clemmons ($2.8) + Herring ($5.5) + O'Neal ($4.1) + Nate Webster ($5.4) = $48.1

Hendrickson ($15.0) + Trae Waynes ($14.0) + Reader ($13.3M) + Riley Reiff ($7.5M) + Awuzie ($7.3M) + Ogunjobi ($6.2 M) + Bell ($6.0) + Hilton ($6.0) = $75.3

Not even in the same ballpark. Almost an extra $30 million per year.

Touche. It was still one of the most significant splurges in Bengals history though. I'd also throw in that Palmer's rookie deal had a base $17.5 million average by today's standards, with easily attainable incentives to push it to $20 million avg.

Burrow's contract has only a $9 million average. That helped us spend more.

I concede that Zac's spending spree was a bit better, but you should at least admit that the strategies were similar, and that was one of the most active periods of FA/trades we've had in a 2 year span.

[Big_Ern]

(11-10-2021, 05:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Marvin coached under a whole different set of rules than Zac.  Give Marvin the big free agent spending Zac got and we would have won much more.

But like i said before, even though I supported Marvin I don't want to bring him back.

Marv's teams were way more talented than this one.