marvin is worse then I even thought he needs to go asap

[*Nately120*]

(11-09-2016, 10:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You forgot the Browns.

Pus the Lions, Bucs, and Dolphins have zero playoff wins and only 5 combined playoff appearances.

The Browns made the playoffs 1 year before Marvin showed up.  I'll admit you are right, but hell after a baker's dozen worth of years what's another?  The Dolphins made it in 2008, but I'm starting to wonder if you are talking wins or appearances.  I thought you said appearance, specifically.  I could be wrong.

Also, the Lions are THE example of Super Bowl era futility so let's just call that the mattress in the basement and move on.  The Bucs won the Super Bowl 1 year before Marvin Lewis showed up so I think it's fair to assume they aren't a fanbase salivating over his post-season success.

I spose the bottom line is that YES Marvin Lewis has had more success than teams that keep changing HCs, GMs, and/or QBs.

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2016, 05:23 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Like I said before. The teams he was on were offensive based teams. Its hard to have a good defense when the team is more of an offensive team.

What side of the ball were the pre-Zimmer Bengals of Palmer, Chad, TJ, Rudi based on?

[Brownshoe]

(11-09-2016, 10:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What side of the ball were the pre-Zimmer Bengals of Palmer, Chad, TJ, Rudi based on?

We were drafting defensive players in the first round more so than offensive players during that time. We were about even in the second round. Having 3 of both offensive and defensive players. So I would say they were trying to be balanced, maybe a little more defensive oriented since we took more defensive players in the first.

[*bfine32*]

(11-09-2016, 11:40 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: We were drafting defensive players in the first round more so than offensive players during that time. We were about even in the second round. Having 3 of both offensive and defensive players. So I would say they were trying to be balanced, maybe a little more defensive oriented since we took more defensive players in the first.

Nope, pointing to first round draft picks don't help you either. Every year he was in Dallas and Atlanta their first round draft choice was a Defensive Player.

It's OK you can just say it: "I like Zimmer better than Marvin". 

[Brownshoe]

(11-10-2016, 12:12 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Nope, pointing to first round draft picks don't help you either. Every year he was in Dallas and Atlanta their first round draft choice was a Defensive Player.

It's OK you can just say it: "I like Zimmer better than Marvin". 

Lol who doesn't think that Zimmer is a better coach than Marvin? Its more than self evident that he is. Especially on the defensive side of the ball. Marvin has only had 2 years that he was in the top half of the league in points allowed without Zimmer. As a head coach the worst Zimmer has done is 11th in points allowed his first year. His second he was in the top 5 and this year they are first so far. Zimmer is leaps and bounds a better defensive mind. Not even a question honestly. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(11-10-2016, 12:27 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Lol who doesn't think that Zimmer is a better coach than Marvin? Its more than self evident that he is. Especially on the defensive side of the ball. Marvin has only had 2 years that he was in the top half of the league in points allowed without Zimmer. As a head coach the worst Zimmer has done is 11th in points allowed his first year. His second he was in the top 5 and this year they are first so far. Zimmer is leaps and bounds a better defensive mind. Not even a question honestly. 

Not sure Zimmer is a better defensive mind tbh. Marvin was the DC of the 2000 Ravens. A team many consider to be one of the best defenses of all time. 

I think Zimmer is a better HC though. Even if the sample size is fairly small. 

[Brownshoe]

(11-10-2016, 12:38 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure Zimmer is a better defensive mind tbh. Marvin was the DC of the 2000 Ravens. A team many consider to be one of the best defenses of all time. 

I think Zimmer is a better HC though. Even if the sample size is fairly small. 

Why wasn't Marvin able to recreate that defense or even make this defense consistently above average then? Marvin has had 2 years at 16th or above in points allowed without Zimmer. I would think that you could contribute the 2000 Ravens defense on the head coach since Marvin hasn't been able to produce a good defense other than 1 year without Zimmer (2015).

[JumboTron]

I personally believe, and have always said, that Lewis is one of the best defensive minds in the game. At least he was at one time. Maybe better than Zimmer was when he was at his peak as an NFL DC.

When it comes to attributes of a HC though? For example, getting an entire team of grown men ready to go play at a high level especially in games when the stakes are the highest? Even though he lacks the experience I would take Zimmer hands down.

[OrlandoBengal]

(11-10-2016, 12:38 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure Zimmer is a better defensive mind tbh. Marvin was the DC of the 2000 Ravens. A team many consider to be one of the best defenses of all time. 

I think Zimmer is a better HC though. Even if the sample size is fairly small. 

In all fairness, those Ravens defenses were loaded with super stars.  It's not like he was not given an extremely good product to work with or that they completely collapsed after he left.

[fredtoast]

(11-10-2016, 12:27 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Lol who doesn't think that Zimmer is a better coach than Marvin? Its more than self evident that he is. Especially on the defensive side of the ball. Marvin has only had 2 years that he was in the top half of the league in points allowed without Zimmer. As a head coach the worst Zimmer has done is 11th in points allowed his first year. His second he was in the top 5 and this year they are first so far. Zimmer is leaps and bounds a better defensive mind. Not even a question honestly. 

Now I am confused.

It seems that you want to give Zimmer all the credit for the defense while he is head coach but none of the blame for the offense.

And you want to give Zimmer credit for his time as DC with the Bengals (but not before), but ignore Marvin's time as DC.

It is "more than self evident" that you are just cherry picking facts that fit your position and ignoring others.

[Brownshoe]

(11-11-2016, 11:56 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Now I am confused.

It seems that you want to give Zimmer all the credit for the defense while he is head coach but none of the blame for the offense.

And you want to give Zimmer credit for his time as DC with the Bengals (but not before), but ignore Marvin's time as DC.

It is "more than self evident" that you are just cherry picking facts that fit your position and ignoring others.

You bring up the Vikings offense like they have any good players on it. They lost their all pro RB, and they lost their QB right before the season started. Give me a break Fred I know you're not that stupid.

Marvin has a hard time making our defense good as the head coach. So tell me why he should get credit for something he can't do. He's only had 1 year without Zimmer that our defense was in the top 10 in points allowed and only 2 times we were in the top half of the league in points allowed. That's self evident that he can't do it. Otherwise he would have more years where the defense is good. Its not a coincidence that Zimmer came here and turned the defense around and then when he left our defense has been bad 2 out of the 3 years he's been gone. Sorry you can't see it because you have such a bias for Marvin. Its pretty easy to see honestly.

Zimmer has proven himself on multiple teams. Marvin can't do anything on his teams and he's been carried by the coaches around him. Baltimore stayed in the top 10 in points allowed even after Marvin left. Its pretty obvious that Billik was a big reason why that defense was so good, otherwise they would have been a lot worse.

[OrlandoBengal]

(11-11-2016, 01:54 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: You bring up the Vikings offense like they have any good players on it. They lost their all pro RB, and they lost their QB right before the season started. Give me a break Fred I know you're not that stupid.

Marvin has a hard time making our defense good as the head coach. So tell me why he should get credit for something he can't do. He's only had 1 year without Zimmer that our defense was in the top 10 in points allowed and only 2 times we were in the top half of the league in points allowed. That's self evident that he can't do it. Otherwise he would have more years where the defense is good. Its not a coincidence that Zimmer came here and turned the defense around and then when he left our defense has been bad 2 out of the 3 years he's been gone. Sorry you can't see it because you have such a bias for Marvin. Its pretty easy to see honestly.

Zimmer has proven himself on multiple teams. Marvin can't do anything on his teams and he's been carried by the coaches around him. Baltimore stayed in the top 10 in points allowed even after Marvin left. Its pretty obvious that Billik was a big reason why that defense was so good, otherwise they would have been a lot worse.

I don't think it was Brian Billick, I think the credit goes to Ozzie Newsome for keeping them stacked with talent.  That defense has had some really good players over the years.

[*ochocincos*]

Has Mike Zimmer really shown he's a better coach than Marvin Lewis?
Zimmer is in his third season as a HC, so let's compare their first three seasons.

Zimmer inherited a team that was 5-10-1 the previous year, last in their division.
So far, Zimmer's seasons have been...
2014: 7-9, missed playoffs
2015: 11-5, 0-1 in playoffs
2016: 5-3 so far this season

Marvin Lewis, however, inherited a much worse team that was 2-14 the previous year and holding the first overall pick in 2003.
Lewis, in his first three seasons....
2003: 8-8, missed playoffs
2004: 8-8, missed playoffs
2005: 11-5, 0-1 in playoffs

Granted Zimmer's Vikings haven't finished out this year yet, but so far, it's kind of a toss up. Marvin had to do more with less when he took over though, IMO.

[Bengalholic]

(11-09-2016, 10:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You forgot the Browns.

Pus the Lions, Bucs, and Dolphins have zero playoff wins and only 5 combined playoff appearances.

Should we really be comparing and contrasting our team against some of the worst teams in the league over the last 13+ years? Surely, that can't be the standard we're holding them up against?

Th Raiders, Browns, Jags, Bills and Dolphins are the worst 5 teams in the AFC during Marvin's tenure. If you compare what the Bengals have accomplished during the last 13 years (even without a playoff win) - it does look pretty good if we're comparing it to those teams.

However, if you're comparing the Bengals to the best teams in the AFC during Marvin's tenure, it's a whole different story. The Pats, Colts, Steelers, Broncos and Ravens have a combined 59 postseason wins and have represented the AFC in the last 13 Super Bowls. The Bengals - by comparison - are 0-7 in the playoffs. That contrast is pretty damn stark.

So yeah, over the last 13+ years, they've been better than the worst teams and not as good as the best teams. 

[*ochocincos*]

(11-11-2016, 03:50 PM)Bengalholic Wrote: Should we really be comparing and contrasting our team against some of the worst teams in the league over the last 13+ years? Surely, that can't be the standard we're holding them up against?

Th Raiders, Browns, Jags, Bills and Dolphins are the worst 5 teams in the AFC during Marvin's tenure. If you compare what the Bengals have accomplished during the last 13 years (even without a playoff win) - it does look pretty good if we're comparing it to those teams.

However, if you're comparing the Bengals to the best teams in the AFC during Marvin's tenure, it's a whole different story. The Pats, Colts, Steelers, Broncos and Ravens have a combined 59 postseason wins and have represented the AFC in the last 13 Super Bowls. The Bengals - by comparison - are 0-7 in the playoffs. That contrast is pretty damn stark.

So yeah, over the last 13+ years, they've been better than the worst teams and not as good as the best teams. 

And that's why so many people are complaining now compared to before. Yes, the Bengals could be worse, but it's no longer satisfactory to be "better than the worst". Many people want to be the best.

Also, the fact the same 5 teams have represented the AFC in each Super Bowl the past 13 years shows the game is rigged!