duh bengals frunt orfice is smart George!

[flamingrey]

The bottom line here is you are soley basing ML's career here on his in game ability to coach, which leaves a LOT to be desired, as I've already stated several times.

However, when evaluating anyone (player, manager, coach, GM), you never look at just one aspect of that person's ability. He has hired good coaches to help him. That is what good head coaches do. He's helped put together some really good teams. He's won here with the same set of rules that those before him had...same owner. The schedule flux's every year. There were some gimme's in the 90's, but those guys were unable to take advantage.

Say what you want, you have that right to your opinion, but at least be honest that your total disdain for ML clouds your judgement when trying to be objective with this subject.

Not at all. The only difference between me and you is you've shown the inability to realize the impact of having a decent QB - and that's being generous - on the roster. Additionally, if you would stop looking at SUBJECTIVE stats (i.e. wins) in a vacuum, you may also be able to expand your very simple-minded opinion.

 

[flamingrey]

This whole conversation made me realize how great of a head coach Mike Brown (NBA) is. First he took a cellar dweller like Cleveland to the Finals and overall had great success with them. And now he's having success with the Lakers in just his first season coming out of a lockout shortened (off)season.

Dead serious.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Ah, so you'd like to give the credit to Brownie boy when the conversation is about him and Marvin when the conversation is about him....anyone else on the list?

Good to know.

I had read that twice to understand what you were saying.

I am just stating a fact, I was not giving anyone credit. Do facts butt hurt you now also?

 

[Cincyfan78]

Not at all. If you went by wins, I would be saying that's he's one of the best coaches in the NFL. Top 10 just based on getting division titles and into the playoffs.

If you go by in game coaching, he's one of the worst coaches in the NFL. Bottom 10 just based on his inability to correctly use a replay challege or call a time-out.


I'm stating...that taking ALL of the evidence into consideration....he's mediocre.


If I went soley based on wins, as you suggest, I would be stating something totally different than what I am stating; he's mediocre when compared to other coaches around the league when you consider the BIG PICTURE (i.e. everything involved in being a head coach..not just in game management). He's won. He's won division titles. He's gotten into the playoffs. His in game coaching hurts, no question about this.


While you say we (I) am undervaluing the role of a decent QB, I counter by saying you undervalue the role in which Marvin has in putting the teams together. I.E. QB's drafted (yes, Carson fell to them, but at least it didn't get screwed up) the roster in general, coaches hired, etc...etc...Marvin has a hand in all of that, unless you want to give sole credit to Mike Brown.

We can go back and forth all day. Neither one of us is going to change the other's opnion. But you can at least get mine right; Marvin is Mediocre. Not great. Average. Good enough to get this team into the playoffs with a solid roster and coaching hires. His in-game management comes into play in crucial games, and well...we know what happens from there.

I wish he would hire a replay/challenge consultant like Andy Reid does.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Not at all. If you went by wins, I would be saying that's he's one of the best coaches in the NFL. Top 10 just based on getting division titles and into the playoffs.

If you go by in game coaching, he's one of the worst coaches in the NFL. Bottom 10 just based on his inability to correctly use a replay challege or call a time-out.


I'm stating...that taking ALL of the evidence into consideration....he's mediocre.


If I went soley based on wins, as you suggest, I would be stating something totally different than what I am stating; he's mediocre when compared to other coaches around the league when you consider the BIG PICTURE (i.e. everything involved in being a head coach..not just in game management). He's won. He's won division titles. He's gotten into the playoffs. His in game coaching hurts, no question about this.


While you say we (I) am undervaluing the role of a decent QB, I counter by saying you undervalue the role in which Marvin has in putting the teams together. I.E. QB's drafted (yes, Carson fell to them, but at least it didn't get screwed up) the roster in general, coaches hired, etc...etc...Marvin has a hand in all of that, unless you want to give sole credit to Mike Brown.

We can go back and forth all day. Neither one of us is going to change the other's opnion. But you can at least get mine right; Marvin is Mediocre. Not great. Average. Good enough to get this team into the playoffs with a solid roster and coaching hires. His in-game management comes into play in crucial games, and well...we know what happens from there.

I wish he would hire a replay/challenge consultant like Andy Reid does.

The year we drafted Palmer, there was a lot of debate on whether we would take Palmer, Leftwich or Newman. That pick could have easily been screwed up, as it had been many times in the past.

 

[Servo]

This whole conversation made me realize how great of a head coach Mike Brown (NBA) is. First he took a cellar dweller like Cleveland to the Finals and overall had great success with them. And now he's having success with the Lakers in just his first season coming out of a lockout shortened (off)season.

Dead serious.

You're not seriously equating Carson with LeBron, are you? Let alone a dominant player in Basketball (5 person game) v. football (22)

 

[CrashDavisSports]

You're not seriously equating Carson with LeBron, are you? Let alone a dominant player in Basketball (5 person game) v. football (22)

He is "serious", don't question Flamingay's logic.

 

[Servo]

At this point in his career you could argue that Carson is a bust. Any QB taken #1 overall without a playoff win did not validate their draft position. Also considering how much he's regressed as a player.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

At this point in his career you could argue that Carson is a bust. Any QB taken #1 overall without a playoff win did not validate their draft position. Also considering how much he's regressed as a player.

Plus, he is an interception machine.

 

[flamingrey]

You're not seriously equating Carson with LeBron, are you? Let alone a dominant player in Basketball (5 person game) v. football (22)

It was simply to point out 1) the kind of effect a player can have on a coach, AND 2) record doesn't mean squat...Brown sucks as a coach. Don't think too far into it.

That said, are you also going to deny the effect on a team a very good QB has than one of the worst QB's?

 

[flamingrey]

At this point in his career you could argue that Carson is a bust. Any QB taken #1 overall without a playoff win did not validate their draft position. Also considering how much he's regressed as a player.

In the context of this argument you look at the value he added during Marvin's tenure. What he is at this point in his career doesn't matter. In 2005 when we made the playoffs - since Marvin is being given credit for making the playoffs and having a winning record, something his predecessors didn't - he was a top 3 QB. In 2006, while we didn't make the playoffs, he was still a very good QB. After that he really started to regress, but along came Zimmer. In 2009, Marvin tried his hardest to make this a losing ball club, but both Zimmer and Carson bailed him out. 5 game-winning drives is a bailout. Last season, it's hard to argue we didn't have a LOT of talent on the squad. So, not so surprising we beat all the teams with losing records. That's not always easy though, so some credit there. But not being able to win a SINGLE game against a playoff team in some 8 tries? That's the sign of a bad coach.

Furthermore, just look at the records and the success. In the years Carson was injured or sucked, the Bengals also sucked. 2007 he missed 12 games. Weren't the Bengals 0-12 at one point or something? 2008 is escaping my mind, but I'm sure Carson's stats were abysmal. We did nothing. 2010 Carson's stats were mostly abysmal. The Bengals also sucked. This team has gone as Carson has gone. This is undeniable. Marvin is just stealing credit.

I'll give you another example. Jim Caldwell. Horrible coach, and most see this. During the Colts' SB run, in well more than half of their games, they were down in the 4th quarter. That season Peyton had some 7-8 game winning drives or the like. Though simply looking at their record and making it to the SB, I guess you'd have to say he's a great coach. I mean, those are the facts, right?

 

[Servo]

No, I think QB is the most important position in all of sports. In Marv's 1st year he took a team with the worst record in the NFL and went 8-8 with career journeyman Kitna (who I like....but he's not a great QB). 2005 Carson was awesome...and I think Marv did a good job consirering the level of immaturity on that roster. If Carson wouldn't have got hurt maybe they win a couple playoff games, we'll never know. 2006 and 2006 Carson was still good, then he really fell off into being a mediocre QB at best. So MArv won with a mediocre Carson in 09 and a rookie in Dalton in 2011.

 

[Servo]

I'll give you another example. Jim Caldwell. Horrible coach, and most see this. During the Colts' SB run, in well more than half of their games, they were down in the 4th quarter. That season Peyton had some 7-8 game winning drives or the like. Though simply looking at their record and making it to the SB, I guess you'd have to say he's a great coach. I mean, those are the facts, right?

Marv is a better coach than Caldwell. True, Manning is a HC on the field and I could coach the manning lead colts and go to the playoffs. Carson, on the other hand, is a coach killer. Just ask Hue Jackson who bet his job on Carson and came up empty (Marv is also a better HC than Jackson)

 

[flamingrey]

Disagree that Marvin is better than either of those guys.

Hue cost himself the job throwing his entire team under the bus.

Marvin should be thanking Carson for his job. Carson made him look good in the early years. Carson's injuries were his excuse in the mid-years. And Carson's play was his excuse in the late years.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Disagree that Marvin is better than either of those guys.

Hue cost himself the job throwing his entire team under the bus.

Marvin should be thanking Carson for his job. Carson made him look good in the early years. Carson's injuries were his excuse in the mid-years. And Carson's play was his excuse in the late years.

Every team needs a good QB to be competitive. Is there any team in the league without a decent QB leading them that has won consistantly? Are their QB's that have had contract years or been one hit wonders, sure. But consistantly been winners without a good QB? I wish you luck finding me one.

Alex Smith last year, one hit wonder to this point.

A good QB bails out every head coach, all teh time. Marvin had to select Palmer and he did. He had the choice of Leftwich and Newman they were debating between. They selected Palmer after one good college season at USC.

 

[flamingrey]

No, I think QB is the most important position in all of sports. In Marv's 1st year he took a team with the worst record in the NFL and went 8-8 with career journeyman Kitna (who I like....but he's not a great QB). 2005 Carson was awesome...and I think Marv did a good job consirering the level of immaturity on that roster. If Carson wouldn't have got hurt maybe they win a couple playoff games, we'll never know. 2006 and 2006 Carson was still good, then he really fell off into being a mediocre QB at best. So MArv won with a mediocre Carson in 09 and a rookie in Dalton in 2011.

2009 while his stats were mediocre, him and Zimmer bailed out the squad in 5 separate games. That was the difference between 10-6 and 5-11.

2011 I've already covered. The team just wasn't very good. 0-8 against winning teams despite tons of talent.

I thought Marvin was a very good coach as a rookie. Players really bought into what he was selling. That faded real fast though.

 

[Cincyfan78]

People are vastly under-rating the defense in 2005, as well. Lead the NFL in take-aways and scoring defense, if I remember correctly. At one point they were scoring points off turnovers at a clip of like 75% of the time....and when you lead the NFL in turnovers, and are scoring on offense after turnovers...life is good.

As good as Carson was in 2005...don't forget the defense. And while Carson wasn't horrible in 2006 or 2007, the defense fell apart...it would seem that the DEFENSE was more critical to the Bengals success than Carson.

 

[flamingrey]

People are vastly under-rating the defense in 2005, as well. Lead the NFL in take-aways and scoring defense, if I remember correctly. At one point they were scoring points off turnovers at a clip of like 75% of the time....and when you lead the NFL in turnovers, and are scoring on offense after turnovers...life is good.

As good as Carson was in 2005...don't forget the defense. And while Carson wasn't horrible in 2006 or 2007, the defense fell apart...it would seem that the DEFENSE was more critical to the Bengals success than Carson.

The defense that season was very opportunistic, much like the defenses we saw of the Packers (moreso) and Patriots this past season. It was allowed by the dynamic offense, and of course also plays to the strengths of the offense also.

But that's besides the point since your stats are way off.

The Bengals were 22nd in point and 28th in yards. Generally, that's the makings of a very bad defense. Though as you pointed out, we were tops in takeaways, so I wouldn't be opposed to calling it a middle-of-the-pack defense.

Carson was the reason for the success, not the defense, and it wasn't close.

 

[cincygrad]

The defense that season was very opportunistic, much like the defenses we saw of the Packers (moreso) and Patriots this past season. It was allowed by the dynamic offense, and of course also plays to the strengths of the offense also.

But that's besides the point since your stats are way off.

The Bengals were 22nd in point and 28th in yards. Generally, that's the makings of a very bad defense. Though as you pointed out, we were tops in takeaways, so I wouldn't be opposed to calling it a middle-of-the-pack defense.

Carson and a top notch offensive line was the reason for the success, not the defense, and it wasn't close.

FIFY

 

[CrashDavisSports]

The defense that season was very opportunistic, much like the defenses we saw of the Packers (moreso) and Patriots this past season. It was allowed by the dynamic offense, and of course also plays to the strengths of the offense also.

But that's besides the point since your stats are way off.

The Bengals were 22nd in point and 28th in yards. Generally, that's the makings of a very bad defense. Though as you pointed out, we were tops in takeaways, so I wouldn't be opposed to calling it a middle-of-the-pack defense.

Carson was the reason for the success, not the defense, and it wasn't close.

Please, for the sake of God, name me one single HC who had extended success without a good QB? Please, tell me. I know there have been one hit wonders, Trent Dilfer (who was more the beneficiary of the greatest defense of all time), Alex Smith, etc. But what team/HC has had extended success without a good QB?

It all starts with the QB, so that is why they are the most important position on the team. You rely on your QB to win you games for F sake. That is why they make the most money. Every team lives or dies by their QB, and every great coach is made or destroyed because of his QB choice.

Do you think Mike McCarthy is the next great coach because of his coaching ability, or could some of it have to do with the fact Aaron Rodgers is f'n ridiculous?