duh bengals frunt orfice is smart George!

[cincygrad]

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?

John Harbaugh?

 

[Cincyfan78]

Brian Billick won a S.B. with Trent Dilfer and went to several playoffs, no?

 

[flamingrey]

John Harbaugh?

Funny thing is he holds it against Marvin's predecessors despite never having had good QB's to work with, then he comes with that argument. Talk about playing both sides of the fence. Or maybe he was just trying to make my argument for me.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Funny thing is he holds it against Marvin's predecessors despite never having had good QB's to work with, then he comes with that argument. Talk about playing both sides of the fence. Or maybe he was just trying to make my argument for me.

No, it is still the coaches responsibility to find HIS QB to run his team. If the coach cannot find a QB, then he suffers with them. Same thing happened to Shula and Coslet. No QB, no success.

How is Andy Reid doing since McNabb fell on hard times, and Vick was not the same as his first full season with the Eagles? As a HC, you have to find your QB, that is on the coach. Once a coach does, he sets himself up for success.

Yes, I agree with you Flaming, you have to have a good QB to be successful, I am not denying that. However, you will not find a good HC typically without riding the coat tails of his QB, unless that team is ALL defense and the QB is a game manager.

By the way, Flacco is not a bad QB, he is just an overrated QB.

Marvin could not do what he did without the "good" Palmer, but neither could most any other NFL head coach either.

PS..I can't really stand Marvin Lewis, but I think your point of view is so f'n flawed I had to take this stance.

 

[Servo]

Funny thing is he holds it against Marvin's predecessors despite never having had good QB's to work with, then he comes with that argument. Talk about playing both sides of the fence. Or maybe he was just trying to make my argument for me.

So you consider Jon Kitna, 2009 Carson and 2011 Andy Dalton to be good QBs?

 

[flamingrey]

So you consider Jon Kitna, 2009 Carson and 2011 Andy Dalton to be good QBs?

As I've already stated:

In 2003, I thought Marvin did a very good job as head coach. I don't recall the strength of the schedule, so not sure if that was a factor, but the players really bought into what he was selling. Unfortunately, that fire didn't last too long, and it usually doesn't with a crappy coach.

2009 Carson's stats left quite a bit to be desired, but you cannot argue 5 game-winning drives set up by a defense going up against some very poor passing QBs. Not only were we a bounce or 2 away from 5-11, but Marvin did an excellent job of setting the team up for failure. Not to mention we lost something like 5 of our last 7 games. So, yes, the team absolutely went as Carson went in 2009.

2011 the stars aligned. Cake schedule, and a good defense going up against a bunch of really bad QBs. Not to mention the rest of the AFC had a down year. I can give credit to Marvin for beating ALL of the easy teams (never an easy feat), but there's no question that there was a lot of talent on the team. And still, despite that talent not a single win against a playoff team (0-8). I'm not as enamored as some with last year's team. Fool's gold.

 

[flamingrey]

PS..I can't really stand Marvin Lewis, but I think your point of view is so f'n flawed I had to take this stance

LOL @ Hobson calling someone else's POV flawed.

p.s. speaking of flawed POV's, the only thing you argued in your post is Marvin is a good talent evaluator. So what do you think of him as a coach?

 

[Servo]

As I've already stated:

In 2003, I thought Marvin did a very good job as head coach. I don't recall the strength of the schedule, so not sure if that was a factor, but the players really bought into what he was selling. Unfortunately, that fire didn't last too long, and it usually doesn't with a crappy coach.

2009 Carson's stats left quite a bit to be desired, but you cannot argue 5 game-winning drives set up by a defense going up against some very poor passing QBs. Not only were we a bounce or 2 away from 5-11, but Marvin did an excellent job of setting the team up for failure. Not to mention we lost something like 5 of our last 7 games. So, yes, the team absolutely went as Carson went in 2009.

2011 the stars aligned. Cake schedule, and a good defense going up against a bunch of really bad QBs. Not to mention the rest of the AFC had a down year. I can give credit to Marvin for beating ALL of the easy teams (never an easy feat), but there's no question that there was a lot of talent on the team. And still, despite that talent not a single win against a playoff team (0-8). I'm not as enamored as some with last year's team. Fool's gold.

Based on your post you cant think Marv is that bad of a coach. I mean your assesments of the seasons I mostly agree with. I think in 2009 if we had a good QB those last minute drives would not have been necessary. To Carson's credit he pulled them out...still by any measure not a good QB. I think the team won in spite of him and not because of him and he was just abysmal in the playoffs v. the Jets. Still though, Marv has been succesful without good QB play. I'm not saying the dude is Vince Lombardi or Bill Bellicek...but he's left things better than he found them here in Cincinnati which is really all you can ask of anybody. Especially considering the culture with the Bengals FO. Things are better now than they have been in years. They've got one of the (if not the best) young rosters in the game. They've got money to spend and a mandate to spend it. I'm still thinking 8-8 or 9-7 this year, but if the young players progress (particularly Dalton) they could make some noise in 13 (if they progress quickly they could make noise this year). The talent is legit. I genuinely like this team (typically I just rooted for the Bengals because they were the Bengals despite the high ratio of underachieving, dumb, non competitive, selfish players they had...they were tough to root for). I like where they are at right now and the direction they took post carson chad.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Didn't I see somewhere where the Patriots didn't have a single win against a winning team in 2011 during the regular season?

 

[flamingrey]

Based on your post you cant think Marv is that bad of a coach. I mean your assesments of the seasons I mostly agree with. I think in 2009 if we had a good QB those last minute drives would not have been necessary. To Carson's credit he pulled them out...still by any measure not a good QB. I think the team won in spite of him and not because of him and he was just abysmal in the playoffs v. the Jets. Still though, Marv has been succesful without good QB play. I'm not saying the dude is Vince Lombardi or Bill Bellicek...but he's left things better than he found them here in Cincinnati which is really all you can ask of anybody. Especially considering the culture with the Bengals FO. Things are better now than they have been in years. They've got one of the (if not the best) young rosters in the game. They've got money to spend and a mandate to spend it. I'm still thinking 8-8 or 9-7 this year, but if the young players progress (particularly Dalton) they could make some noise in 13 (if they progress quickly they could make noise this year). The talent is legit. I genuinely like this team (typically I just rooted for the Bengals because they were the Bengals despite the high ratio of underachieving, dumb, non competitive, selfish players they had...they were tough to root for). I like where they are at right now and the direction they took post carson chad.

I think if we had a different COACH in 2009, those last minute drives would not have been necessary. Do not forget, that's when Marvin first cemented his run-run-pass philosophy. We were in the tops in the league in 3rd and very long situations. Not to mention Chad was our #1 and Caldwell our #2. So while Carson's stats compared to previous seasons wasn't up to par, he wasn't worse than an average QB especially given what he had to work with. 3100 yards, 21 TD, 13 Int. I think "good QB" in 2009 would be a decent description. If there was any barrier for the team, it was Marvin, not Carson. So based on that assessment, not sure how you can conclude I might think Marvin was a decent coach.

Just like everyone before you, the only thing you have to offer is that he's a good talent evaluator. Great! Hire him in the scouting department. And all this talk of talent, where has that led us? Where's the success? Too bad for that talent, Marvin can't do anything with it since he sucks as a coach. Coaches that play not to lose can never maximize their talent.

I challenge you to name a single thing Marvin does well as a head coach.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Funny...I thought head coaches evaluated talent...hired Coordinators...put players in positions to succeed, oh and wins do count for something. Maybe not a ton, but they do reflect on the coach, whether you like to admit it or not.

Again, head coach is an all-encompassing position that is not defined just by his ability (or lack there of) with regards to in-game coaching, but also how the team responds, if they win, the type of talent on the field, the type of coordinators they hire...

We are all paiting broad strokes with regards to the position...the only one who seems to want to be narrow-minded about this issue is you...who refuses to look at anything other than in-game coaching...and you keep relying on Palmer/QB debate that is weak, at best. His true great season was 2005....in 2009 by your own admission it was "good" but a lot of teams have a QB that can throw for 3000 yards....even if you didn't like the run-run-pass way...it worked to a division title and a sweep of the AFCN.

 

[cincygrad]

I think if we had a different COACH in 2009, those last minute drives would not have been necessary. Do not forget, that's when Marvin first cemented his run-run-pass philosophy. We were in the tops in the league in 3rd and very long situations. Not to mention Chad was our #1 and Caldwell our #2. So while Carson's stats compared to previous seasons wasn't up to par, he wasn't worse than an average QB especially given what he had to work with. 3100 yards, 21 TD, 13 Int. I think "good QB" in 2009 would be a decent description. If there was any barrier for the team, it was Marvin, not Carson. So based on that assessment, not sure how you can conclude I might think Marvin was a decent coach.

Just like everyone before you, the only thing you have to offer is that he's a good talent evaluator. Great! Hire him in the scouting department. And all this talk of talent, where has that led us? Where's the success? Too bad for that talent, Marvin can't do anything with it since he sucks as a coach. Coaches that play not to lose can never maximize their talent.

I challenge you to name a single thing Marvin does well as a head coach.

I hate Marv and don't find him to be a great coach. But I will say that one thing I believe he does well is motivate his players to perform. He's had some teams that have had limited talent at key positions or limited success, but those teams never quit. Meanwhile, even good coaches like Tom Coughlin have had teams that have absolutely quit before the season ended. I never saw that in a Marvin Lewis coached team.

 

[Servo]

I think if we had a different COACH in 2009, those last minute drives would not have been necessary. Do not forget, that's when Marvin first cemented his run-run-pass philosophy. We were in the tops in the league in 3rd and very long situations. Not to mention Chad was our #1 and Caldwell our #2. So while Carson's stats compared to previous seasons wasn't up to par, he wasn't worse than an average QB especially given what he had to work with. 3100 yards, 21 TD, 13 Int. I think "good QB" in 2009 would be a decent description. If there was any barrier for the team, it was Marvin, not Carson. So based on that assessment, not sure how you can conclude I might think Marvin was a decent coach.

Just like everyone before you, the only thing you have to offer is that he's a good talent evaluator. Great! Hire him in the scouting department. And all this talk of talent, where has that led us? Where's the success? Too bad for that talent, Marvin can't do anything with it since he sucks as a coach. Coaches that play not to lose can never maximize their talent.

I challenge you to name a single thing Marvin does well as a head coach.

I didnt look up his stats...I just went off of memory. Yeah, his stats werent bad. I'll say statisically at least he was solid. I think the whole run 1st thing was due to compensate for a really poor O-Line and to protect Carson. I think Marv did that because he felt that he had to with the personnel that thye had...and overall it worked.

As far as what he does well as an HC I'll say that he seems to keep his team together in adversity. That might be more credit due to Zimmer...but the players seem to play hard for him and respect him. At the end of 2010 which was just a brutal season they closed out strong. So as a tactician or game planner he leaves alot to be desired but I think overall he does a good job of keeping everyone moving in the right direction. But yeah, the thing that appeals to me most about Marvin is the change in talent acquisition...that and the fact that I dont think we could get a better coach right now. I dont think he's a great HC and I dont think he's incompetent. We could do (and have done) much worse than Marv.

 

[flamingrey]

Funny...I thought head coaches evaluated talent...hired Coordinators...put players in positions to succeed, oh and wins do count for something. Maybe not a ton, but they do reflect on the coach, whether you like to admit it or not.

Again, head coach is an all-encompassing position that is not defined just by his ability (or lack there of) with regards to in-game coaching, but also how the team responds, if they win, the type of talent on the field, the type of coordinators they hire...

We are all paiting broad strokes with regards to the position...the only one who seems to want to be narrow-minded about this issue is you...who refuses to look at anything other than in-game coaching...and you keep relying on Palmer/QB debate that is weak, at best. His true great season was 2005....in 2009 by your own admission it was "good" but a lot of teams have a QB that can throw for 3000 yards....even if you didn't like the run-run-pass way...it worked to a division title and a sweep of the AFCN.

Gruden is here. Zimmer is here. Whether Marvin is gone tomorrow or not, those guys will still be around. They are not attached at the hip. So if you want to relish on the fact that Marvin brought those guys in, so now all of a sudden Marvin is a good coach and we should hang onto him, then that's your own prerogative.

As far as I'm concerned, the type of talent on the field, the type of coordinators they hire, etc. are so far down the list of things to judge a coach on, especially relative to game coaching, they really don't factor in. The coach only has so much input in those things. Feel free to disagree.

Run-run-pass was not the leading factor to a division title. Not even close.

Of course wins mean something, unless you're looking at it in a vacuum. Expand your horizon.

This is the 2nd time you've played a card similar to 'you don't agree with me so you must be stubborn'. Please stop. It makes you look foolish.

 

[flamingrey]

I didnt look up his stats...I just went off of memory. Yeah, his stats werent bad. I'll say statisically at least he was solid. I think the whole run 1st thing was due to compensate for a really poor O-Line and to protect Carson. I think Marv did that because he felt that he had to with the personnel that thye had...and overall it worked.

As far as what he does well as an HC I'll say that he seems to keep his team together in adversity. That might be more credit due to Zimmer...but the players seem to play hard for him and respect him. At the end of 2010 which was just a brutal season they closed out strong. So as a tactician or game planner he leaves alot to be desired but I think overall he does a good job of keeping everyone moving in the right direction. But yeah, the thing that appeals to me most about Marvin is the change in talent acquisition...that and the fact that I dont think we could get a better coach right now. I dont think he's a great HC and I dont think he's incompetent. We could do (and have done) much worse than Marv.

Henry died and the team lost 5 of 7 games. In 2003 the players played hard for him. That faded pretty fast. Last season they played hard for him. He's a good motivator, but this will probably be just as short-lived as the last time.

That's where we disagree. I think any young head coach could do a better job. Most other available coaches could do a better job. In fact, I believe he's completely incompetent coaching the team. And I do not believe Marvin is much better, if at all, than the guys we've had before him.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

Gruden is here. Zimmer is here. Whether Marvin is gone tomorrow or not, those guys will still be around. They are not attached at the hip. So if you want to relish on the fact that Marvin brought those guys in, so now all of a sudden Marvin is a good coach and we should hang onto him, then that's your own prerogative.

As far as I'm concerned, the type of talent on the field, the type of coordinators they hire, etc. are so far down the list of things to judge a coach on, especially relative to game coaching, they really don't factor in. The coach only has so much input in those things. Feel free to disagree.

Run-run-pass was not the leading factor to a division title. Not even close.

Of course wins mean something, unless you're looking at it in a vacuum. Expand your horizon.

This is the 2nd time you've played a card similar to 'you don't agree with me so you must be stubborn'. Please stop. It makes you look foolish.

I guess we can bring back Zeke Bratkowski and Chuck Bresnahan, those guys were good. Since the assistants play no part in the suceess of a coach really, and he is not responsible for brining them in.

 

[cincygrad]

I guess we can bring back Zeke Bratkowski and Chuck Bresnahan, those guys were good. Since the assistants play no part in the suceess of a coach really, and he is not responsible for brining them in.

To be fair, it was Marv that brought in Bresh to begin with.... The guy had no other tie to the organization besides the fact that he was friends with Marv.

As for Brat..... The guy did have some success when he had a good offensive line and had limited success after. Whether that was Marvin's fault can be debated. Marvin clearly was allowed to let go of Leslie Frazier after 2 seasons, so saying he wasn't allowed to fire Brat seems somewhat illogical.

 

[flamingrey]

I guess we can bring back Zeke Bratkowski and Chuck Bresnahan, those guys were good. Since the assistants play no part in the suceess of a coach really, and he is not responsible for brining them in.

I might suggest taking a deep breath and then re-reading my post. I made none of those arguments.

 

[CrashDavisSports]

I might suggest taking a deep breath and then re-reading my post. I made none of those arguments.

Deep breath taken and the thread has about run its course with me. I am getting quite bored on this subject anyways as I have little good to say about Marvin other than his recent hiring of coaches and his last few drafts. Outside that, I wouldn't mind seeing him go.