49 out of 53

[Bengal Dragon]

I have supported Marvin until this year. He took the Bengals from laughingstock to decent in his first three years. However, it is the coach's job to build a team and not depend on just a few players. The loss of one, two, or three players should not destroy a team that is built from the bottom up. It should hurt, but not destroy a team. 49 of the 53 players currently on the Bengals team have been brought in under Marvin's watch. The coaches have also been brought in by Marvin except Bradkosky (Not spelled correctly, but I don't have time to look it up). The Bengals do not look good on the field. Other teams dominate them at times. The Bengals have far too much talent to look so bad at times. Since the players and coaches have been picked by Marvin, he must shoulder the blame. If the players do not play up to their ability and are kept by the coaching staff, and the coaching staff cannot coach up the players, then changes need to be made. Marvin makes very few changes. All teams have injuries, but don't go to pieces like the Bengals have. Look at New England. They lost their best player (Brady) and are still winning because they have a system to replace players. I don't believe the Bengals have. This falls on the head coach.

[Scoutforlife591]

[quote name='Bengal Dragon' post='719340' date='Oct 29 2008, 07:01 PM']I have supported Marvin until this year. He took the Bengals from laughingstock to decent in his first three years. However, it is the coach's job to build a team and not depend on just a few players. The loss of one, two, or three players should not destroy a team that is built from the bottom up. It should hurt, but not destroy a team. 49 of the 53 players currently on the Bengals team have been brought in under Marvin's watch. The coaches have also been brought in by Marvin except Bradkosky (Not spelled correctly, but I don't have time to look it up). The Bengals do not look good on the field. Other teams dominate them at times. The Bengals have far too much talent to look so bad at times. Since the players and coaches have been picked by Marvin, he must shoulder the blame. If the players do not play up to their ability and are kept by the coaching staff, and the coaching staff cannot coach up the players, then changes need to be made. Marvin makes very few changes. All teams have injuries, but don't go to pieces like the Bengals have. Look at New England. They lost their best player (Brady) and are still winning because they have a system to replace players. I don't believe the Bengals have. This falls on the head coach.[/quote]

It's actually 48. I don't know how anyone could argue that Marvin brought Chris Henry here....the 2nd time.

[Bengal Dragon]

[quote name='Scoutforlife591' post='719346' date='Oct 29 2008, 06:20 PM']It's actually 48. I don't know how anyone could argue that Marvin brought Chris Henry here....the 2nd time.[/quote]

I partly agree. Chris Henry was originally brought in by Marvin but is now on staff because of Mike Brown.

[Scoutforlife591]

[quote name='Bengal Dragon' post='719353' date='Oct 29 2008, 07:42 PM']I partly agree. Chris Henry was originally brought in by Marvin but is now on staff because of Mike Brown.[/quote]

So you completely agree...because that was my point...he's here because of Mike, and probably was the first time too.

[ThurmanMunster]

i didnt know mike brown stepped aside and lets marvin draft on his own.

[-GoBengals-]

[quote name='Bengal Dragon' post='719340' date='Oct 29 2008, 07:01 PM']I have supported Marvin until this year. He took the Bengals from laughingstock to decent in his first three years. However, it is the coach's job to build a team and not depend on just a few players. The loss of one, two, or three players should not destroy a team that is built from the bottom up. It should hurt, but not destroy a team. 49 of the 53 players currently on the Bengals team have been brought in under Marvin's watch. The coaches have also been brought in by Marvin except Bradkosky (Not spelled correctly, but I don't have time to look it up). The Bengals do not look good on the field. Other teams dominate them at times. The Bengals have far too much talent to look so bad at times. Since the players and coaches have been picked by Marvin, he must shoulder the blame. If the players do not play up to their ability and are kept by the coaching staff, and the coaching staff cannot coach up the players, then changes need to be made. Marvin makes very few changes. All teams have injuries, but don't go to pieces like the Bengals have. Look at New England. They lost their best player (Brady) and are still winning because they have a system to replace players. I don't believe the Bengals have. This falls on the head coach.[/quote]


there were over 40 players injured last year, at some point or another, and yes, a few players, if key, can easily kill a team..... easily..

if the saints lost brees, bush and a LT, they are the same team? the ravens lose ray lewis, suggs, and reed and that defense is in the top 20? not a chance, they have a winning record then? not a chance

how good are the chargers without rivers, LT, and cromartie? garbage, sproiles is decent, but no LT.

you have NO insight into what goes on behind the scenes, what changes would you know are or arent made? as far as coaching changes, marvin is on his 3rd d-cooard in 5-6 seasons.. id say thats change. why hasnt bratkowski been changed? cause he has been top 10 every single season since he arrived here until this season. even with kitna...

there isnt anything any coach on the planet could do to fix this season.

take any teams top 3 most talented players away or at least minimize their effectiveness, and they drop off at least 40%.... easily.


name a single coach out there who would have done better this season with this group of players? any single coach on the planet who has us not at 0-8 right now with this group?


there isnt any. .. with what marvin built, and drafted, this is how the team should look.

hall
joseph
oneal(as nickel)
rivers
thurman
pollack
brooks (as rotation
ndukwe
madieu
white (as rotation)
Geathers
odom/rucker(rucker lost to several years of injury, doing a fantastic job at this point)
peko
jt/sims/shirley

12 of the above 17 players have been hurt, paralyzed or kicked from the league (again due to rules established AFTER we drafted them), at some point since marvins been here, some for whole seasons, some for severlal games, some for a game or two.. there is a whole lot of talent there...

as for the offense and especially the offensive line, we ahve drafted several linemen, keift was lost to injury for whole seasons, levi missed a buncha time and spent a lot of time sucking during recovery... braham was lost unexpectidly,

we have drafted 8 offensive linemen since marvins arrival, ... all of which aside from eric G have played well or been injured..

[Bgal]

Other than Carson, the Bengals are fairly healthy this year. They weren't exactly looking good or winning games when Carson played either. Brat may have been top 10, but his play calling has always been frustrating. He's been blessed with a lot of talent. As the talent lessens or stops caring, he can't even get the offense to get a first down.

I'm tired of hearing the same old excuses for this team. It's not like the Bengals are having one down year. Other than 2005, they have been average or very below average for almost 20 years. Maybe there's a reason they suffer more injuries than any other team? Why are they always one of the last teams to sign their first round pick (besides Carson)? The Bengals' organization is obviously not playing the game right, because they always lose.

[Squirrlnutz]

[quote name='GoBengals' post='719441' date='Oct 30 2008, 12:50 AM']there were over 40 players injured last year, at some point or another, and yes, a few players, if key, can easily kill a team..... easily..

if the saints lost brees, bush and a LT, they are the same team? the ravens lose ray lewis, suggs, and reed and that defense is in the top 20? not a chance, they have a winning record then? not a chance

how good are the chargers without rivers, LT, and cromartie? garbage, sproiles is decent, but no LT.

[b]you have NO insight into what goes on behind the scenes, what changes would you know are or arent made?[/b] as far as coaching changes, marvin is on his 3rd d-cooard in 5-6 seasons.. id say thats change. why hasnt bratkowski been changed? [b]cause he has been top 10 every single season since he arrived here until this season. even with kitna...[/b]
there isnt anything any coach on the planet could do to fix this season.

take any teams top 3 most talented players away or at least minimize their effectiveness, and they drop off at least 40%.... easily.


name a single coach out there who would have done better this season with this group of players? any single coach on the planet who has us not at 0-8 right now with this group?


there isnt any. .. with what marvin built, and drafted, this is how the team should look.

hall
joseph
oneal(as nickel)
rivers
thurman
pollack
brooks (as rotation
ndukwe
madieu
white (as rotation)
Geathers
odom/rucker(rucker lost to several years of injury, doing a fantastic job at this point)
peko
jt/sims/shirley

12 of the above 17 players have been hurt, paralyzed or kicked from the league (again due to rules established AFTER we drafted them), at some point since marvins been here, some for whole seasons, some for severlal games, some for a game or two.. there is a whole lot of talent there...

as for the offense and especially the offensive line, we ahve drafted several linemen, keift was lost to injury for whole seasons, levi missed a buncha time and spent a lot of time sucking during recovery... braham was lost unexpectidly,

we have drafted 8 offensive linemen since marvins arrival, ... all of which aside from eric G have played well or been injured..[/quote]

Aside from the high you get braggin about your "insider info" do you ever stop to think that the lay-fan doesn't need insider info to realize that 0 wins = a fucking problem?

We don't care that the plans layed out haven't come to fruition. We don't care that "if things had worked out more in our favor we should be fielding these other guys instead of whats out there now."

If your talking year 2 of a coaching regime I get it. Year 3, ok but you need to have better contingency plans. Year 4, this is becoming a problem...do something about it. Year 5, year 6 its just becoming disgraceful.

The coaches need to get more out of what they have, thats why they get paid. 6 years into this thing we should not be on a 3 year free-fall into the NFL record books.


Bratkowski...top 10...in the run game too? Oh thats right we can just throw that out because our passing game can compensate for 0 running game and we can rack up enough yards throwing the ball all around the field while trailing in every game and end up in the top 10 at the end of the year.

[oldschooler]

12 of those 49 were first year players.

And 26 of those 49 players have 3 years or less experience.

4 of the remaining 23 players, with more than 3 years experience,
weren`t on the roster at the beginning of the 2007 season.

Of the players with more than 3 years experience.

Benson wasn`t signed until right before the 5th game.
Chris Henry played in 1 preseason game, and was suspended the first 4 games.
Chris Perry hadn`t played in a real game since 2006.
Odom missed basically all of training camp and preseason.
Utecth has missed 3 games.
Carson Palmer played in 2 games while injured, missed 4 others.
Levi Jones has knee cartlidge damage, and has to get animal fat injected in his knee.
Kenny Watson missed 2 games.
Jamar Fletcher was signed right before the Browns game, and has missed a game since.
Shayne Graham missed 2 games.
TJ Houshmandzadeh missed all of the OTAs, all of Training Camp and all of Preseason.
Chad Johnson seperated his shoulder in the 2nd preseason game, and will be out if he is hit the wrong way.
Dexter Jackson missed 5 games due to injury.
John Thornton missed 1 game due to injury.

So 14 of the 23 players with more than 3 years experience, has had some issues with injury,
suspension, and/or weren`t even with the team at the beginning of the season.


And the only time the Bengals have been dominated is in the 2nd half or 4th quarter.

[|SF2|]

I think its time to dispel the notion that we have had an elite offense in the past with Brat at the helm. If the theory is we had excellent offensive weapons when healthy then should we not have been one of the elite offenses in the league at some point? Top 10% maybe,.. top 15%.

The reality is this offense has NEVER been in the top 10% in the league since Marvin has been coach if you go by either points (my choice which helps Brat) or yards.

The best we have done in 2005 when we were in the top 12.5% in points scored. Good, Yes. Elite given the talent we had, thats debatable.

The only other good/ maybe great season was 2006. That year we barely cracked into the top 25% in offense. In fact we ranked 8th out of 32 in points and yards. Thats good no doubt but is that really GREAT as some seem to think? When you enter the playoff does the 8th ranked offense scare you or is it the top 1 thru 4? Given the weapons we had is barely breaking the top 25% that impressive? Lets move on.

Last year we did not break the top 3rd in offense.

This year we have not broken the BOTTOM 5%.

So we had one Great year in my mind given the talent, 1 good year and the rest have been average to bad considering the weapons we had on offense.

Jeff Blake had very similar results but had a worse defense, thats right, a worse defense. I know you all think Blake sucked and Palmer is God but the numbers really don't prove that. Palmer is better but not by much.

[TheBeaverHunter]

[quote name='Squirrlnutz' post='719484' date='Oct 30 2008, 07:42 AM']Aside from the high you get braggin about your "insider info" do you ever stop to think that the lay-fan doesn't need insider info to realize that 0 wins = a fucking problem?

We don't care that the plans layed out haven't come to fruition. We don't care that "if things had worked out more in our favor we should be fielding these other guys instead of whats out there now."

If your talking year 2 of a coaching regime I get it. Year 3, ok but you need to have better contingency plans. Year 4, this is becoming a problem...do something about it. Year 5, year 6 its just becoming disgraceful.

The coaches need to get more out of what they have, thats why they get paid. 6 years into this thing we should not be on a 3 year free-fall into the NFL record books.


Bratkowski...top 10...in the run game too? Oh thats right we can just throw that out because our passing game can compensate for 0 running game and we can rack up enough yards throwing the ball all around the field while trailing in every game and end up in the top 10 at the end of the year. [/quote]


No matter what logic you throw at them, they will never agree with you. I have stopped, not given up, just tired. It is like a dog chasing it's tail with these people. They keep running the same circle, refusing to accept their savior has failed and shifting blame elsewhere.

[|SF2|]

[quote name='oldschooler' post='719487' date='Oct 30 2008, 09:24 AM']12 of those 49 were first year players.

And 26 of those 49 players have 3 years or less experience.

4 of the remaining 23 players, with more than 3 years experience,
weren`t on the roster at the beginning of the 2007 season.

Of the players with more than 3 years experience.

Benson wasn`t signed until right before the 5th game.
Chris Henry played in 1 preseason game, and was suspended the first 4 games.
Chris Perry hadn`t played in a real game since 2006.
Odom missed basically all of training camp and preseason.
Utecth has missed 3 games.
Carson Palmer played in 2 games while injured, missed 4 others.
Levi Jones has knee cartlidge damage, and has to get animal fat injected in his knee.
Kenny Watson missed 2 games.
Jamar Fletcher was signed right before the Browns game, and has missed a game since.
Shayne Graham missed 2 games.
TJ Houshmandzadeh missed all of the OTAs, all of Training Camp and all of Preseason.
Chad Johnson seperated his shoulder in the 2nd preseason game, and will be out if he is hit the wrong way.
Dexter Jackson missed 5 games due to injury.
John Thornton missed 1 game due to injury.

So 14 of the 23 players with more than 3 years experience, has had some issues with injury,
suspension, and/or weren`t even with the team at the beginning of the season.


And the only time the Bengals have been dominated is in the 2nd half or 4th quarter.[/quote]

So basically the Bengals were depending on guys who were either hurt, had never proven themselves in the past due to injury, assumed our franchise QB would play all 16 games and pretended that our 2 pro bowl WRs not participating in OTAs was really not that big a deal.

The injury excuse would be on every side of a Bengal Magic Eight ball by the way. Seems our team is always the most injured but by golly next year will be different.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='SF2' post='719495' date='Oct 30 2008, 07:58 AM']Jeff Blake had very similar results but had a worse defense, thats right, a worse defense. I know you all think Blake sucked and Palmer is God but the numbers really don't prove that. Palmer is better but not by much.[/quote]



Jeff Blakes best year as a Bengal, he had an 82.2 QB rating.
He only had 2 seasons out of 6, where his QB rating was over 80.

Out of Carson's 5 seasons as the Bengals starter, he has had 3
seasons that were better than Blake's best season.
Even last season, when Palmer had an "off" season,
he had a better QB rating, than Blake had in his 'best"
season as a Bengal.

Carson has also thrown 107 TD passes in 65 games.
Blake threw 93 TD passes in 75 games.

[Palmer4HOF]

[quote name='TheBeaverHunter' post='719502' date='Oct 30 2008, 09:20 AM']No matter what logic you throw at them, they will never agree with you. I have stopped, not given up, just tired. It is like a dog chasing it's tail with these people. They keep running the same circle, refusing to accept their savior has failed and shifting blame elsewhere.[/quote]

x 80000


No reason to even try anymore... There will always be the "bad luck" or "injuries" or the "refs" for them to blame for our problems

[oldschooler]

[quote name='SF2' post='719505' date='Oct 30 2008, 08:28 AM']So basically the Bengals were depending on guys who were either hurt, had never proven themselves in the past due to injury, assumed our franchise QB would play all 16 games and pretended that our 2 pro bowl WRs not participating in OTAs was really not that big a deal.

The injury excuse would be on every side of a Bengal Magic Eight ball by the way. Seems our team is always the most injured but by golly next year will be different.[/quote]

You call it an excuse, I call it facts.

Most of the players I listed, were hurt after Training Camp had started.
All except Levi and Perry. And most of the others were added because of injuries to others.

They "blew it up". And the most experienced players
have had injuries. I don`t know how you "plan" for that.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='Palmer4HOF' post='719511' date='Oct 30 2008, 08:39 AM']x 80000


No reason to even try anymore... There will always be the "bad luck" or "injuries" or the "refs" for them to blame for our problems[/quote]



Every team wins or loses because of "inches".
You know, it is called "a game of inches"?
So yeah, having bad luck and injuries, or refs
making shitty calls, will effect those "inches".

Sorry if you all can`t understand that logic.
And just want to blame Mike Brown or some coach
ALL the time.

[|SF2|]

[quote name='oldschooler' post='719507' date='Oct 30 2008, 10:32 AM']Jeff Blakes best year as a Bengal, he had an 82.2 QB rating.
He only had 2 seasons out of 6, where his QB rating was over 80.

Out of Carson's 5 seasons as the Bengals starter, he has had 3
seasons that were better than Blake's best season.
Even last season, when Palmer had an "off" season,
he had a better QB rating, than Blake had in his 'best"
season as a Bengal.

Carson has also thrown 107 TD passes in 65 games.
Blake threw 93 TD passes in 75 games.[/quote]


So? I never said Blake was better than Carson, just said Blake led offensive teams were not much different rating wise than Carson's.

Carson is a better QB but my point was more that many on this board have an inflated perception of how good our offense was when it was healthy and in its prime. The point is Palmer's best 3 years team wise are hardly better than Blakes 3 best years. Sure, he had a better QB rating but that did not translate into an elite offense.

The point is we had a good offense for a few years, nothing more. It was not a dominant offense except for MAYBE 2005. Two years it was good, NOT GREAT. With the weapons we had you would have thought we were in the top 20% every year but it only happened once.

[|SF2|]

[quote name='oldschooler' post='719513' date='Oct 30 2008, 10:45 AM']Every team wins or loses because of "inches".
You know, it is called "a game of inches"?
So yeah, having bad luck and injuries, or refs
making shitty calls, will effect those "inches".

Sorry if you all can`t understand that logic.
And just want to blame Mike Brown or some coach
ALL the time.[/quote]

We are the Cincinnati Schleprocks!!! Dude even has stripes on his HAT!!! Word!!

[img]http://www.topthat.net/webrock/images/schlep.jpg[/img]

[oldschooler]

[quote name='SF2' post='719517' date='Oct 30 2008, 08:59 AM']So? I never said Blake was better than Carson, just said Blake led offensive teams were not much different rating wise than Carson's.

Carson is a better QB but my point was more that many on this board have an inflated perception of how good our offense was when it was healthy and in its prime. The point is Palmer's best 3 years team wise are hardly better than Blakes 3 best years. Sure, he had a better QB rating but that did not translate into an elite offense.

The point is we had a good offense for a few years, nothing more. It was not a dominant offense except for MAYBE 2005. Two years it was good, NOT GREAT. With the weapons we had you would have thought we were in the top 20% every year but it only happened once.[/quote]


Carson has only been the QB for 5 seasons, counting this one.
And has been injured in 3 out of those 5 seasons.


Also top 20%? 20% of 32 = 6.4
Why don`t you just say top 6?

I guess top 10 Offense sounds to good.
So let`s skew it to percentages instead.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='SF2' post='719520' date='Oct 30 2008, 09:03 AM']We are the Cincinnati Schleprocks!!! Dude even has stripes on his HAT!!! Word!!

[img]http://www.topthat.net/webrock/images/schlep.jpg[/img][/quote]


Wowsie wowsie, woo woo !

[|SF2|]

[quote name='oldschooler' post='719521' date='Oct 30 2008, 11:07 AM']Carson has only been the QB for 5 seasons, counting this one.
And has been injured in 3 out of those 5 seasons.


Also top 20%? 20% of 32 = 6.4
Why don`t you just say top 6?

I guess top 10 Offense sounds to good.
So let`s skew it to percentages instead.[/quote]

Because top 10 is typically used when you grade on a 100 point scale not on a 32 point scale. Furthermore, the top 10 in pro football is not nearly the same as the top 10 in say college football, basketball etc...

Being in the top ten in the NFL is not the same.

Percentages tell the true story. If my kid said he was in the top 10 in his class (18 students) does that mean he is excellent or maybe just average?

The perception is we have had an awesome offense. The truth is it was great one year, and good for a few others.

During the great 49er runs they were ranked #1 in offense 4 years in a row and the top three or better 6 years in a row. The Rams were #1 three years in a row, Indy 4th or better 8 of the last 9 years.

We hit 6th once and 8th another. 10 and 11th as well but thats not GREAT, only good. Excluding this year we have had a good offense on the average but not GREAT. Keep in mind our defense has sucked as well so you should expect MORE scoring from an offense in this situation, not less.

We have had a good offense under BRAT, NOTHING MORE.

[Bgal]

[quote name='oldschooler' post='719513' date='Oct 30 2008, 09:45 AM']Every team wins or loses because of "inches".
You know, it is called "a game of inches"?
So yeah, having bad luck and injuries, or refs
making shitty calls, will effect those "inches".

Sorry if you all can`t understand that logic.
And just want to blame Mike Brown or some coach
ALL the time.[/quote]

Teams that actually win games get the inches they need. Those teams overcome injuries and bad calls. Those teams make halftime adjustments and don't fall apart in the 4th quarter.

Bad luck doesn't bring 0-8 and 20 years of shitty football teams. Bad management does.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='Bgal' post='719537' date='Oct 30 2008, 09:29 AM']Teams that actually win games get the inches they need. Those teams overcome injuries and bad calls. Those teams make halftime adjustments and don't fall apart in the 4th quarter.

Bad luck doesn't bring 0-8 and 20 years of shitty football teams. Bad management does.[/quote]

20 years of shitty football teams? I guess the 1988 Bengals were shitty?
And so were the 2005 Bengals?

Anyway, I'm sorry, we were talking about this season, weren`t we?



It is well known that this team went into rebuilding mode in 2003.
And that they had injuries and suspesions to key draft picks.

It is also well known, or at least it should be, that this team just "blew it up" this past offseason.
That`s why they are one of the youngest teams in the NFL now.
And they are one of the youngest teams in the NFL, that is also
playing the toughest schedules,with a lot of their most experienced
players injured. I don`t see what that has to do with 20 years ago.

You want to blame it all on management? Fine. I don`t see it that way though.

[oldschooler]

[quote name='SF2' post='719534' date='Oct 30 2008, 09:27 AM']Because top 10 is typically used when you grade on a 100 point scale not on a 32 point scale. Furthermore, the top 10 in pro football is not nearly the same as the top 10 in say college football, basketball etc...

Being in the top ten in the NFL is not the same.

Percentages tell the true story. If my kid said he was in the top 10 in his class (18 students) does that mean he is excellent or maybe just average?

The perception is we have had an awesome offense. The truth is it was great one year, and good for a few others.

During the great 49er runs they were ranked #1 in offense 4 years in a row and the top three or better 6 years in a row. The Rams were #1 three years in a row, Indy 4th or better 8 of the last 9 years.

We hit 6th once and 8th another. 10 and 11th as well but thats not GREAT, only good. Excluding this year we have had a good offense on the average but not GREAT. Keep in mind our defense has sucked as well so you should expect MORE scoring from an offense in this situation, not less.

We have had a good offense under BRAT, NOTHING MORE.[/quote]



50% is average.
20% is well above average.

[Bgal]

[quote name='oldschooler' post='719545' date='Oct 30 2008, 10:41 AM']20 years of shitty football teams? I guess the 1988 Bengals were shitty?
And so were the 2005 Bengals?

Anyway, I'm sorry, we were talking about this season, weren`t we?



It is well known that this team went into rebuilding mode in 2003.
And that they had injuries and suspesions to key draft picks.

It is also well known, or at least it should be, that this team just "blew it up" this past offseason.
That`s why they are one of the youngest teams in the NFL now.
And they are one of the youngest teams in the NFL, that is also
playing the toughest schedules,with a lot of their most experienced
players injured. I don`t see what that has to do with 20 years ago.

You want to blame it all on management? Fine. I don`t see it that way though.[/quote]


It's always the same old story. Rebuilding... young team. Maybe in 2014 we'll have another first round playoff loss and consider all this worth it. What were they doing before rebuilding in 2003? Lots of drafts that didn't work out and injuries. Same shit.