On having a GM

[rwalling]

I saw this excerpt in Doc's column this morning on the Reds hiring Walt Jocketty and hd to wipe coffee off my laptop:

"On the positive side, there is absolutely nothing wrong with adding bright people to your business. If the Bengals did this, we'd be doing cartwheels on Fountain Square. After we awakened from passing out."

and again

"The move says a couple things about Life With Bob:

Castellini is friends with Jocketty and trusts his expertise;

He isn't shy about making moves that keep people on their toes;

He wants to win and is smart and ego-less enough to let others show him how.

All of which is good. Again: How would you feel if Mike Brown were that way?"

I love this town! Two competent GMs in one stadium and none in the stadium directly across the parking lot!

[HoosierCat]

But hey, per bengals.com, average PBS ticket prices for 2008 will be 20 cents lower than the NFL average. So we got that going for us.

[cincyhokie]

I saw this excerpt in Doc's column this morning on the Reds hiring Walt Jocketty and hd to wipe coffee off my laptop:

"On the positive side, there is absolutely nothing wrong with adding bright people to your business. If the Bengals did this, we'd be doing cartwheels on Fountain Square. After we awakened from passing out."

and again

"The move says a couple things about Life With Bob:

Castellini is friends with Jocketty and trusts his expertise;

He isn't shy about making moves that keep people on their toes;

He wants to win and is smart and ego-less enough to let others show him how.

All of which is good. Again: How would you feel if Mike Brown were that way?"

I love this town! Two competent GMs in one stadium and none in the stadium directly across the parking lot!

That's good stuff. The Reds may not be a winning team this year but at least they are making an effort....and in this town that goes a really long way with the fans.

As far as the Bengals go, I was thinking about cancelling my season tickets if both Breshnahan and Bratowski were not fired. I figured why cancel when I can just sell all 10 games and make a profit on some idiot like me with false hope. It's the Mike Brown way.

The Reds are making dealing with the Bengals easier. I'm seriously about to go into a state of apathy with this team like the one from about 1991-2002. Wake me when we decide to compete again.

[COB]

The Reds are making dealing with the Bengals easier.

I know we all like to get our hate on for Mike Brown, but this statement defies logic. It's not the 90s. Since Marvin's been hired, the Bengals are a winning organization. The Reds? I don't know their exact winning percentage during these last 5 years, but no way is it above .470. I know for sure they haven't won their division or even had a winning season.

In the last five years, the Bengals have been better. That's just reality. And they'll be better next year too. The comments that writer made are rooted in a blatantly obvious dislike for Mike Brown. Meanwhile he obviously has mad love for the Reds' brass. Spin it any way you want, Mike Brown is running a winning organization, and the Reds are running a losing one.

[cincyhokie]

I know I've had a few beers tonight but are you serious? Mike Brown has never run a winning anything except for 2005. He sat on the success and look where it's gotten him. The Reds? Yeah, they've sucked. They've making moves though. And these teams and this city, is in need for a change. I'm a proponent of change.

By the way, please post Mike Brown's career record. I can tell you it's not a winning one.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

Spin it any way you want, Mike Brown is running a winning organization

Wow, just wow.

[HoosierCat]

Spin it any way you want, Mike Brown is running a winning organization

Wow, just wow.

I am forced to agree with shula.

[COB]

Spin it any way you want, Mike Brown is running a winning organization

Wow, just wow.

I am forced to agree with shula.

Hey, since he hired Marvin, they're winning, and they're better than the Reds. That's a fact.

Saying, Wow, just wow, the implication being I'm some sort of a naive moron, doesn't change the truth about the Bengals over the last five years.

How we all perceive Mike Brown and the Bengals, and the Reds, is tinged by the totality of their performances during our lifetimes. But the teams they are fielding right now are a different story. Marvin's Bengals are in the top half of the league. Yet our perception of today's Bengal team is imbued with that sense of doom and hopelessness that comes from decades of futility. That perception is wrong.

The Bengals are winners. In my opinion they'll have a winning record next year. Brown is finally spending money, and drafting better.

Can someone please explain to me how that sportswriter can rave about how brilliant the Reds management is, and fantasize about how good the Bengals would be if only we had management like the Reds? Yea, if only we were as well managed as the Reds, we'd have five losing seasons in the last five years instead of one.

Here's the definition of retarded, biased, hack sports writing: Writing that puts me in the position of defending Mike Brown.

I'll say it again, and whether anyone wants to accept it or not, it's the truth: Mike Brown is running a winning organization.

[cincyhokie]

How we all perceive Mike Brown and the Bengals, and the Reds, is tinged by the totality of their performances during our lifetimes. But the teams they are fielding right now are a different story. Marvin's Bengals are in the top half of the league. Yet our perception of today's Bengal team is imbued with that sense of doom and hopelessness that comes from decades of futility. That perception is wrong.

The Bengals are winners. In my opinion they'll have a winning record next year. Brown is finally spending money, and drafting better.

Can someone please explain to me how that sportswriter can rave about how brilliant the Reds management is, and fantasize about how good the Bengals would be if only we had management like the Reds? Yea, if only we were as well managed as the Reds, we'd have five losing seasons in the last five years instead of one.

Here's the definition of retarded, biased, hack sports writing: Writing that puts me in the position of defending Mike Brown.

I'll say it again, and whether anyone wants to accept it or not, it's the truth: Mike Brown is running a winning organization.

It is a matter of perception. Since the Bengals hired Marvin Lewis they are 42-38. In 5 years they have one playoff appearance. By definition the record that is 4 games over .500 is a winning one.

The problem I see is that Mike Brown has impeded his own success. Instead of improving on what culminated in an 11-5 year in 2005, he's stayed at the ol' "if it ain't broke don't fix it" mentallity. Just because you find success does not mean that you don't continue to seek improvements. The defense we had in 2005 needed major changes especially on the d-line. We kept status quo in free agency and did not address the line in the draft.

As I see it, Mike Brown is more a detriment to his success than he is a proponent of it. He didn't know how to continue with the winning ways of 2005, concerning personnel moves, because he has never won. He doesn't know how.

Speaking of the Reds. I was agreeing with Daugherty's column because he mentioned what the Reds are doing NOW. Not what the Reds have done. I would like to see both teams with a bright outlook, but right now it looks like the Reds are heading in the winning direction and the Bengals headed for their usual place. Mediocrity.

[BengalszoneBilly]

The Bengals are winners. In my opinion they'll have a winning record next year.

I'd like to say that same thing about a winning season in '08, but will hold off until I see which way they go in the draft and hopefully the free agent market as well. If Cincinnati's glaring team weaknesses are not seriously addressed via these two avenues, I could not possibly hope to pick for them a winning record, much less 8-8 again.

[cincyhokie]

The Bengals are winners. In my opinion they'll have a winning record next year.

I'd like to say that same thing about a winning season in '08, but will hold off until I see which way they go in the draft and hopefully the free agent market as well. If Cincinnati's glaring team weaknesses are not seriously addressed via these two avenues, I could not possibly hope to pick for them a winning record, much less 8-8 again.

We probably won't see answers to our glaring problems. Just half ass hole plugging moves that raise our curiosity enough to draw us to the stadium again next year. Not with confidence. Just with hope that we may do well.

[Oldcat]

The Bengals are winners. In my opinion they'll have a winning record next year.

I'd like to say that same thing about a winning season in '08, but will hold off until I see which way they go in the draft and hopefully the free agent market as well. If Cincinnati's glaring team weaknesses are not seriously addressed via these two avenues, I could not possibly hope to pick for them a winning record, much less 8-8 again.

We probably won't see answers to our glaring problems. Just half ass hole plugging moves that raise our curiosity enough to draw us to the stadium again next year. Not with confidence. Just with hope that we may do well.

And in what year in the last five have we *not* addressed needs of the team in the draft? Our glaring needs last year were corner, lb..and we drafted a corner in round 1, and a LB in round 3 (from supplimental draft). We drafted a RB to complement/replace Rudi. We needed safety help and got two. We drafted a Defensive Lineman, and a center. We have picked so many linebackers its hard to keep track.

Sure it would have been nice it get a hall of fame pass rusher, tight end, or whatever else we see as glaring flaws. But those guys aren't always available, and its unfair to forget about what glaring flaws they DID address in the draft.

[generaldreedle]

Spin it any way you want, Mike Brown is running a winning organization

Wow, just wow.

I am forced to agree with shula.

Hey, since he hired Marvin, they're winning, and they're better than the Reds. That's a fact.

Saying, Wow, just wow, the implication being I'm some sort of a naive moron, doesn't change the truth about the Bengals over the last five years.

How we all perceive Mike Brown and the Bengals, and the Reds, is tinged by the totality of their performances during our lifetimes. But the teams they are fielding right now are a different story. Marvin's Bengals are in the top half of the league. Yet our perception of today's Bengal team is imbued with that sense of doom and hopelessness that comes from decades of futility. That perception is wrong.

The Bengals are winners. In my opinion they'll have a winning record next year. Brown is finally spending money, and drafting better.

Can someone please explain to me how that sportswriter can rave about how brilliant the Reds management is, and fantasize about how good the Bengals would be if only we had management like the Reds? Yea, if only we were as well managed as the Reds, we'd have five losing seasons in the last five years instead of one.

Here's the definition of retarded, biased, hack sports writing: Writing that puts me in the position of defending Mike Brown.

I'll say it again, and whether anyone wants to accept it or not, it's the truth: Mike Brown is running a winning organization.

When I am judging an owners success, I like to look at what their record is as a whole. Not cherry pick a 5 year span. Oh, and by the way, over the last five years we have had only one winning season, three .500 seasons, and one losing season.

[BengalszoneBilly]

And in what year in the last five have we *not* addressed needs of the team in the draft? Our glaring needs last year were corner, lb..and we drafted a corner in round 1, and a LB in round 3 (from supplimental draft).

Our needs on the LINE have been ignored or weakly addressed. This DL pick you mentioned had no impact whatsoever. Overall we're paying the price today for it by sitting and watching the playoffs again. Granted, we got some good DB's, but with no pressure being consistently put on the opposing QB, they simply can't do their job as well.

The offensive line is another under/poorly addressed area of concern. Andrews and Guy-chick aren't the answer.

[cincyhokie]

And in what year in the last five have we *not* addressed needs of the team in the draft? Our glaring needs last year were corner, lb..and we drafted a corner in round 1, and a LB in round 3 (from supplimental draft).

Our needs on the LINE have been ignored or weakly addressed. This DL pick you mentioned had no impact whatsoever. Overall we're paying the price today for it by sitting and watching the playoffs again. Granted, we got some good DB's, but with no pressure being consistently put on the opposing QB, they simply can't do their job as well.

The offensive line is another under/poorly addressed area of concern. Andrews and Guy-chick aren't the answer.

Exactly. I'd argue to say that for the past 4 years we've needed DTs much more than any other position. When have we seen any kind of QB pressure from our front 4? I can't remember. Robinson and Thorton take up blockers and that's it. They are not impact players. Year after year I keep waiting for the Bengals to purge their subpar DTs. Year after year we are status quo and subsiquently we suck. Offenses do not have to plan for any one defensive player on this team, let alone the defensive line. Not one.

As far as J. Smith, Andrews, and Guy-check go....we proclaim them as good here in Bengalville. I would be very very surprised if they make an impact anywhere for any other team. And that's the problem. We need impact players on defense. We don't have any.

But hey, Cincinnati falls in love with familiar faces. It doesn't matter if they are good for the team or not.

[HoosierCat]

Fox just mentioned that the Bengals currently hold the record for most consecutive seasons without a playoff victory at 17 (and counting)...

[COB]

When I am judging an owners success, I like to look at what their record is as a whole. Not cherry pick a 5 year span.

I don't. I like to cherry pick a 5 year span. Just kidding. Both time periods are, to different degrees, a valid reflection of an owner's success. But I feel it's fair, in light of what I consider to be substantive changes having been made over the last five years (new coach, new voices in the drafting process resulting in better drafting, more spending to extend valuable players), to evaluate this owner over that 5 year period.

I guarantee you our rivals in the AFC North are evaluating us based on the present "administration". Marvin's teams are 7-3 against Browns, 7-3 against the Ravens. Please don't remind me 3-7 against the Steelers plus the playoff loss. Mike Brown is running a winning organization.

[COB]

Fox just mentioned that the Bengals currently hold the record for most consecutive seasons without a playoff victory at 17 (and counting)...

Did they mention an oxcart?

[cincyhokie]

When I am judging an owners success, I like to look at what their record is as a whole. Not cherry pick a 5 year span.

I don't. I like to cherry pick a 5 year span. Just kidding. Both time periods are, to different degrees, a valid reflection of an owner's success. But I feel it's fair, in light of what I consider to be substantive changes having been made over the last five years (new coach, new voices in the drafting process resulting in better drafting, more spending to extend valuable players), to evaluate this owner over that 5 year period.

I guarantee you our rivals in the AFC North are evaluating us based on the present "administration". Marvin's teams are 7-3 against Browns, 7-3 against the Ravens. Please don't remind me 3-7 against the Steelers plus the playoff loss. Mike Brown is running a winning organization.

But what have we won? Since Marvin was hired the Bengals have a 42-38 record. Only ONE of those seasons has been a winning one? Is this what you are referring to?

What if the Bengals go 80-80 in the next 10 years under Marvin? That would give them a 122-118 record. That is a winning record. Would you still consider them a winning team? Or would you consider them a mediocre team?

For me to say Mike Brown is running a winning organization I want to see CONSISTENT winning. Not one good year out of 5 that puts them above the .500 mark.

[HoosierCat]

Fox just mentioned that the Bengals currently hold the record for most consecutive seasons without a playoff victory at 17 (and counting)...

Did they mention an oxcart?

No, they were too busy plugging Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.

[COB]

But what have we won?

The AFC North. Once.

What if the Bengals go 80-80 in the next 10 years under Marvin? That would give them a 122-118 record. That is a winning record. Would you still consider them a winning team?

The word "consider" doesn't enter into it. They would be a winning team. No interpretation needed. But yes, I'd surely consider them mediocre at that point. I'm a mark for Marvin and his record because I look at what he's done within the context of everything Bengal - The losing history, the horrible coaching (some of which came right before him), the selfish, negative culture that he's trying to break down, etc.

And that's exactly why that writer taking his little p***y shots at Mike Brown pissed me off so much. I look at those five consecutive losing season for the Reds within the context of everything Reds. Mike Brown and Marvin have managed to re-float the Titanic. Meanwhile the Reds management have been handed a storied winning tradition and taken a big crap on it.

Daugherty allowed his personal feelings and bias towards the parties on both teams to influence that column. In my opinion, he came out looking stupid.

[cincyhokie]

But what have we won?

The AFC North. Once.

What if the Bengals go 80-80 in the next 10 years under Marvin? That would give them a 122-118 record. That is a winning record. Would you still consider them a winning team?

The word "consider" doesn't enter into it. They would be a winning team. No interpretation needed. But yes, I'd surely consider them mediocre at that point. I'm a mark for Marvin and his record because I look at what he's done within the context of everything Bengal - The losing history, the horrible coaching (some of which came right before him), the selfish, negative culture that he's trying to break down, etc.

And that's exactly why that writer taking his little p***y shots at Mike Brown pissed me off so much. I look at those five consecutive losing season for the Reds within the context of everything Reds. Mike Brown and Marvin have managed to re-float the Titanic. Meanwhile the Reds management have been handed a storied winning tradition and taken a big crap on it.

Daugherty allowed his personal feelings and bias towards the parties on both teams to influence that column. In my opinion he came out looking stupid.

To me Mike Brown doesn't get a pass for one winning season in 17 years. I appreciate the work Marvin has done to get the Bengals back to a .500 level. That's good. But not good for 5 years. There's no reason this team should be 15-19 since winning the division in Detroit. None. Why should we settle for mediocrity?

As far as the Reds go, you can't do a 5 year comparison between Mike Brown and Bob Castellini. Castellini is going into his 3rd year. I don't know if you follow the Reds but they are in the top 5 in baseball in projected talent in the minor leagues. Add that with a competent GM, an experienced advisor in Walt Jockerty, and a proven winner in Dusty Baker and I am confident the Reds will be a consistent winner before the Bengals will.

[COB]

There's no reason this team should be 15-19 since winning the division in Detroit. None. Why should we settle for mediocrity?

I can think of a few reasons.

The way you feel about the Reds (pieces being in place, confident for the future), that's the way I feel about the Bengals. And really, for the same reasons you listed. Young talent, good coaching.

I suppose the one thing the Reds have that the Bengals don't is a blind homer sportswriter doing their flack work for them. In contrast, Daugherty's column shows a disdain for the Bengals I find disturbing. It appears that for Daugherty to truly enjoy climbing on Walt Jocketty's jock, he has to spit on Mike Brown while he's up there. And if facts, reality, records, etc. are in the way, well, he just goes ahead anyway.

[ShulaSteakhouse]

There's no reason this team should be 15-19 since winning the division in Detroit. None. Why should we settle for mediocrity?

I can think of a few reasons.

The way you feel about the Reds (pieces being in place, confident for the future), that's the way I feel about the Bengals. And really, for the same reasons you listed. Young talent, good coaching.

I suppose the one thing the Reds have that the Bengals don't is a blind homer sportswriter doing their flack work for them. In contrast, Daugherty's column shows a disdain for the Bengals I find disturbing. It appears that for Daugherty to truly enjoy climbing on Walt Jocketty's jock, he has to spit on Mike Brown while he's up there. And if facts, reality, records, etc. are in the way, well, he just goes ahead anyway.

The difference here is that the Reds "make an effort" - hell that's all I ask. They have 2 GM's, a new owner, got rid of most of their front office staff, signed the 2nd best pitcher on the FA market, traded for 2 others, etc.., etc...,

Mike Brown doesn't make a true effort to get better - I honestly do not believe he really wants to win - he does not make the effort required, that other teams make, to get there.

I will not fault someone for honestly trying and putting forth the resources and effort to build a winning team - but there's no excuse for simply not making enough of an effort.

[HairOnFire]

I'm a mark for Marvin and his record because I look at what he's done within the context of everything Bengal - The losing history, the horrible coaching (some of which came right before him), the selfish, negative culture that he's trying to break down, etc.

Agreed. However, with each passing day it becomes more and more clear that Lewis was unable to change the selfish behavior that has defined the Bengal lockerroom OR the overwhelmingly negative culture that largly defines the Bengals fanbase. And as a result of the latter, you find yourself branded a cherry picker if you only judge Marvin Lewis based upon the years he's been in charge.....instead of heaping more than a decades worth of baggage on his shoulders. And how ironic is it that those who scream the loudest for change refuse to acknowledge it when it happens?

I look at those five consecutive losing season for the Reds within the context of everything Reds. Mike Brown and Marvin have managed to re-float the Titanic. Meanwhile the Reds management have been handed a storied winning tradition and taken a big crap on it.

Well, I've long felt that Cincinnati is a baseball town and always will be precisely because the long and rich tradition of the Reds is a great source of local pride. And even though a growing number of fans are too young to remember most of the franchise's accomplishments the brand name remains untarnished, and will remain so even after years of prolonged sucking. As a result, mediocrity has become an acceptable goal for the Reds, not that they've managed that trick, and any changes that franchise makes are applauded even though the changes may be nothing more than fairly obvious window dressing.

Daugherty allowed his personal feelings and bias towards the parties on both teams to influence that column. In my opinion, he came out looking stupid.

But that's just the point. Paul Daugherty has positioned himself as the "Hero of the stupid"....and while he may be a horrible sportswriter, one of the worst I've ever read, he knows his audience and never passes on any opportunity to feed the negativity they wallow in.