Kyler Murray's Attitude

[DVontel]

I tend to agree completely with you on this. I don't like LaFleur or Staley either.

What makes Zac not better than Kliff?

 

[DVontel]

If Zac Taylor & the Bengals make another deep playoff run, you can’t help but to say Zac Taylor is a solid HC. You don’t go on multiple deep playoff runs with bad HCs. We’ve seen bad HCs hold back talented rosters. Zac Taylor has yet to be one of them.

He’s following the Josh Allen discourse. Social-media so hard-pressed to say that one’s a bust until they do it more than once.

 

[kerouac9]

If Zac Taylor & the Bengals make another deep playoff run, you can’t help but to say Zac Taylor is a solid HC. You don’t go on multiple deep playoff runs with bad HCs. We’ve seen bad HCs hold back talented rosters. Zac Taylor has yet to be one of them.

He’s following the Josh Allen discourse. Social-media so hard-pressed to say that one’s a bust until they do it more than once.

Yeah, but I think "solid HC" is where Taylor kind of ceilings. Without the deep playoff run, Taylor right now looks a lot like Kliff Kingsbury -- a guy who was hired during the rush to hire anyone who shared an elevator with Sean McVay who hasn't brought any innovation or success. Reports were that Burrow walked in the door of the Bengals facility and immediately was the guy in charge.

Mediocre HCs make multiple deep playoff runs all the time (looking at you, Mike McCarthy). Is he better than, like, Mike Zimmer?

 

[BritCard]

I tend to agree completely with you on this. I don't like LaFleur or Staley either.

LaFleur is better imo. He has an interesting offense, especially in the run game.

Even this year he's 7-8 with no WRs, Rodgers playing awful, Bakhtiari and Alexander out most the year etc etc

There's a reason Kyler gets paid $45m a year and Kliff $6m.

Look at Shanahan and all the plaudits his offense gets and his records in the seasons he lost his starting QBs.

 

[BritCard]

Yeah, but I think "solid HC" is where Taylor kind of ceilings. Without the deep playoff run, Taylor right now looks a lot like Kliff Kingsbury -- a guy who was hired during the rush to hire anyone who shared an elevator with Sean McVay who hasn't brought any innovation or success. Reports were that Burrow walked in the door of the Bengals facility and immediately was the guy in charge.

Mediocre HCs make multiple deep playoff runs all the time (looking at you, Mike McCarthy). Is he better than, like, Mike Zimmer?

At the start of this year Kliff had a better win loss record than Taylor.

Remove a mountain of injuries, bad QB play and QB injuries and he probably still is.

Taylor and Kliff are the same guy. The only difference is one has Burrow.

I mean, Brock Purdy is a better leader than Kyler and we're still having this conversation.

 

[DVontel]

brought any innovation or success.

I mean, Tennessee has made the playoffs a good amount under Vrabel the past couple of years. What kind of innovation he brings? As cliche as it is, maybe he’s just good at leading his men. Same with Zac.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

I tend to agree completely with you on this. I don't like LaFleur or Staley either.

There’s not one owner or general manager in the league that would hire Kliff over Taylor. This is all nonsense. Are people really ignoring the fact that we hired a guy who just a month before was fired by a mediocre college football program? It was completely unchartered territory unlike hiring a QB coach from a successful and winning organization which happens all the time.

It also takes all credit or blame away from respective staffs and front offices when we have seen countless examples in league history with players absolutely sucking under certain coaches and same players excelling under others.

 

[dscher]

Two things can be true:

1. This organization is a dumpster fire in basically every way and has failed not just Kyler but every other member of the team

2. Kyler needs to grow up.

The solution:

K1 and everyone else on the team deserve a chance to be coached and managed by actual adults who deserve said jobs. If they’re still not producing them you cut ties.

This is all that really needs to be said at the end of the day. But, it's a message board, so the show must continue...

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

Yeah, but I think "solid HC" is where Taylor kind of ceilings. Without the deep playoff run, Taylor right now looks a lot like Kliff Kingsbury -- a guy who was hired during the rush to hire anyone who shared an elevator with Sean McVay who hasn't brought any innovation or success. Reports were that Burrow walked in the door of the Bengals facility and immediately was the guy in charge.

Mediocre HCs make multiple deep playoff runs all the time (looking at you, Mike McCarthy). Is he better than, like, Mike Zimmer?

I would agree with Taylor being a “moment in time” type hire due to being with McVay. The difference of
course is that he advanced his career under McVay which is a bit more than being casual acquaintances with him like Kliff.

Anyone honestly comparing their resumes both now and when they were hired is insane.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

At the start of this year Kliff had a better win loss record than Taylor.

Remove a mountain of injuries, bad QB play and QB injuries and he probably still is.

Taylor and Kliff are the same guy. The only difference is one has Burrow.

I mean, Brock Purdy is a better leader than Kyler and we're still having this conversation.

I mean Kliff had a better record than Shanahan at the beginning of the season. Go ask any GM in the league 8 months ago who they’d rather employ?

Not one franchise in the entire NFL not run by an idiot owner and drunk GM would’ve hired Kliff. His hire was widely and rightly panned by insiders, media, and players alike.

Of course now I’m the guy arguing with the poster who looks at this abortion of a franchise and believes that if Kyler played better we’d have been 9-4.

 

[SoonerLou]

I probably should include this in the What I was about thread.

However, in terms of Kyler it will be interesting if they do hire another coach if the lack of run action in our offense was limiting him or not. I mean he's got his own limitations obviously, but the lack of run action in the offense is something Trent Dilfer mentioned years ago. And its actually something Sean Payton mentioned a couple months ago.

Its possible Kliff/Kyler would have both been better without each other. Kliff needs a taller QB to take advantage of the middle of the field consistently. Kyler needs a more play action/schemed up with less WRs on the field to enhance his game.


Or we just find out neither is that great.

 

[kerouac9]

At the start of this year Kliff had a better win loss record than Taylor.

Remove a mountain of injuries, bad QB play and QB injuries and he probably still is.

Taylor and Kliff are the same guy. The only difference is one has Burrow.

I mean, Brock Purdy is a better leader than Kyler and we're still having this conversation.

I dunno. I think the best-case scenario for Kliff is Zac Taylor, who I think is pretty mediocre. Had higher hopes for Kliff, but the cool run plays and stuff we saw in years one and two have completely disappeared.

I'm just really discouraged by the fact that not only did he not "fix" what I hoped he would last offseason (catastrophic and chaotic two-minute drills and other situational football), he didn't seem to fix anything. All of his bad habits just seemed to get worse.

I mean, Tennessee has made the playoffs a good amount under Vrabel the past couple of years. What kind of innovation he brings? As cliche as it is, maybe he’s just good at leading his men. Same with Zac.

Yeah... Vrabel wasn't brought in as an innovator. He was brought in as a leadership type with also some organizational background as part of the Bill O'Brien staff. That said, Vrabel definitely committed to the play-action passing game in a way that was innovative for his time and got Arthur Smith a head coaching job.

The idea with hiring these McVay disciples is they had some secret sauce on making great offenses.

Before Burrow got there there was zero evidence that Taylor was a good leader, game planner, or game manager. There are 32 NFL coaches; some of them have to be in the middle. Taylor can optimize his reputation by getting out of Joe Burrow's way. The problem with Kliff is he can't just hand the reins to Kyler because Kyler has no interest in imposing his desires or preferences on the offense. I think he just wants to show up and mash buttons to make the scoreboard light up.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

I dunno. I think the best-case scenario for Kliff is Zac Taylor, who I think is pretty mediocre. Had higher hopes for Kliff, but the cool run plays and stuff we saw in years one and two have completely disappeared.

I'm just really discouraged by the fact that not only did he not "fix" what I hoped he would last offseason (catastrophic and chaotic two-minute drills and other situational football), he didn't seem to fix anything. All of his bad habits just seemed to get worse.


Yeah... Vrabel wasn't brought in as an innovator. He was brought in as a leadership type with also some organizational background as part of the Bill O'Brien staff. That said, Vrabel definitely committed to the play-action passing game in a way that was innovative for his time and got Arthur Smith a head coaching job.

The idea with hiring these McVay disciples is they had some secret sauce on making great offenses.

Before Burrow got there there was zero evidence that Taylor was a good leader, game planner, or game manager. There are 32 NFL coaches; some of them have to be in the middle. Taylor can optimize his reputation by getting out of Joe Burrow's way. The problem with Kliff is he can't just hand the reins to Kyler because Kyler has no interest in imposing his desires or preferences on the offense. I think he just wants to show up and mash buttons to make the scoreboard light up.

Vrabel (Shanahan, Arians as well) are good examples of how system is kinda overrated. Everyone is on film after a few weeks, so outside of a few random exotic play calls you win by having a disciplined team that trains and plays hard. And you get those players by having the right evaluators in the front office and proper coaching both off and on the field.

Bidwill and Keim are morons and thought football games are won by some guru designing complex Good Will Hunting style plays. In reality the best teams 85% of the time run the same thing everyone else does just better, then the last 15% is random God-given talent and coach creativity.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

At the start of this year Kliff had a better win loss record than Taylor.

Remove a mountain of injuries, bad QB play and QB injuries and he probably still is.

Taylor and Kliff are the same guy. The only difference is one has Burrow.

I mean, Brock Purdy is a better leader than Kyler and we're still having this conversation.

I mean they’re the same guy unless you ignore one has failed miserably down the stretch of every season for 10 seasons, one has crapped the bed in his lone playoff game whilst the other went to the super bowl, one followed up a playoff season with a 4-5 win season whilst the other has double digit wins again. Yeah, samesies.

And I guarantee you if Brit is falling for the “we were only bad bc of injuries bs so is bidwill. You want samesies? There you go. Brit and bidwill.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Vrabel (Shanahan, Arians as well) are good examples of how system is kinda overrated. Everyone is on film after a few weeks, so outside of a few random exotic play calls you win by having a disciplined team that trains and plays hard. And you get those players by having the right evaluators in the front office and proper coaching both off and on the field.

Bidwill and Keim are morons and thought football games are won by some guru designing complex Good Will Hunting style plays. In reality the best teams 85% of the time run the same thing everyone else does just better, then the last 15% is random God-given talent and coach creativity.

I think great coaching lies somewhere between what you posit. I 100% agree that great coaching is in large part driven by leadership, organization, accountability, and trust. But I also believe gameday coaching is incredibly important. Part is play construction - leveraging your players to their optimal ability with each play. But also the chess match that takes place on the field. A coach may win or lose a game by position his team to dial up a perfect screen at the exact time the opponent sells out on a blitz or goes full boat blitz on no help pass pro package, etc. The great ones seem to find the right group of plays and timing. And of course I’m not ignoring talent, I’m just talking about the coaching component to winning.

 

[kerouac9]

Vrabel (Shanahan, Arians as well) are good examples of how system is kinda overrated. Everyone is on film after a few weeks, so outside of a few random exotic play calls you win by having a disciplined team that trains and plays hard. And you get those players by having the right evaluators in the front office and proper coaching both off and on the field.

Bidwill and Keim are morons and thought football games are won by some guru designing complex Good Will Hunting style plays. In reality the best teams 85% of the time run the same thing everyone else does just better, then the last 15% is random God-given talent and coach creativity.

System is overrated, and Bidwill and Keim are morons.

Also, though, I think that what Vrabel, Shanahan, and Arians all have in common is a vision for what they want their team to be. Neither Kliff nor Keim really possessed that vision.

 

[BritCard]

I mean Kliff had a better record than Shanahan at the beginning of the season. Go ask any GM in the league 8 months ago who they’d rather employ?

Not one franchise in the entire NFL not run by an idiot owner and drunk GM would’ve hired Kliff. His hire was widely and rightly panned by insiders, media, and players alike.

Of course now I’m the guy arguing with the poster who looks at this abortion of a franchise and believes that if Kyler played better we’d have been 9-4.

I mean, the Jet's wanted to hire him on the day he interviewed apparently and we had to lure hima way by private jet. But sure, nobody else wanted to hire him.

And yes, had Kyler played better we would have a much better record. That's why QB's get paid. Probably not so much after game 10 when the injuries really started piling up, there is only so much any QB can do but by that point we could easily have been 7-3 if not for some complete dog crap performances in Rams #1, both Seahawks games, and the Eagles games.

This is not even debatable. It's an obvious truth. It's why GM's get paid $3m a year. The average HC gets about $6m a year and QB's get $40m plus. The closer you get to the ball and the more you touch it the more you affect the game and the more you get paid.

The league history is littered with bad GM's and mediocre HC's having success with good QB play. We did it just last year. The Bengals got to a SB. Hell, we did it ourselves in 2008.

Kyler has been ass outside of about 15 minutes in game 2 and again this is supported by a mountain of statistics, where he is generally looking up at 20+ other better QB's.

 

[BritCard]

The problem with Kliff is he can't just hand the reins to Kyler because Kyler has no interest in imposing his desires or preferences on the offense. I think he just wants to show up and mash buttons to make the scoreboard light up.

This. This is the core of the problem.

 

[BritCard]

System is overrated, and Bidwill and Keim are morons.

Also, though, I think that what Vrabel, Shanahan, and Arians all have in common is a vision for what they want their team to be. Neither Kliff nor Keim really possessed that vision.

How do we know?

I'm sure Kliff has a vision and that vision doesn't include a QB that shows no leadership, doesn't work hard enough and blames everyone else for their own failings.

Do any of us think that Kliff had a say in Kyler's early extention? Hard to believe he was telling Keim to get it done.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

How do we know?

I'm sure Kliff has a vision and that vision doesn't include a QB that shows no leadership, doesn't work hard enough and blames everyone else for their own failings.

Do any of us think that Kliff had a say in Kyler's early extention? Hard to believe he was telling Keim to get it done.

Yep Kliff has always had a vision for winning football games. That’s why it’s been other people’s fault not his in that entire decade of coaching in which he’s been a loser.

You must be the “let Kliff be great” source that Weinfuss referenced.

 

[unseenaz]

System is overrated, and Bidwill and Keim are morons.

Also, though, I think that what Vrabel, Shanahan, and Arians all have in common is a vision for what they want their team to be. Neither Kliff nor Keim really possessed that vision.

Keim doesn't, that's obvious. His track record is a decade to prove it.

Do we really know that about Kliff though? From day 1 it seems like he doesn't have much say in the personnel or coaching staff.

 

[GatorAZ]

I mean, the Jet's wanted to hire him on the day he interviewed apparently and we had to lure hima way by private jet. But sure, nobody else wanted to hire him.

And yes, had Kyler played better we would have a much better record. That's why QB's get paid. Probably not so much after game 10 when the injuries really started piling up, there is only so much any QB can do but by that point we could easily have been 7-3 if not for some complete dog crap performances in Rams #1, both Seahawks games, and the Eagles games.

This is not even debatable. It's an obvious truth. It's why GM's get paid $3m a year. The average HC gets about $6m a year and QB's get $40m plus. The closer you get to the ball and the more you touch it the more you affect the game and the more you get paid.

The league history is littered with bad GM's and mediocre HC's having success with good QB play. We did it just last year. The Bengals got to a SB. Hell, we did it ourselves in 2008.

Kyler has been ass outside of about 15 minutes in game 2 and again this is supported by a mountain of statistics, where he is generally looking up at 20+ other better QB's.

A NY market team was never hiring a HC with zero NFL coaching experience. The Jets interview was a brilliant formula by Kliff’s agent to create interest/energy. Throughout this whole process Erik Burkhardt has taken Bidwill to the cleaners on multiple occasions.

 

[Cheesebeef]

A NY market team was never hiring a HC with zero NFL coaching experience. The Jets interview was a brilliant formula by Kliff’s agent to create interest/energy. Throughout this whole process Erik Burkhardt has taken Bidwill to the cleaners on multiple occasions.

Also… one of the worst franchises in sports ALSO wanting to hire one of the least qualified Head Coaches ever, along side the Cardinals, is proof positive of what again?

And then eventually landing on Gase gives even more credence that Kliff was a legit hire?

Really… anyone using the Cardinals and Jets as barometers of anything but complete and utter dysfunction is drinking drano.

 

[MaoTosiFanClub]

System is overrated, and Bidwill and Keim are morons.

Also, though, I think that what Vrabel, Shanahan, and Arians all have in common is a vision for what they want their team to be. Neither Kliff nor Keim really possessed that vision.

This is accurate. The players they draft and sign as FA’s and how they develop them is to fit their system and culture over the short and long-term. Keim and Kliff just throw darts to pick players and can’t see more than two feet in front of their faces just like “fans” as the anonymous source in the organization so perfectly described.

 

[DVontel]

Brit treating Kliff as if he had a Steve Spurrier track record at Florida & not his actual record of constantly losing & collapsing seasons in his coaching career is hilarious.