Marlon Mack

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, dw49 said:

Yeah he's subpar. Let's face it , the top 3 guys are just guys ?

 

Which top three?

[dw49]

47 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Which top three?

 

Pagano , Chud and Monochino. I do think the jury is still out on Monochino as he had nothing to work with last year. So maybe I'm a little unfair including him

 

[Superman]

Just now, dw49 said:

 

Pagano , Chud and Monochino. I do think the jury is still out on Monochino as he had nothing to work with last year. So maybe I'm a little unfair including him

 

 

I'm in the same boat with you. I don't know much about Monachino, but I do know that the defense looks undisciplined, they get lost in coverage, and they aren't showing any physicality. I know the gameplans and schemes are being held back, and that includes last year when we started a bunch of young guys and had a bunch of injuries. But if you told me I could replace the entire staff, but had to keep three guys, Monachino wouldn't be one of them. 

[CheezyColt]

2 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

He's 35, and has lost a step (to put it nicely). You think Ballard should shell out $3.5 million just because he was able to eek out 1,000 yards in a 8-8 season? And why would we want to be younger and faster at every position EXCEPT for runningback?

To protect the franchise when he returns. If they were going to cut him, they would have done it earlier... and I would have ultimately been ok with that. New GM and all, I get it. But to do it this far in when he hasn't shown to be any worse than what's expected, that's just a waste of reps and continuity when we're not even deep at the position. That's how I see it at least.

[dw49]

41 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm in the same boat with you. I don't know much about Monachino, but I do know that the defense looks undisciplined, they get lost in coverage, and they aren't showing any physicality. I know the gameplans and schemes are being held back, and that includes last year when we started a bunch of young guys and had a bunch of injuries. But if you told me I could replace the entire staff, but had to keep three guys, Monachino wouldn't be one of them. 

 

 

Yeah .. I'm with you. And how many times do we need to see that little underneath stuff kill us on a consistent basis ? 

 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Yeah .. I'm with you. And how many times do we need to see that little underneath stuff kill us on a consistent basis ? 

 

 

It's doubly frustrating. We can't stop it, but we don't use it. 

[Smoke317]

1 minute ago, dw49 said:

 

 

Yeah .. I'm with you. And how many times do we need to see that little underneath stuff kill us on a consistent basis ? 

 

Exactly. Why is it that every other team can scheme guys open but it looks like our receivers have the hardest time creating separation???   It's really feeling like our coaching staff was just as responsible for our mediocrity as our last GM...  Should have sent them packing & got a young offensive innovator in here to work with #12...

[dw49]

7 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

It's doubly frustrating. We can't stop it, but we don't use it. 

 

Reminds me of the year we went to the championship game vs NE. They ran that same running play for 2 solid games and we never stopped it ? 

[dw49]

8 minutes ago, Smoke317 said:

Exactly. Why is it that every other team can scheme guys open but it looks like our receivers have the hardest time creating separation???   It's really feeling like our coaching staff was just as responsible for our mediocrity as our last GM...  Should have sent them packing & got a young offensive innovator in here to work with #12...

 

Maybe finding those young brilliant guys is tough ? In any event , it's safe to say we don't "out - scheme " anyone.

[Smoke317]

There's no reason why Luck shouldn't be running his own offense like Peyton was by now. He should be running hurry up whenever he damn well feels like it. He should never have to ask Chuck or Chud for much of anything. Dungy was smart enough to let Peyton work unless he had to make an executive decision. I feel like Luck isn't advancing like he should be at this stage. I'm sure the injuries are a factor but I don't think the coaches are helping him reach & maximize his potential.

 

Irsay screwed up big time with Grigson & Pagano. It's really looking like it's time to completely end this era before we've wasted the greatest prospect since Elway & Peyton...  No McDaniels or Shanahan & Wade Phillips for this year.  No Harbaugh.

 

It's feeling like our organization is at a crossroads. Texans, Titans, & Jags are threatening. It's very possible that we could drop to the bottom of our division for the next 7-10 years if we don't get this right. 

[Smoke317]

15 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

Maybe finding those young brilliant guys is tough ? In any event , it's safe to say we don't "out - scheme " anyone.

They're out there though. I love Chuck as a person. Really seems like a good man. I would have brought him on as a D.C. at most.  He had no business getting the HC job. I could have coached Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Haloti Ngata, & Terrell Suggs...  He didn't teach them a damn thing...  

 

Ironically, Caldwell, the coach we let go (deserved less of the blame than Polian), now owns us...  Won a Super Bowl and beat us en route to it with Pagano's old defense (sure didn't look like they missed him very much),  ruined our home opener last year, & then embarrassed us again in our first preseason game...

 

Now I don't want Caldwell back but the trend seems to be showing that Chuck is not the answer. He can't even beat the "yes man" coach we fired for him...

 

Please Andrew come back & talk me off the cliff??? I love what Ballard is trying to do but I think it's all wasted on Chuck and his staff. Get em out of here. 

[Peterk2011]

On 2017. 08. 21. at 9:45 PM, BPindy said:

 

You're right, he gets it on his reputation of being a solid starter for over a decade in the league. I'm as excited for Mack as anyone, but I want to see him do it against some starters first. If he deserves it, the job will be his.

 

This! 

 

The only reason I don't sound overly excited is because I've seen Mack in college, so I expected nothing less than this. It was still nice to see him being himself amongst pros, even against 2nd, 3rd stringers. He'll be fine against 1st teams too I'm positive about it. He'll just need morerately good blocking in from of him, but who doesn't?

 

All that said, today's NFL teams, an especially the Colts, need running back to:

1) secure the ball. Never fumble, never give it away. Never ever. Period.

2) avoid negative yards, so don't force Luck to second/things and longs

3) BLOCK FOR Luck. And do it very well. The most important of the three probably.

 

Mack can run 150 yards a game, with 6yrds per attempts, it won't help us, if he fails in either of the above 3. Because running backs don't win games any more. They've been not winning for 15-20 years, but nowadays they win games less then ever. It's the QB who does. And we have a QB who does.

 

A good RB can help Luck tremendously, and Mack has every talent to be good. But he needs to excel at the above 3 to be a starter. He hasn't played a regular season snap yet, so until he proves he can do that, he is a logical 3rd man behind Gore and Turbin, who both are excellent blockers and nearly ever finish their rushes behind tle LOS. It does not mean we can't utilize Mack though. He can be a very good asset as a 3rd man already. There will be plenty of situations when we will be able to put him in and give him chance to flash. I hope - i mean we all hope, right?  - of course, that he'll learn all of those things he needs to, and in - and from - 2018 the starting job will be his.

 

p.s.:

Guys, please go to one of the many Pagano topics to discuss him and his stuff. Please don't force us, who had enough of the Pagano / coaching  debate, have to dig through these posts each and every topic, each and every time we visit this forum.   Thank you.

[Myles]

16 hours ago, DaColts85 said:

I don't really care for Kravitz that much and never have...but I would not judge his expertise on Mack just in this one statement.  I am sure there were a lot of scouts and coaches who thought Trent was going to be a stud as well.  Everyone makes a mistake or two.  We just happened to get the worst part of that trade making us look really bad.

I agree.   I was just pointing out that the guy isn't always correct.  

[WERC82]

16 hours ago, BPindy said:

 

You're right, he gets it on his reputation of being a solid starter for over a decade in the league. I'm as excited for Mack as anyone, but I want to see him do it against some starters first. If he deserves it, the job will be his.

Agreed but I want to see more of Mack than just sprinkled in over time. Doing that gives the opponents a better opportunity to game plan for him.

[Jay Kirk]

23 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

Play action here we come!!! FINALLY! 

 

Seriously though, the kid looked legit. Not only running, he made a crazy good catch as well. 

 

 

Different Offense altogether with him in , regardless whos on the other side of ball . Play action yes , because he will make you respect the run . Hes by far the quickest and shiftiest back , without stutter stepping just quick cuts and burst , even seen him run under the defense. Broke some tackles . Whats not to like. Some rated him as the second best overall back in the draft. IMO was a steal. I have been anxious to see him play and I wasn't disappointed . Will give Luck another major weapon and take some pressure off , if the Coaching staff is smart enough to play him. IMO if they would like to keep their jobs they will do just that and let him share with Gore.

[lollygagger8]

18 minutes ago, Jay Kirk said:

Different Offense altogether with him in , regardless whos on the other side of ball . Play action yes , because he will make you respect the run . Hes by far the quickest and shiftiest back , without stutter stepping just quick cuts and burst , even seen him run under the defense. Broke some tackles . Whats not to like. Some rated him as the second best overall back in the draft. IMO was a steal. I have been anxious to see him play and I wasn't disappointed . Will give Luck another major weapon and take some pressure off , if the Coaching staff is smart enough to play him. IMO if they would like to keep their jobs they will do just that and let him share with Gore.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

15 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

To protect the franchise when he returns. If they were going to cut him, they would have done it earlier... and I would have ultimately been ok with that. New GM and all, I get it. But to do it this far in when he hasn't shown to be any worse than what's expected, that's just a waste of reps and continuity when we're not even deep at the position. That's how I see it at least.

 

Gore hasn't shown anything this preseason, for better or worse, because he hasn't played a single snap. And if Ballard's concerned about "protecting the franchise," he should probably start acquiring some offensive linemen.

[COLTS449]

18 hours ago, Superman said:

 

No, it would actually save the Colts Gore's base salary of $3.5m this year. He has no guaranteed money until Week 1 starts, when his full salary is guaranteed.

 

I wouldn't cut him, of course...

 

OK. Wasn't sure. That's why I put the ?????'s LOL. But I haven't seen your input on Mack Supe. What are your expectations and what do you think we have in him at this point ? Just always curious to know your opinion bro.

[CheezyColt]

2 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Gore hasn't shown anything this preseason, for better or worse, because he hasn't played a single snap. And if Ballard's concerned about "protecting the franchise," he should probably start acquiring some offensive linemen.

Like drafting a tackle and picking up a backup center in FA?

 

Regarding Gore: exactly. You know what you're going to get from him and it's more than Josh freaking Ferguson. We're not cap-strapped so there's really no reason to cut him from a performance or financial standpoint, in my eyes. I'm all for letting Mack take over if he continues to show this kind of ability and production... but having Gore available for the final year of his contract is not a detriment.

[IndyScribe]

2 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Gore hasn't shown anything this preseason, for better or worse, because he hasn't played a single snap. And if Ballard's concerned about "protecting the franchise," he should probably start acquiring some offensive linemen.

It's only been a season. Nothing's going to be fixed in that short amount of time. He went defense, which is fine. If the O-Line needs work, Ballard can draft some next year.

[Myles]

7 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

Like drafting a tackle and picking up a backup center in FA?

 

Regarding Gore: exactly. You know what you're going to get from him and it's more than Josh freaking Ferguson. We're not cap-strapped so there's really no reason to cut him from a performance or financial standpoint, in my eyes. I'm all for letting Mack take over if he continues to show this kind of ability and production... but having Gore available for the final year of his contract is not a detriment.

I agree.   If the Colts defense is better and Luck and the offense is scoring, Gore should get the bulk of the carries with Mack catching some passes and getting some carries.   I'm not sure on his blocking ability yet.   I have to believe the coaches will ride the hot back.   

[CheezyColt]

24 minutes ago, IndyScribe said:

It's only been a season. Nothing's going to be fixed in that short amount of time. He went defense, which is fine. If the O-Line needs work, Ballard can draft some next year.

Early indicators show that next year's O-line class should be much better than this past year too. At least from the little I've read.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, COLTS449 said:

 

OK. Wasn't sure. That's why I put the ?????'s LOL. But I haven't seen your input on Mack Supe. What are your expectations and what do you think we have in him at this point ? Just always curious to know your opinion bro.

 

I'm all about Mack. We have to get him on the field generously this year, IMO. I know he'll have troubles with protection, but we can work around that if we use him smartly. One of the questions about him coming out was with his willingness to keep the ball between the tackles rather than bouncing prematurely, and he kind of quieted that one down on Saturday, slamming the ball up the middle with reckless abandon. He has the goods, IMO.

 

The other concern is ball security, and you can tell they've been stressing that to him with the way he was covering the ball up with two hands through traffic. If he puts the ball on the ground, though, he'll sacrifice reps, so I hope he keeps protecting it. 

 

I think we have a nice stable of backs, three guys who can do different things. Mack is the one with the juice, though. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

56 minutes ago, CheezyColt said:

Like drafting a tackle and picking up a backup center in FA?

 

A tackle, that by just about any standard, is a HUGE project and has a ton of question marks. As far as the backup center goes, we don't really know what we have there because he's been on PUP since he was brought in. The line wouldn't be under nearly the amount of scrutiny that it currently is had Kelly not injured his foot, and if we would've held on to Blythe.

[Colt Overseas]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

I'm all about Mack. We have to get him on the field generously this year, IMO. I know he'll have troubles with protection, but we can work around that if we use him smartly. One of the questions about him coming out was with his willingness to keep the ball between the tackles rather than bouncing prematurely, and he kind of quieted that one down on Saturday, slamming the ball up the middle with reckless abandon. He has the goods, IMO.

 

 

He actually looks good carrying the ball between the tackles. Really loved what he did on Saturday.

 

Love the step he put on the MIKE here with minimal room to work with.

 

 

Very excited about this kid!

[CheezyColt]

That may be, but he has acquired some linemen. Can't fault the guy for a player getting injured.

[krunk]

1 hour ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

A tackle, that by just about any standard, is a HUGE project and has a ton of question marks. As far as the backup center goes, we don't really know what we have there because he's been on PUP since he was brought in. The line wouldn't be under nearly the amount of scrutiny that it currently is had Kelly not injured his foot, and if we would've held on to Blythe.

Bond is better than Blythe.   There's an example right in this thread. Take a look at that GIF above on the Mack run and watch Bond take the defender and move him out of the hole.  Mack runs right in between the space Bond cleared for him. Bond did that on more than one occasion

against Dallas.

[Dingus McGirt]

That run in the GIF reminded me of Faulk.

[GoColts8818]

He's really the first player on offense to really stand out in the pre-season in a good way.  I look forward to seeing more of him but I need to see more of him before I proclaim him the next great running back in the Colts history.  Still you have to be excited by what you saw from him against the Cowboys.

[GoColts8818]

11 hours ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Gore hasn't shown anything this preseason, for better or worse, because he hasn't played a single snap. And if Ballard's concerned about "protecting the franchise," he should probably start acquiring some offensive linemen.

He did.  He signed a vetren center and drafted a guy in the draft.  This coming off the Colts taking four linemen the year before in the draft and having another young guy in Mewhort drafted right before that.  You have to see what you have there.  It looks like the Colts have four of the five guys locked in in Castonzo, Mewhort, Kelly, and Haeg.  it's not Ballard's fault Kelly got hurt.  As for right tackle they have a young guy they like in Clark.  While he hasn't been overly impressive in the pre-season this is only his second season.  You have to give him sometime to develop and if he can't they have Good and the kid they drafted this year and you hope one of them takes advantage of the opportunity when they get it of Clark doesn't work out.  

[stitches]

 

 

[WoolMagnet]

On 8/19/2017 at 10:16 PM, a06cc said:

Ok keep telling yourself that. Why would the Colts keep a 35 yr old back if this kid performs?

If we have to tell you, you wouldnt understand

[Smitto]

On 8/22/2017 at 3:01 AM, Smoke317 said:

Exactly. Why is it that every other team can scheme guys open but it looks like our receivers have the hardest time creating separation???   It's really feeling like our coaching staff was just as responsible for our mediocrity as our last GM...  Should have sent them packing & got a young offensive innovator in here to work with #12...

The Colts receivers probably can't get open as other Premier wideouts because they probably aren't the best at running routes... One of the main reasons TY isn't classed as a top 5 WR is because he needs schemes to get open because he's not the best at getting jammed or running the best routes. There's only so much you can teach someone as a coach, so maybe it isn't actually the coaches fault... I would like it to be but we'll never know. 

[Stephen]

2 hours ago, Smitto said:

The Colts receivers probably can't get open as other Premier wideouts because they probably aren't the best at running routes... One of the main reasons TY isn't classed as a top 5 WR is because he needs schemes to get open because he's not the best at getting jammed or running the best routes. There's only so much you can teach someone as a coach, so maybe it isn't actually the coaches fault... I would like it to be but we'll never know. 

Natson be open

[will426]

Hilton only needs to be schemed open when he's double teamed ^ he's a good route runner it's just pretty easy to take him out due to lack of offensive weapons or should I say "lack of scheming for your offensive weapons"

[Smitto]

1 hour ago, Stephen said:

Natson be open

Yea he looks good running routes... He reminds me of Marvin Harrison with his size and how he runs his routes 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

5 hours ago, stitches said:

 

 

 

I love at about the midway point he says "Scott Tolzien you terrible." That had me cracking up.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

4 hours ago, Smitto said:

One of the main reasons TY isn't classed as a top 5 WR is because he needs schemes to get open because he's not the best at getting jammed or running the best routes.

 

TY's route-running improved quite a bit from '15 to '16. He's not quite at Antonio Brown or Julian Edelman level, but he's a lot better than previous years.

[Smitto]

24 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

TY's route-running improved quite a bit from '15 to '16. He's not quite at Antonio Brown or Julian Edelman level, but he's a lot better than previous years.

He has improved but if he wants that classification as a top 5 he needs to shine more in games where CBs are taking out our less capable wideouts... Only then will he get that classification like Reggie and Marvin got. 

[dodsworth]

16 hours ago, Colt Overseas said:

 

He actually looks good carrying the ball between the tackles. Really loved what he did on Saturday.

 

Love the step he put on the MIKE here with minimal room to work with.

 

 

Very excited about this kid!

Looks a bit like Addai on that run.