Frank Gore Made our Offense One dimensional

[Shadow_Creek]

Before you all pick up your stones to throw my way hear me out. The first three years without Gore our offense was really creative under Bruce and Pep. We were also climbing heights into the playoffs stopping short of a Superbowl. Then the first year under Gore our offense creativity vanished because we relied to much on Gore which is not a bad thing but it made us more predictable on offense. I believe Gores second year we had Andre Johnson which made our offense as a unit even more predictable thus our records for both years spoke for themselves 8-8. Now This year i noticed how the saints after acquiring Peterson realized that there offense was becoming predictable so after releasing him there creativity which we once had returned and look at them now sitting pretty in the playoffs. That being said I know we didn't have luck for much of last year and all of this year but i feel we shot ourselves in the foot when we didn't go out and get a good back draft wise during Peps tenure or during the first year of having Gore and i feel it could have made us more dangerous.  now you may throw the stones.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

 

I remember numerous times where Gore went in motion, ran routes, caught screens, and even took wildcat snaps, so I don't think it was as one-dimensional as you're remembering.  Gore just isn't athletic enough to make the big splash plays like some of the younger scat-backs.  We haven't been that predictable, we just haven't been that good.

 

Predictable was Pep running it up the gut on 1st and 2nd down, then trying to hit a long-developing pass downfield but taking a sack because the D ignores the play-action...

[King Colt]

The Colts are a passing team and a long ball passing team. Without a passer the team is three and out. Mack is a bit of a disappointment so far and frankly without Gore right now the Colts would be frozen. The play calling has been way to predictable. I wonder what the Colts will do with Gore. He definitely wants to continue to play. Keep in mind the OL rarely opens up anything so Gore pushes people for his yards. Part of the reason the Colts are bad is they don't have the talent to get fancy and when they try they embarrass themselves.

[lance_m8]

10 minutes ago, King Colt said:

The Colts are a passing team and a long ball passing team. Without a passer the team is three and out. Mack is a bit of a disappointment so far and frankly without Gore right now the Colts would be frozen. The play calling has been way to predictable. I wonder what the Colts will do with Gore. He definitely wants to continue to play. Keep in mind the OL rarely opens up anything so Gore pushes people for his yards. Part of the reason the Colts are bad is they don't have the talent to get fancy and when they try they embarrass themselves.

Mack is a disappointment? you crazy?

[Solon]

5 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

Mack is a disappointment? you crazy?

 

[Aluckiswolverine]

10 minutes ago, King Colt said:

The Colts are a passing team and a long ball passing team. Without a passer the team is three and out. Mack is a bit of a disappointment so far and frankly without Gore right now the Colts would be frozen. The play calling has been way to predictable. I wonder what the Colts will do with Gore. He definitely wants to continue to play. Keep in mind the OL rarely opens up anything so Gore pushes people for his yards. Part of the reason the Colts are bad is they don't have the talent to get fancy and when they try they embarrass themselves.

For the limited amount of touches he had he has shown to be very promising. 

[ztboiler]

Nobody should throw stones here at the OP....it is rather true by definition without being disrespectful of a truly great back.  

 

Gore's greatness and expected contribution is positive yardage in a power running game between the tackles.  That is by definition more one dimensional when he is in the game than more multi-threat players would be.  You trade yards per play for ball control defensive minded football.  It's a better recipe for teams with disruptive defenses....but one that still can produce championships when done well.

 

Frank knows who he is...we shouldn't apologize for him.

[Aluckiswolverine]

1 minute ago, ztboiler said:

Nobody should throw stones here at the OP....it is rather true by definition without being disrespectful of a truly great back.  

 

Gore's greatness and expected contribution is positive yardage in a power running game between the tackles.  That is by definition more one dimensional when he is in the game than more multi-threat players would be.  You trade yards per play for ball control defensive minded football.  It's a better recipe for teams with disruptive defenses....but one that still can produce championships when done well.

 

Frank knows who he is...we shouldn't apologize for him.

 Don’t think we are throwing stones at OP. I kinda agree with him. I blame Pagano, he used the 2017 season as the Frank Gore HOF tour.

 

Pagano put in Gore who is a good back and a HOF’er in front of a more talented rookie. Everyone is asking for a game changing rookie in the 2018 draft and they don’t  realize we have one on the roster already. 

 

Mack has a chance to take it to the house every time he touches the ball. Gore was told to run so that’s what he did. I blame Pagano for making us one dimensional. 

[GoColts8818]

31 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

Mack is a disappointment? you crazy?

I can see his point to an extent.  I want to be clear I do NOT think Mack was a disappointment but I don’t think he’s a superstar in waiting some think he is either.  I think he is a good change of pace back.  He’s a homerun hitter who does most of his damage on the outside of the tackles but his pass protection leaves a lot to be desired and he needs to improve his running between the tackles, the TD run vs the Texans not withstanding.  He could be the Colts version of Sproles which is not a bad thing but I think they do need another back that gets the bulk of the carries.  

[Roger]

8 minutes ago, Aluckiswolverine said:

 Don’t think we are throwing stones at OP. I kinda agree with him. I blame Pagano, he used the 2017 season as the Frank Gore HOF tour.

 

Pagano put in Gore who is a good back and a HOF’er in front of a more talented rookie. Everyone is asking for a game changing rookie in the 2018 draft and they don’t  realize we have one on the roster already. 

 

Mack has a chance to take it to the house every time he touches the ball. Gore was told to run so that’s what he did. I blame Pagano for making us one dimensional. 

[jameszeigler834]

1 hour ago, Shadow_Creek said:

Before you all pick up your stones to throw my way hear me out. The first three years without Gore our offense was really creative under Bruce and Pep. We were also climbing heights into the playoffs stopping short of a Superbowl. Then the first year under Gore our offense creativity vanished because we relied to much on Gore which is not a bad thing but it made us more predictable on offense. I believe Gores second year we had Andre Johnson which made our offense as a unit even more predictable thus our records for both years spoke for themselves 8-8. Now This year i noticed how the saints after acquiring Peterson realized that there offense was becoming predictable so after releasing him there creativity which we once had returned and look at them now sitting pretty in the playoffs. That being said I know we didn't have luck for much of last year and all of this year but i feel we shot ourselves in the foot when we didn't go out and get a good back draft wise during Peps tenure or during the first year of having Gore and i feel it could have made us more dangerous.  now you may throw the stones.

I disagree our horrible play caller made us predictable.

[crazycolt1]

14 minutes ago, Aluckiswolverine said:

 Don’t think we are throwing stones at OP. I kinda agree with him. I blame Pagano, he used the 2017 season as the Frank Gore HOF tour.

 

Pagano put in Gore who is a good back and a HOF’er in front of a more talented rookie. Everyone is asking for a game changing rookie in the 2018 draft and they don’t  realize we have one on the roster already. 

 

Mack has a chance to take it to the house every time he touches the ball. Gore was told to run so that’s what he did. I blame Pagano for making us one dimensional. 

Mack more talented than Gore?  I don't think so.

[Shadow_Creek]

51 minutes ago, King Colt said:

The Colts are a passing team and a long ball passing team. Without a passer the team is three and out. Mack is a bit of a disappointment so far and frankly without Gore right now the Colts would be frozen. The play calling has been way to predictable. I wonder what the Colts will do with Gore. He definitely wants to continue to play. Keep in mind the OL rarely opens up anything so Gore pushes people for his yards. Part of the reason the Colts are bad is they don't have the talent to get fancy and when they try they embarrass themselves.

suppose we kept Boom herron do you think a combination between him Mack and Gore would have been uber scary

[Shadow_Creek]

2 minutes ago, jameszeigler834 said:

I disagree our horrible play caller made us predictable.

True. i was going to add that as well

[lollygagger8]

 

You lost me at "The first three years without Gore our offense was really creative under Bruce and Pep."

[jameszeigler834]

3 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

True. i was going to add that as well

I would love to see what Luck and Brissett could do with better coaching.

[braveheartcolt]

Mack is not nor ever will be more talented than Mr Gore. What a silly thing to say....he may develop but I saw nothing special that excites me. Next year with Luck back, he may show a lot more.

[Shadow_Creek]

3 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

You lost me at "The first three years without Gore our offense was really creative under Bruce and Pep."

i was referring to how they both were able to come up with ways for the offense to score and win 11+ games i believe all 3 of the first years of Luck

[threeflight]

What Pagano did this past season was imo a travesty.  The Colts were going no where after about game 8, everyone could see that.  To continue to play Gore to the extent he did when it had NO beneficial effect to the future of the Colts was just wrong.  Every rookie and young guy who had a chance to be a part of the future should have been playing.  

 

I like Gore, but he is what he is.  He will always be what he is.  

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

You lost me at "The first three years without Gore our offense was really creative under Bruce and Pep."

 

Pep was innovative and creative, he wasn't good at calling a game, finding a rhythm and exploiting the other team's weaknesses. His offense had no identity, but he came up with some nice wrinkles at times.

 

Bruce also had some tricks up his sleeve. Don't forget the Ballard TD.

[Superman]

1 hour ago, Shadow_Creek said:

The first three years without Gore our offense was really creative under Bruce and Pep. We were also climbing heights into the playoffs stopping short of a Superbowl. Then the first year under Gore our offense creativity vanished because we relied to much on Gore which is not a bad thing but it made us more predictable on offense.

 

You should also be sure to remember that Andrew Luck missed 9 games in 2015, and 16 games in 2017.

 

It's kind of shallow to blame any issues with the offense on Frank Gore. 

[deedub75]

We’ve been predictable since Arians left.

[Shadow_Creek]

Just now, Superman said:

 

You should also be sure to remember that Andrew Luck missed 9 games in 2015, and 16 games in 2017.

 

It's kind of shallow to blame any issues with the offense on Frank Gore. 

yeah i forgot to mention that Gore wasn't to blame. he was only following orders

[Peterk2011]

59 minutes ago, lance_m8 said:

Mack is a disappointment? you crazy?

 

He kinda is yes. Not a bust, not at all, but last year many experts said (and the expectation on this very forum was) that he will be the successor of Gore. Well, he wasn't. He is shifty, is has speed, but still struggles to find holes between the tackles.

 

I hope he'll have a very good offseason, and improve. But at the moment, I don't see more than a potentially good change of pace back in him.

[King Colt]

57 minutes ago, Aluckiswolverine said:

For the limited amount of touches he had he has shown to be very promising. 

Promising does not get 6.

[Aluckiswolverine]

11 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

Mack is not nor ever will be more talented than Mr Gore. What a silly thing to say....he may develop but I saw nothing special that excites me. Next year with Luck back, he may show a lot more.

Agree to disagree, Gore is a HOF player but look at it from a blank slate. Mack is younger, faster and a home run threat. 

 

Gore is 34 year old pass blocking grinder. Age catches up to everyone. Mack>Gore in pure talent alone. 

[Shadow_Creek]

Just now, Peterk2011 said:

 

He kinda is yes. Not a bust, not at all, but last year many experts said (and the expectation on this very forum was) that he will be the successor of Gore. Well, he wasn't. He is shifty, is has speed, but still struggles to find holes between the tackles.

 

I hope he'll have a very good offseason, and improve. But at the moment, I don't see more than a potentially good change of pace back in him.

what if and this is a strong IF but what if Chud only had the offense suited for Gore to run and really had no kind of package for Mack. what i mean is i keeping thinking how Pags would just up and take Mack outta games for no kind of reason and it would also explain his low carries as well.

[Aluckiswolverine]

1 minute ago, King Colt said:

Promising does not get 6.

 

[gacoop1]

I'll take Mack over Gore any day.  They didn't give him(Mack) too many touches, otherwise he would have been a 1K yd runner in 2017.

[lollygagger8]

16 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

i was referring to how they both were able to come up with ways for the offense to score and win 11+ games i believe all 3 of the first years of Luck

 

I will agree that they were better than Chud's offense (somehow) 

[Superman]

4 minutes ago, Peterk2011 said:

 

He kinda is yes. Not a bust, not at all, but last year many experts said (and the expectation on this very forum was) that he will be the successor of Gore. Well, he wasn't. He is shifty, is has speed, but still struggles to find holes between the tackles.

 

I hope he'll have a very good offseason, and improve. But at the moment, I don't see more than a potentially good change of pace back in him.

 

I don't get this thinking. He had 93 carries behind a very bad OL in a very disjointed offense, and he's being written off because he doesn't have great vision like Gore.

 

We haven't seen enough of Mack to know whether he can be more than a change back. And even if he's at his best as a change back, we know that he has more big play potential than anyone we've had in a long time. Pair him with a more steady back and get him in the right scheme, and we might have a very dangerous backfield combo.

[shasta519]

Gore didn't make the offense one-dimensional and predictable...Chud did that on his own.

 

What Gore did was limit the offense because of the lack of chunk plays. Outside of the pointless last game of the season, the Colts only won any games this season because of big chunk plays from Hilton and Mack. But when you have Gore as your lead back, you great reduce the potential for those types of plays...at least from the RB position. This is probably the thing I am looking most forward to on offense...having big play RBs getting 90% of the touches.

[Peterk2011]

2 minutes ago, Shadow_Creek said:

what if and this is a strong IF but what if Chud only had the offense suited for Gore to run and really had no kind of package for Mack. what i mean is i keeping thinking how Pags would just up and take Mack outta games for no kind of reason and it would also explain his low carries as well.

 

Well, if you fail to find your holes between the tackles, that's not a schematic problem. If those holes are there. Gore showed us, that those holes were there.

 

If I want to blame the coaches, then I'd rather say they failed to teach Mack how to run between the tackles. But, being honest, I don't thing that was the problem. It was Mack. He needs to improve.

[Superman]

1 minute ago, Peterk2011 said:

It was Mack. He needs to improve.

 

First year RB who only got 93 carries needs to get better. Not surprising. 

 

As for the idea that Gore proved the holes were there, that's not really an accurate analysis. Mack got hit in the backfield on an inordinate number of his carries. He wasn't bouncing the ball outside and ignoring wide open running lanes, or dancing in the backfield rather than attacking the line of scrimmage. He was affected dramatically by the poor play of the offensive line.

 

And comparing his ability to hit the hole with Gore's is kind of lacking perspective as well. Gore has been doing this a long time, and has always had great vision. Can't expect a rookie to understand how to run the way a seasoned vet like Gore does.

[lollygagger8]

19 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Pep was innovative and creative, he wasn't good at calling a game, finding a rhythm and exploiting the other team's weaknesses. His offense had no identity, but he came up with some nice wrinkles at times.

 

Bruce also had some tricks up his sleeve. Don't forget the Ballard TD.

 

I don't think Pep was that creative. He constantly telegraphed the run all the time with 2 extra linemen like it was college. He wasn't good at running different plays out of the same formations either. I think his playbook was massive, but not very creative or innovative. 

 

That Ballardcopter TD was awesome. That was more Ballard willing it into the end zone than anything. IIRC, that play almost got picked off. Worked out in the end though. Still an amazing effort on Ballard's part. 

 

 

[shasta519]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I don't get this thinking. He had 93 carries behind a very bad OL in a very disjointed offense, and he's being written off because he doesn't have great vision like Gore.

 

We haven't seen enough of Mack to know whether he can be more than a change back. And even if he's at his best as a change back, we know that he has more big play potential than anyone we've had in a long time. Pair him with a more steady back and get him in the right scheme, and we might have a very dangerous backfield combo.

 

His YPC are right in line with Vick Ballard...who is a cult hero with Colts fans for his rookie season. And Mack was more productive as a pass catcher. Seems like a different standard...if we are considering Mack to be any type of disappointment.

 

I think the disappointment (frustration seems more apt) could stem from the success that guys like Hunt and Kamara have had compared to Mack. 

 

While it does seem like the Colts got the short end of the stick when it comes to rookie RBs this season, I don't think it's fair to judge Mack until he gets a new OC next season. He at least has huge potential as a change of pace RB. And Chud's inability to use Mack more as a pass catcher was either stupid or stubborn...or both. 

[colt18]

wth lol

 

 

Our offense was going to be one dimensional without Luck no matter what. Defenses keyed in on Gore and dared Brissett to win on his arm, not hard to comprehend.

[IinD]

You'd think having all pros like Vujo, Person and Haeg would make Gore and Mack look awesome.

 

I blame Frank as well. He should have done more running behind those beasts.

[Superman]

17 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

I don't think Pep was that creative. He constantly telegraphed the run all the time with 2 extra linemen like it was college. He wasn't good at running different plays out of the same formations either. I think his playbook was massive, but not very creative or innovative. 

 

 

He used extra linemen situationally, which isn't unique to him. We just had bad blocking and an awful RB. 

 

There were times when he'd go unbalanced and then run the counter game, which usually worked. Then he'd go away from it, like the Eagles game in 2015.  He had other wrinkles, also.

 

My thinking was never that he didn't have good plays, it was that he didn't know how to call a game. His initial gameplans were lacking also, often having slow starts on offense. 

[Superman]

20 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

I think the disappointment (frustration seems more apt) could stem from the success that guys like Hunt and Kamara have had compared to Mack. 

 

 

Primary differences between Mack and those guys were good coaching and good QB play.