There are 64 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

bold prediction for the upcoming season

Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
I seem to recall a Bengals team that had gotten all the way to the Super Bowl with a huge, dominating O-line and a 260 lb fullback, at the time the biggest and most punishing back in the league. That team had a first and goal at the 2 against a Niner team that the analysts called "finesse." They ran it three times and tried a pass in the flat once. They never got in.

Except in this case frank already had 110 yards, a 5.8 average and a TD. The Ravens couldnt stop him, and in this case, their big man Ngata, wasnt even on the field.

I'm just saying nothing is a given. Did I want them to just pound it in or at least have Kaepernick try to run around the edge? Sure. But nothing is a sure thing.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,055
Here are Frank Gore's 2012 receiving numbers and his ranking among the 13 backs that played 75% or more of a team's snaps.

His drop rate was 5.00%. 3rd of 13

He had averaged 8.4 yards per catch. 3rd of 13

He forced 11 missed tackles and avoided tackles. 4th of 13

His catch rate was 82.4%. 5th of 13

He averaged 8.4 yards after catch. 5th of 13

He had 4 drops. 7th of 13

He gained 234 yards. 8th of 13

Gore was targeted 34 times. 10th of 13

He had 28 receptions. 10th of 13
Kilgore starts more than one game.
Originally posted by buck:
Here are Frank Gore's 2012 receiving numbers and his ranking among the 13 backs that played 75% or more of a team's snaps.

His drop rate was 5.00%. 3rd of 13

He had averaged 8.4 yards per catch. 3rd of 13

He forced 11 missed tackles and avoided tackles. 4th of 13

His catch rate was 82.4%. 5th of 13

He averaged 8.4 yards after catch. 5th of 13

He had 4 drops. 7th of 13

He gained 234 yards. 8th of 13

Gore was targeted 34 times. 10th of 13

He had 28 receptions. 10th of 13

According to Drustopo's source his drop percentage was 11% this year and 19.35% last year. And your not taking into account the joaquiz Rodgers' of the league who should be considered in this debate because I was talking about strictly receiving backs.
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
I seem to recall a Bengals team that had gotten all the way to the Super Bowl with a huge, dominating O-line and a 260 lb fullback, at the time the biggest and most punishing back in the league. That team had a first and goal at the 2 against a Niner team that the analysts called "finesse." They ran it three times and tried a pass in the flat once. They never got in.

Except in this case frank already had 110 yards, a 5.8 average and a TD. The Ravens couldnt stop him, and in this case, their big man Ngata, wasnt even on the field.


Yeah and the ravens knew we were probably the best or 2nd best rushing team in the nfl next to the skins when RG3 was healthy. They stacked the box and sent everybody and left the receivers in man to man coverage. It's easy for us to say "oh they should've ran the ball". But the ravens played it smart and made an inexperienced quarterback make a tough throw in an even tougher situation. I don't know how the refs didn't call holding on the most crucial play in the most crucial game of the year... Or how they called ticky tacky penalties the whole year and then decided we're going to let them play in the superbowl and not call obvious penalties. But it is what it is.

No. They werent stacked in the box. They were worried about Kaep on the edge, and thats what they were schemeing against. If they were worried about a run up the middle they would not have had Ngata sitting on the bench. And fact is, even if they were schemeing against the run, they couldnt stop Gore all night. This is not a case of saying "should have run the football:" months later. This is a case of screaming at the television live pleading for them to run the football as it unfolded. Everyone and their moms wanted gore to have the football in that situation, and he deserved it.
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
I seem to recall a Bengals team that had gotten all the way to the Super Bowl with a huge, dominating O-line and a 260 lb fullback, at the time the biggest and most punishing back in the league. That team had a first and goal at the 2 against a Niner team that the analysts called "finesse." They ran it three times and tried a pass in the flat once. They never got in.

Except in this case frank already had 110 yards, a 5.8 average and a TD. The Ravens couldnt stop him, and in this case, their big man Ngata, wasnt even on the field.


Yeah and the ravens knew we were probably the best or 2nd best rushing team in the nfl next to the skins when RG3 was healthy. They stacked the box and sent everybody and left the receivers in man to man coverage. It's easy for us to say "oh they should've ran the ball". But the ravens played it smart and made an inexperienced quarterback make a tough throw in an even tougher situation. I don't know how the refs didn't call holding on the most crucial play in the most crucial game of the year... Or how they called ticky tacky penalties the whole year and then decided we're going to let them play in the superbowl and not call obvious penalties. But it is what it is.

No. They werent stacked in the box. They were worried about Kaep on the edge, and thats what they were schemeing against. If they were worried about a run up the middle they would not have had Ngata sitting on the bench. And fact is, even if they were schemeing against the run, they couldnt stop Gore all night. This is not a case of saying "should have run the football:" months later. This is a case of screaming at the television live pleading for them to run the football as it unfolded. Everyone and their moms wanted gore to have the football in that situation, and he deserved it.

I'm not saying I didn't want gore to touch the ball, I'm saying that it wasn't as easy as people make it out to be. Ngata was on the bench because he was hurt not because they weren't worried about the run. And yes they were stacked, and yes they did send everybody but the corners. My point is they put all their marbles into stopping the run, whether it was stopping kaep or gore. So it left our receivers with one on one matchups, and we had a fade route to crabs that should've warranted a PI but we didn't get the call. And here we are miserable and debating about what should've been.
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by Leathaface:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by Leathaface:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
What exactly is gore immune to? Saying he isn't a top 10 receiving back? Frank Gore is the best runningback we've ever had but father time is catching up and I believe hunter and james are more valuable as receivers than gore. Not running the ball or blocking, Gore is far superior there IMO.

What makes you think "father time" is catching up to Gore when he just put up 1214 yards (2nd most in his career), a 4.7 ypc (highest since 2009), 8 TDs, and 28 receptions?

Oh and he also had 319 yds/5.1 ypc/4 TD in the playoffs.

And you still have absolutely zero proof to back your claim about his pass catching (except your opinion).

Case closed.


Umm father time is catching up to him because he is getting older, not younger. Like I said he drops too many passes, I don't need to look at the stats when I watch every 49er game. But if you do this year and last he saw a major dip in production compared to previous years right? His drop percentage was 19.35 last year and 11 this year right? Or am I just making this information that you guys supplied me with up?

30 is the magic number for runningbacks according to history but I don't think it will slow down frank from running just receiving.

When you use the phrase, "father time is catching up" to a player, it means they're slowing down because of age. Not because they are simply getting older. Would you say "father time" is catching up to Tom Brady? How about Lebron James? Uhhh no. Of course they're getting older. If English is your first language, there should be no excuse for not knowing how to use that phrase (English is my 2nd language, btw).

I watch every 9er game too. Frank Gore is not a featured pass catcher in the 49er offense under Roman but that doesn't mean he's regressed in that area. Like posted earlier, he had FOUR drops last year for a drop rate of 11%...right on par with other RBs in the league.

You're on an island here and you have nothing to back up this baseless claim. I'm done arguing this frivolous point as well. Anyone who has watched the 49ers knows how much of a weapon he is in the passing game when utilized.


Frank had 10 drops in 2 years and a 19.35 % drop rate is evidence that his hands aren't up to par with the rest of the backs. 11 % is also below average not on par. It's not my fault that's what you got out of me saying father time is catching up to frank gore. He's a year older and players are getting faster and more athletic. Not only that but frank has been our workhorse for quite some time now and has a bunch of wear and tear. Brady and Lebron James are completely different because history shows qbs can play for a long time in this league and basketball players have longer careers as well. Rbs are comparable to centers because their knees usually get bad as they get older. RB's for the most part don't have productive career's after age 30. Now I never said frank was going to show a huge regression running the ball so don't misquote me. I said he has already seen a drop in productive as a receiving back. Frank will still be our main back and will still play out of the shotgun because of his tremendous blocking, but he won't be our "featured" receiving back because IMO we have 2 guys better at it than he is. This is assuming that kendall hunter comes back healthy which your right might not be the case. Even if he doesn't LMJ will be featured more as a receiving back than gore will IMO.

Anaylists say father time is catching up to players like Tony G all the time. But does that mean they're saying he is seeing a huge drop in his production? No. So I don't know what your talking about.

1. This offense doesnt "feature" backs in the passing game.
2. LMJ hasnt proven to be a better receiving back than anyone. He has never been a receiving back. Hell, in college he was mostly a between the tackles runner. Until he proves otherwise, he is not a receiving back.


Have you seen the 13-14 version of the 49ers yet? No, so how are you already going to assume they won't feature a runningback in the passing game? Yes james ran well between the tackles in college but that is college. You have to be more creative in the nfl to get these smaller guys involved. James works well in space and took a lot of handoffs from the shotgun formation in college as well. Typically we run more I formations and 2 tight end sets than other teams do and James doesn't flourish as well in those sets. Usually James is lined up in our shotgun and pistol formations. This spreads out the defense and allows james to work better in space which is where he flourishes IMO. Receiving backs are usually the faster more agile backs that work well in space. Charles, CJ2K, MCf*gget, and Spiller are good examples. Not saying this is always the case but IMO james will flourish more in those situations than gore will.

Your basing all of your theories and projections on pure forsight into what yout think next years team might look like . I am basing my opinions on what the history of this team under harbaugh has been, and the history of the players themselves. I really dont think you understand LMJ and his running style. You want him to be, and you describe him as though he is sproles. He is nothing like that. He is an illusive between the tackles RB, that can hit the edge, but really isaint as effective at that as you make him out to be. Hunter was much more effective on the edge. Also, like i have said several times LMJ has never been a receiving target. Never. Just because you think he fits a certain mold will not change that.

Like i said, just because Frank Gore has not been used as a receiving back doesnt mean he cant do it. That is a product of the offense and not Gore. Similar to Stephen Jackson, who is a great receiving RB, but simple wasnt used in that capacity alot of the time.

Again, your whole opinion on the matter is flawed. LMJ and Hunter will get their attempts, but non of them will be because Gore is incapable.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,055
Here are the passing numbers for Frank Gore over the past 5 seasons (2008 to 2012).

He has been targeted 246 times. He has 188 receptions. His catch rate is 76.42%.

He has had 21 drops. His drop rate is 8.54%.

He has accumulated 1,627 receiving yards. He has averaged 325.4 receiving yards a year. He has averaged 8.48 yards per reception.

He has 8 receiving scores.

He has fumbled 1 time on a pass play.

He has forced missed tackles or avoided tackles 37 times.
  • buck
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 10,055
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
According to Drustopo's source his drop percentage was 11% this year and 19.35% last year. And your not taking into account the joaquiz Rodgers' of the league who should be considered in this debate because I was talking about strictly receiving backs.

I got my numbers from Pro Football Focus.

I did not make any attempt to decide who was or was not strictly a receiving back. I am not smart enough to make that decision.

I used the number snaps played because that indicates who is a top back and I thought you were talking about top backs.
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
I seem to recall a Bengals team that had gotten all the way to the Super Bowl with a huge, dominating O-line and a 260 lb fullback, at the time the biggest and most punishing back in the league. That team had a first and goal at the 2 against a Niner team that the analysts called "finesse." They ran it three times and tried a pass in the flat once. They never got in.

Except in this case frank already had 110 yards, a 5.8 average and a TD. The Ravens couldnt stop him, and in this case, their big man Ngata, wasnt even on the field.


Yeah and the ravens knew we were probably the best or 2nd best rushing team in the nfl next to the skins when RG3 was healthy. They stacked the box and sent everybody and left the receivers in man to man coverage. It's easy for us to say "oh they should've ran the ball". But the ravens played it smart and made an inexperienced quarterback make a tough throw in an even tougher situation. I don't know how the refs didn't call holding on the most crucial play in the most crucial game of the year... Or how they called ticky tacky penalties the whole year and then decided we're going to let them play in the superbowl and not call obvious penalties. But it is what it is.

No. They werent stacked in the box. They were worried about Kaep on the edge, and thats what they were schemeing against. If they were worried about a run up the middle they would not have had Ngata sitting on the bench. And fact is, even if they were schemeing against the run, they couldnt stop Gore all night. This is not a case of saying "should have run the football:" months later. This is a case of screaming at the television live pleading for them to run the football as it unfolded. Everyone and their moms wanted gore to have the football in that situation, and he deserved it.

I'm not saying I didn't want gore to touch the ball, I'm saying that it wasn't as easy as people make it out to be. Ngata was on the bench because he was hurt not because they weren't worried about the run. And yes they were stacked, and yes they did send everybody but the corners. My point is they put all their marbles into stopping the run, whether it was stopping kaep or gore. So it left our receivers with one on one matchups, and we had a fade route to crabs that should've warranted a PI but we didn't get the call. And here we are miserable and debating about what should've been.

even if your correct and the box was stacked (it wasnt for the entire last series, they brought the blitz on the last play yes, but the rest of the series was wide open for the run, i just forced myself to watch again on youtube) Frank Gore has faced stacked boxes his entire career and came out on top. he faced them all night and had a 110 yards, 5.8 average and a TD. every fan who has seriously followed this team knew who should have gotten the football. Everyone on the team knew who should have gotten the football. The only people that didnt seem to know who needed the football down there where the ones calling the plays. Im not talking about specificly the last play. Im talking about the 4 down series.
15-1: only loss comes on the last meaningless game when none of our starters play
Win Super Bowl
Smash Seadderall SeaHGHawks week 2
V. Davis- 60-70 rec, 865 yds, 8 tds
A. Boldin- 70-80 rec, 950 yds, 7 tds
A. Jenkins- 40-50 rec, 465 yds, 4 tds
V. Mcdonald- 30-40rec, 570yds, 8 tds
F. Gore- 1200+ rush yds, 8 tds
K. Hunter- 600+ rush yds, 5 tds
L. James- 400+ rush yds, 4 rush tds, 3 kickoff rtn tds
C.Kaepernick- 3500+ passing yds, 800+ rush yds, 37 total tds including 5 rushing tds.
Aldon Smith- DPOY
N. Asomugha- 5 ints
#1 Defense
Top 5 Offense
Top 3 ST
Record breaking 14 Pro Bowlers but not able to participate due to playing the Super Bowl the following week.
Crabtree will be back at week 6.

We wil
Originally posted by buck:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
According to Drustopo's source his drop percentage was 11% this year and 19.35% last year. And your not taking into account the joaquiz Rodgers' of the league who should be considered in this debate because I was talking about strictly receiving backs.

I got my numbers from Pro Football Focus.

I did not make any attempt to decide who was or was not strictly a receiving back. I am not smart enough to make that decision.

I used the number snaps played because that indicates who is a top back and I thought you were talking about top backs.


Sorry I missed that error. I meant to say strictly receiving stats not backs. I have no complaints about frank gore as a runner or a blocker. This simply was about his hands. So which source is more reliable between the 2? Either way I'm not buying because I've seen frank gore drop some very easy passes due to a lack of concentration. Not saying he is inadequate because he is decent, I just think james and hunter will be better in the future. That and the fact that there's 2 of them and both will get their touches.
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by JimDrinkAMiller:
Originally posted by IdahoNiner:
Originally posted by GNielsen:
I seem to recall a Bengals team that had gotten all the way to the Super Bowl with a huge, dominating O-line and a 260 lb fullback, at the time the biggest and most punishing back in the league. That team had a first and goal at the 2 against a Niner team that the analysts called "finesse." They ran it three times and tried a pass in the flat once. They never got in.

Except in this case frank already had 110 yards, a 5.8 average and a TD. The Ravens couldnt stop him, and in this case, their big man Ngata, wasnt even on the field.


Yeah and the ravens knew we were probably the best or 2nd best rushing team in the nfl next to the skins when RG3 was healthy. They stacked the box and sent everybody and left the receivers in man to man coverage. It's easy for us to say "oh they should've ran the ball". But the ravens played it smart and made an inexperienced quarterback make a tough throw in an even tougher situation. I don't know how the refs didn't call holding on the most crucial play in the most crucial game of the year... Or how they called ticky tacky penalties the whole year and then decided we're going to let them play in the superbowl and not call obvious penalties. But it is what it is.

No. They werent stacked in the box. They were worried about Kaep on the edge, and thats what they were schemeing against. If they were worried about a run up the middle they would not have had Ngata sitting on the bench. And fact is, even if they were schemeing against the run, they couldnt stop Gore all night. This is not a case of saying "should have run the football:" months later. This is a case of screaming at the television live pleading for them to run the football as it unfolded. Everyone and their moms wanted gore to have the football in that situation, and he deserved it.

I'm not saying I didn't want gore to touch the ball, I'm saying that it wasn't as easy as people make it out to be. Ngata was on the bench because he was hurt not because they weren't worried about the run. And yes they were stacked, and yes they did send everybody but the corners. My point is they put all their marbles into stopping the run, whether it was stopping kaep or gore. So it left our receivers with one on one matchups, and we had a fade route to crabs that should've warranted a PI but we didn't get the call. And here we are miserable and debating about what should've been.

even if your correct and the box was stacked (it wasnt for the entire last series, they brought the blitz on the last play yes, but the rest of the series was wide open for the run, i just forced myself to watch again on youtube) Frank Gore has faced stacked boxes his entire career and came out on top. he faced them all night and had a 110 yards, 5.8 average and a TD. every fan who has seriously followed this team knew who should have gotten the football. Everyone on the team knew who should have gotten the football. The only people that didnt seem to know who needed the football down there where the ones calling the plays. Im not talking about specificly the last play. Im talking about the 4 down series.


First play was a run. Second play was the bootleg where we had 3 receivers, 2 of which were tight ends bunched up to the right and 1 to the left. Ravens had 6 guys on the LOS along with their safety playing a step behind the other 2 LBs. Seems pretty stacked to me considering we were in a passing formation. Next play on 3rd down they brought reed up to the LOS and again had 6 guys plus polard behind the 2 linebackers and again we had 4 wideouts. If you watch closely you can clearly see that it is man to man coverage with no help. The last play again we had the bunch formation on the right and 1 wideout to the left and again the ravens had 6 guys on the LOS and again they had man on man coverage. Not to mention the play that wasn't when kaep was clearly intending to run.

I don't know how familiar you are with formations but if I'm in the shotgun with 4 receivers and I see 6 guys on the LOS and 2 linebackers with the safety close behind then I'm probably not thinking about running the ball.
Niners drop a 50 spot on Seattle at Centurylink week 2...