There are 135 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

How do you remember Charlie Garner?

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Ricky Watters has near HOF numbers guys. Check it out.
Ricky Watters was also a lousy Niner at a time when being a Niner meant something.

He was a better fit with the Eagles in the same way that Charles Haley was a better Cowboy. Both were good players, but neither were good Niners.
[ Edited by BubbaParisMVP on Dec 16, 2011 at 1:37 AM ]
Originally posted by WildBill:
Nothing but respect for Gore, but I am partial to Craig. He was a more rounded player. Both could block and run, but Craig caught many a ball out of the backfield and he would have more yards if didn't start off as a FB (I know gore is not being asked to catch out of the backfield and this puzzles me). However teams hated playing and tackling craig and those high knees to the helmet.

That was back in the day when everyone seemed to know how to catch.
Pretty good runner, he was very shifty and had some great spin moves. He was also a real threat out of the backfield in the passing game as well.
Originally posted by BubbaParisMVP:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Ricky Watters has near HOF numbers guys. Check it out.
Ricky Watters was also a lousy Niner at a time when being a Niner meant something.

He was a better fit with the Eagles in the same way that Charles Haley was a better Cowboy. Both were good players, but neither were good Niners.

whats that supposed to mean? Watters and Haley were really good during their time with SF, so how were they not good Niners? IMO how the played on Sundays is what makes you a good or bad Niner.
Originally posted by SonocoNinerFan:
I remember him early in his career as an Eagle gashing us in that 40-8 home debacle in 1994.

Yes, I remember that game. That was a horrible day. Garner and Cunningham killed us. Steve Young got pulled that game too.
Originally posted by Niners99:
whats that supposed to mean? Watters and Haley were really good during their time with SF, so how were they not good Niners? IMO how the played on Sundays is what makes you a good or bad Niner.

Do we really have to go over this again? What part is unclear to you? The selling out of teammates? The motorcycle antics? The self absorbtion? The dissemination of reproductive fluids? The damage done to the Niners' locker room culture?

I'm hard pressed to think of two player that did more damage to the old Niners way of conducting business.
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?




Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by jones49:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?


Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?

List seems pretty decent to me. I may sway Hearst for Watters but thats its own separate argument.

The reason I hate these lists is that most people rank guys they have never seen or barely remmber. You're going to tell me you've seen perry play? You're going to tell me that ricky watters was better than craig? On what basis? What about wendel tyler?


what about him?

Gore was our Marshall Faulk.

He can block, catch, and run.

Hearst could run, and catch.

Watters, Perry, and Craig could run.

Gore is the complete package.

Versatile and excellent in every form. He's in the twilight years, but he's still beastin.

Ricky Watters has near HOF numbers guys. Check it out.

Both Watters and Craig could run and catch and block. Don't know about Perry. Having Craig out there was like having an extra wide receiver, and he was the first running back to do 1,000 yards on the ground and in the air. Watters played wide receiver for a year at Notre Dame and was an excellent receiver.

So I found the previous post a little puzzling.
Originally posted by LeftBankeNiner:
I never saw Perry play. Except in highlights. Of those other players, I liked Craig the best. Better teams then, of course.


Craig was the best for sure, I never liked Watters. Wyndall Tyler was excellent also, during his brief stay us.
Garner had negative press on him that he was too small to be an every down back when the 49ers signed him. But he came here & tore it up as the featured back, proving everyone wrong. Because of this, he was a very pleasant surprise to 49er fans, and we loved having him here.
Garner was very quick - great fit for the 49ers WCO. But he rubber the 49ers front office very raw with his antics before FA. He wanted a big contract and got it in Oakland, but in the year before his FA started, he would apparently yell out the days counting down to his FA at practice -- totally pissing off the staff and front office.
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?




Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by jones49:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?


Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?

List seems pretty decent to me. I may sway Hearst for Watters but thats its own separate argument.

The reason I hate these lists is that most people rank guys they have never seen or barely remmber. You're going to tell me you've seen perry play? You're going to tell me that ricky watters was better than craig? On what basis? What about wendel tyler?


what about him?

Gore was our Marshall Faulk.

He can block, catch, and run.

Hearst could run, and catch.

Watters, Perry, and Craig could run.

Gore is the complete package.

Versatile and excellent in every form. He's in the twilight years, but he's still beastin.

Ricky Watters has near HOF numbers guys. Check it out.

Both Watters and Craig could run and catch and block. Don't know about Perry. Having Craig out there was like having an extra wide receiver, and he was the first running back to do 1,000 yards on the ground and in the air. Watters played wide receiver for a year at Notre Dame and was an excellent receiver.

So I found the previous post a little puzzling.

Watters was an incredible all-purpose back. Not sure why this is puzzling. Watters' numbers are much better than Craigs overall in terms of career yards from scrimmage. I think he's a bit higher on the "rankings" list.
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by English:
Originally posted by NinerGM:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?




Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by jones49:
Originally posted by JoseCortez:
soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?


Originally posted by JoseCortez:
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

soooo, are you just listing popular niners backs from most recent to oldest?

List seems pretty decent to me. I may sway Hearst for Watters but thats its own separate argument.

The reason I hate these lists is that most people rank guys they have never seen or barely remmber. You're going to tell me you've seen perry play? You're going to tell me that ricky watters was better than craig? On what basis? What about wendel tyler?


what about him?

Gore was our Marshall Faulk.

He can block, catch, and run.

Hearst could run, and catch.

Watters, Perry, and Craig could run.

Gore is the complete package.

Versatile and excellent in every form. He's in the twilight years, but he's still beastin.

Ricky Watters has near HOF numbers guys. Check it out.

Both Watters and Craig could run and catch and block. Don't know about Perry. Having Craig out there was like having an extra wide receiver, and he was the first running back to do 1,000 yards on the ground and in the air. Watters played wide receiver for a year at Notre Dame and was an excellent receiver.

So I found the previous post a little puzzling.

Watters was an incredible all-purpose back. Not sure why this is puzzling. Watters' numbers are much better than Craigs overall in terms of career yards from scrimmage. I think he's a bit higher on the "rankings" list.

Again, this list was just my opinion.

Joe Perry didn't play with alot of black dudes., but he is still one of the elite.
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


1)Gore
2)Hearst
3)Watters
4)Craig
5)Perry

I would rate Craig well ahead of Gore and Hearst--in the same way I would rate Montana better than Marino or Favre. Stats --like yards don't tell the whole story---it is making clutch plays--making plays with games on the line--and the bigger the game the better the performance. Craig did all that--I love Gore--but he has never really carried the Niners in a big game---he will have a chance this post season.
Originally posted by HearstFan:
Garner was very quick - great fit for the 49ers WCO. But he rubber the 49ers front office very raw with his antics before FA. He wanted a big contract and got it in Oakland, but in the year before his FA started, he would apparently yell out the days counting down to his FA at practice -- totally pissing off the staff and front office.

Huh, I did not know that. I really liked him, but now that you sheaded this new light of information - I don't think I like him as much.
  • Paul
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 6,726
Originally posted by Moolji:
Originally posted by HearstFan:
Garner was very quick - great fit for the 49ers WCO. But he rubber the 49ers front office very raw with his antics before FA. He wanted a big contract and got it in Oakland, but in the year before his FA started, he would apparently yell out the days counting down to his FA at practice -- totally pissing off the staff and front office.

Huh, I did not know that. I really liked him, but now that you sheaded this new light of information - I don't think I like him as much.

where'd you get that from? lol... I can't even remember the contract he got in Oakland, when he went there he was almost an elite back...
Search Podcast Draft Forum Commentary News Shop Home