There are 95 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

How do you remember Charlie Garner?

Garner was a great stopgap pickup to cover for Hearst going down.

BTW: I would rank Hearst, Craig, and Watters ahead of Gore....mainly because they were more complete players and all we better receivers than Gore. Catching the ball is the most mediocre part of Gore's game.

The thing that made Hearst great was how he finished runs...in 1998 he had 5 TD runs of 70 yds or more. You rarely saw that from Gore, even in his prime. The guy broke long runs, but many times he ran out gas and got run down.

And Hearst will always have a special place in heart with one of the greatest TDs in 49er history (96 yard OT run against the Jets).
I will always remember Charlie Garner as the guy who wasn't good enough to unseat Hearst. Was so mad he left the Niners for the Raiders, b/c it was around the same time Rice left for the Raiders as well

As for ranking of best 49er RBs, here's the best list:

1. Roger Craig (Superbowl rings + 1st 1000 rush/1000 rec yard + Infamy of 1st WCO RB = HOF RB )

2. Joe "The Jet" Perry (I wasn't old enough, but my grandfather and dad told me stories about the epicness of his play back in the Kezar days. Part of the "Million Dollar Backfield", HOFer, and only dogged b/c ppl don't remember him)

3. Frank Gore (I'm biased, but he's the complete package. Will pass Perry for overall team leader including AAFL yards next season. Also stayed even when we sucked, which is HUGE brownie points , and has been rewarded this season )

4. Ricky Waters (Could've been #1 if he'd stayed in SF after 1994. Instead, will be remembered as a huge stat guy who won't get into the HOF anytime soon. NO WAY he deserves to get in before Craig)

5. Garrison Hearst (Great stats, but not long enough career. He had everything but a title ....poor guy)
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.

No I wasn't comparing Watters and Craig. I was puzzled at the assertion that they could both only run whereas Frank Gore is the complete back. Both Watters and Craig were about as complete as they come.
I will remember Garner as one of the few bright spots during some dark seasons for the 49ers. It was the trio of Garcia, Owens, and Garner that aomade that team watchable after it's fall from grace. I remember when the time came to resign him, Bill Walsh and others questioned his durability as a back. I wish we could've kept him, but with Hearst returning, there was no need to give him the contract he would've wanted (and deserved).

As for this greatest 49ers RB debate that is taking place, with all do respect to Roger Craig and Ricky Watters, at what point were they the only true threat on offense? Frank Gore has been in a role smilar to what Walter Payton was for most of his career in Chicago. Even now, with a much better team, if you shut down Frank Gore, by and large, you still can stop this offense (there are some exceptions this season however). I would love to see Frank Gore in an offense where the receivers were actually feared.
He was like a poor mans version of Shady McCoy for Philly. He definitely had lateral quickness and was good at falling forward.
Garner was very productive for us, but he will be remembered as a Raider. I actually remember him with the Eagles too.
I thought Garner was a pretty good back, I was mad when we let him go to the Raiders. But turns out, it was the right call.
I only go back as far as Hearst

Don't really remember Loville
I remember this time. It was very good year.
The way I remember Charlie Garner is him torching us in 1994 when he was with the Eagles. I still remember that game and I still don't get how they worked us like that.
Amp Lee
Hearst was better than Gore....in 1998, he was unstoppable, and unlike Gore he finished runs. No one caught Hearst after he broke into the second level. He was also a pretty good receiver, catching and making some huge pass plays.
As a very caring and compassionate lover.
Originally posted by TonyStarks:
IMO


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

1: Craig
2: Gore
3: Perry
4: Hearst
5: Watters
I remember he was better at picking up blitzes than Lawrence Phillips.