Gore or Watters?

Ok no more "retarded" name calling. Warnings will follow.

Well, considering Gore is the best RB the 49ers have ever had and Watters isn't even the 2nd best...obviously Gore.

Originally posted by English:
Craig

That is the more interesting question.

I'm a Gore man, although recently I was a Craig man. I have the utmost respect for Craig, but I increasingly think of him as a product of the Dynasties. Frank Gore, on the other hand, has been *the* team for an entire era. Now that Smith has taken a bow, it's clearer than ever that these were the Gore years.

I watched Craig's complete career, but against Gore, I can't help but think that Craig was the right guy in the right place. Moreover, Craig had one of the best O lines in the history of football. Frank Gore, on the other hand, has adapted to so many different schemes and still managed to top the charts. Gore is the better rounded, more competent running back--even though Craig's hands were vastly softer. A lot of Craig's career was opened up for him; Gore, on the other hand, had to bludgeon his way toward his numbers.

If my life was on the line, I'd hand the ball to Frank Gore.

Frank. Ricky was good as a complementary player but we never tried to build an offense around him. And I think Frank's attitude does matter, because it affects his play. Frank is always there for the team whether he's getting his numbers or not. Breaks his hip, comes back and has the second best season of his career. Gets old, averages over 5 YPC. Love it.

Cripes, you're just talking about Gore's plusses. Does anyone remember the real Ricky Watters? I can't believe this is even a question.

Originally posted by BubbaParisMVP:

Originally posted by ninermedic:
Frank. Ricky was good as a complementary player but we never tried to build an offense around him. And I think Frank's attitude does matter, because it affects his play. Frank is always there for the team whether he's getting his numbers or not. Breaks his hip, comes back and has the second best season of his career. Gets old, averages over 5 YPC. Love it.

Cripes, you're just talking about Gore's plusses. Does anyone remember the real Ricky Watters? I can't believe this is even a question.

Ricky Watters had a long mustache that he used to twist evilly while he tormented orphans. Or am I thinking about someone else?

EDIT: this is a photo of Watters shortly after he skipped town to go play for the freakin EAGLES for which I will never forgive him.

Originally posted by ninermedic:
Ricky Watters had a long mustache that he used to twist evilly while he tormented orphans. Or am I thinking about someone else?

Pretty much. The dude signed with the Eagles, what more do you want, aside from the fact that he was a child molester?

Joking aside, a lot of old fans will think of him that way. The stats guys will always say, "look at these!" the old fuddy duddies, like me will say he was a terrible Niner. He's just too convenient of a bookend, and too big of a douche bag.


Edit: lol at the picture. That's the way most of us thought about him. He was a complete jerk on a team that used to be defined by team cohesion. I think that a lot of the younger guys don't really understand that. As mentioned above, he was a book end to one era of the team..and the start of the next. You could stick Haley in there too, but good pass rushers are typically insane. Waters, on the other hand, screwed his career.

I Think a lot of you Gore Lovers are Prisoners of the Moment. You also have to remember that Watters played only 3 seasons in SF 92' 93' and 94. He missed his rookie year being hurt in training camp that year. To me, its easily Watters over Gore, Watters was just as much the runner and a way way better reciever and Watters per season, has better TD ratio per season since he only played 3 seasons here.

gore and it's not even close.

Although Watters was a better back than Gore catching passes out of the backfield in the Ol' West Coast offense that 49ers used to run.

Overall GORE is the better back

I liked 32, I even have his jersey from the '94 season, but Gore is by far better.

For who? For what?

Did Ricky Waters put you up to this?

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:
I Think a lot of you Gore Lovers are Prisoners of the Moment. You also have to remember that Watters played only 3 seasons in SF 92' 93' and 94. He missed his rookie year being hurt in training camp that year. To me, its easily Watters over Gore, Watters was just as much the runner and a way way better reciever and Watters per season, has better TD ratio per season since he only played 3 seasons here.

Seriously? Put Gore on those same teams. Gore played on some of the worst teams we ever fielded and he is the best back we have ever had. Dude carries the load.

Lets Compare their stats as 49ers vs each other

1992 Watters 1,013 yards, 4.9 per attempt, 9 tds. 43 cathes 405 yards 2 tds

1993 Watters 950 yards, 4.6 per attempt 10 tds, 31 catches 326 yards 1td

1994 Watters 877 yards, 3.7 per attempt 6 tds, 66 catches 719 yards 5 tds

Now Frank Gore from 2006 through 2008 same 2nd, 3rd & 4th year just like Watters, take out each's rookie year

2006 Gore 1,695 yards 5.4 8 tds. 61 catches 48 485 yards 1 td

2007 Gore 1102 yards 4.2 5 tds. 53 catches 436 1 td

2008 Gore 1,036 yards 4.3 6 tds. 43 catches 373 yards 2 tds.

Watters 33 tds as a 49er, not even including his postseason of 5 in one game vs the Gmen or the 3 he scored in Super Bowl 29. Gore had 22 tds in the same 3 year stretch. Watters is & was every bit as good or better than Gore. Remember as far as yards go, Watters had to play on a PASS 1st team with Rice, Brent Jones & JT while Gore, to Gor'es credit also was stuck with AS, but it was a run 1st offense for Gore so he got more touches. I'd take Watters in a heartbeat.