Gore or Watters?

Gore - hands down.

Waters was VERY good but Frank's the tank.

It gets down to what type of team you have, what offense you run, and what you are expecting from your back. Gore would not have been as effective in the offensive style of the 80's-90's 49er offense, Watters would would not have been able to produce in the Ericson, Nolan, Singltary era. So it comes down to a matter of personal taste, what kind of offense do you like? Choose that, and then you can choose your back! Me I like the more dynamic style of the 80's-90's offense, so give me Rodger Craig, or Ricky Watters. If any team from the 90's could have exploited Gores gifts, it would have been the Dallas Cowboys. Frank is an Emmet Smith like back, only much better, cause he is a NINER!

Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
It gets down to what type of team you have, what offense you run, and what you are expecting from your back. Gore would not have been as effective in the offensive style of the 80's-90's 49er offense, Watters would would not have been able to produce in the Ericson, Nolan, Singltary era. So it comes down to a matter of personal taste, what kind of offense do you like? Choose that, and then you can choose your back! Me I like the more dynamic style of the 80's-90's offense, so give me Rodger Craig, or Ricky Watters. If any team from the 90's could have exploited Gores gifts, it would have been the Dallas Cowboys. Frank is an Emmet Smith like back, only much better, cause he is a NINER!

gore can be successful in any offense IMO.

Originally posted by 49rz4Life:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
saying gore has stone hands is retarded. we dont throw to him much anymore because we have receivers now but in his first 5 or 6 years when there was no one on the team he led the team in receptions a couple times and caught a ton of passes. ricky was great but we didnt miss the repeat just because of him. we still had 1500 rushing yards as a team the next year, it was down from when ricky was there but that wasnt the main reason we lost. we lost because that douchebag FB fumbled on our first play and it was returned for a TD then favre torched us. we were down 21 nothing. and we didnt have deion sanders in 95 to shut people down like in 94. AND those motherf**kers had brett favre, that son of a b***h owns the niners. watters was great but theres no way hes better than gore. gore has everything you want in a RB and the intangibles like leadership, heart and determination. Niners RBs in order in my opinion are Gore, Craig, Hearst then Watters. waters was good but most people on here just refer to the superbowl game when he went off. in the rest of his time here he was good but not great, his yards went up consistently after he left the niners. and its highlighted by the fact that after watters we had a dry spell at RB until we got Hearst. watters is nothing compared to frank.

saying that Watters is NOTHING compared to Frank is retarded. Putting Hearst who had under 40 tds in his career, ahead of Watters is retarded. Yeah Favre owned the 49ers when Steve Young was injured in 1996 and while Rice and Hearst were hurt in 97. We sent em packin in 1998 so that Favre owning us stuff is retarded. the hands of stone thing may be extreme but I've seen Gore drop alot of simple screens that could have went for big gains. Won't disrespect Craig but i'm sticking with Watters.

gore put up way better yardage in his first 3 years than watters did and that was for a team that was just frank gore. they knew frank would get the ball every damn time and and they still couldnt stop him. watters had the luxury of having other threats on the team to take pressure off of him. kind of like what the pats are doing this year with their running game. their RBs are nothing on any other team but because brady is such a threat they are effective. watters was good but he was much better after he left the niners. and he is NOTHING compared to frank who has every significant niners rushing record there is as well as having the most yards from scrimmage in a single season by a niner. ricky only cracked 1000 yards rushing with the niners one time where gore does it pretty much every year, the year he missed it he got hurt and missed a bunch of games and he was still only like 100 or so yards short. Gore>Watters. favre did own us dude, how many times have we beat him and how many times have we beat him? and hearst was a better back than watters. would you say brandon jacobs is a better back than Gore just because he has a couple more rushing TDs due to his almost exclusive goal line usage? no you wouldnt.

Franky G for me.

Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Gore is a true football player.

Watters did it for the glamour and the money and lacked heart.

This, Watters would have rather been a 2,000 yard rusher on a bad team than a 1,000 yard rusher on a Super Bowl contender.

Originally posted by ElephantHaley:
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.

I think it's misleading to put up stats without proper context. Watters, who indeed was a great RB for the 49ers, was on one of the best, most explosive offenses in NFL history. Yes there were a lot of other weapons on that offense, but Watters benefited from that because defenses had to account for many other players. Gore, on the other hand, played on one of the worst offenses in NFL history, where he was the only real threat and defenses basically just played to stop him. Yet he still put up impressive numbers. I am not knocking Watters' talent, but I think Gore is simply better.

I don't like loud mouthed punks so I'm going with Gore.

Frank Gore "I just ball"

Ricky Watters '"For who? For what?"

Did the niners were a running offense......back then.....cause we were until AS...was the QB...don't get me wrong I love gore( I'm wearing his number right now)...I go for gore...the more you run the better the RB shines....

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:

Originally posted by 49rz4Life:

Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
saying gore has stone hands is retarded. we dont throw to him much anymore because we have receivers now but in his first 5 or 6 years when there was no one on the team he led the team in receptions a couple times and caught a ton of passes. ricky was great but we didnt miss the repeat just because of him. we still had 1500 rushing yards as a team the next year, it was down from when ricky was there but that wasnt the main reason we lost. we lost because that douchebag FB fumbled on our first play and it was returned for a TD then favre torched us. we were down 21 nothing. and we didnt have deion sanders in 95 to shut people down like in 94. AND those motherf**kers had brett favre, that son of a b***h owns the niners. watters was great but theres no way hes better than gore. gore has everything you want in a RB and the intangibles like leadership, heart and determination. Niners RBs in order in my opinion are Gore, Craig, Hearst then Watters. waters was good but most people on here just refer to the superbowl game when he went off. in the rest of his time here he was good but not great, his yards went up consistently after he left the niners. and its highlighted by the fact that after watters we had a dry spell at RB until we got Hearst. watters is nothing compared to frank.

saying that Watters is NOTHING compared to Frank is retarded. Putting Hearst who had under 40 tds in his career, ahead of Watters is retarded. Yeah Favre owned the 49ers when Steve Young was injured in 1996 and while Rice and Hearst were hurt in 97. We sent em packin in 1998 so that Favre owning us stuff is retarded. the hands of stone thing may be extreme but I've seen Gore drop alot of simple screens that could have went for big gains. Won't disrespect Craig but i'm sticking with Watters.

gore put up way better yardage in his first 3 years than watters did and that was for a team that was just frank gore. they knew frank would get the ball every damn time and and they still couldnt stop him. watters had the luxury of having other threats on the team to take pressure off of him. kind of like what the pats are doing this year with their running game. their RBs are nothing on any other team but because brady is such a threat they are effective. watters was good but he was much better after he left the niners. and he is NOTHING compared to frank who has every significant niners rushing record there is as well as having the most yards from scrimmage in a single season by a niner. ricky only cracked 1000 yards rushing with the niners one time where gore does it pretty much every year, the year he missed it he got hurt and missed a bunch of games and he was still only like 100 or so yards short. Gore>Watters. favre did own us dude, how many times have we beat him and how many times have we beat him? and hearst was a better back than watters. would you say brandon jacobs is a better back than Gore just because he has a couple more rushing TDs due to his almost exclusive goal line usage? no you wouldnt.

Watters benefited on the Eagles and the Seahawks? Bizarre. Who cares what he did on the Niners. LOOK AT HIS WHOLE CAREER!!! You don't want to do that bruh. If Ricky stayed = more SB's PERIOD. do ur research then come back. Favre beat a battered team and the record doesn't tell the story. Maybe ur better off focusing on what he did while he was here and that is not the discussion. Dude i loved Hearst but not better than Watters IMO. I respect ur opinion tho just disgusted at the NOTHING compared nonsense, ur adding his persona to the evaluation and its not fair. Look at the Numbers. Look at the tape. HOFer PERIOD.

Some of the analysis of these numbers is almost comical. Ricky Watters played in a more explosive offensive. A much more explosive offense. Therefore, I'd expect him to have higher TD numbers. You can't look at pure numbers in this case. Watters had an amazing skillset where if he remained with the Niners, he really could've been Roger Craig 2.0 (which is basically what Faulk became from the Rams). However, given that, Frank Gore put up some great numbers on some of the worst offenses ever assembled. There are some things that he can do that Ricky can't. There are some things that Ricky can do that Frank can't. I choose Frank because not only is he a better teammate, but he produced when all 11 men on defense knew he was getting the ball. It takes a certain level of toughness and determination to get that done. I also saw a comment about Frank Gore's career average per carry being better than Ricky Watters (who averaged 0.5 yards less per carry is meaningless). I don't know what game some of us are paying attention to, but 0.5 yards (per carry over the course of a career) is HUGE. If Frank Gore averaged a mere 0.5 yards per carry more for his career, he'd be in the company of two men- Barry Sanders and Jim Brown.

They are two different backs, but I think someone made a pretty good comparison, likening Frank Gore to Emmitt Smith. If Frank Gore played for the Cowboys in the 1990s, his numbers would be Emmitt Smith like, with even less carries.

Originally posted by modninerfan:

Originally posted by GolittaCamper:
It gets down to what type of team you have, what offense you run, and what you are expecting from your back. Gore would not have been as effective in the offensive style of the 80's-90's 49er offense, Watters would would not have been able to produce in the Ericson, Nolan, Singltary era. So it comes down to a matter of personal taste, what kind of offense do you like? Choose that, and then you can choose your back! Me I like the more dynamic style of the 80's-90's offense, so give me Rodger Craig, or Ricky Watters. If any team from the 90's could have exploited Gores gifts, it would have been the Dallas Cowboys. Frank is an Emmet Smith like back, only much better, cause he is a NINER!

gore can be successful in any offense IMO.

No, not really, but hey it's your opinion, Can he be good in any system, sure, but can he excel? No, that's not the way it works, teams take players who have the right skill set for their offense, well successful ones do anyway.

Watters was also running for an offense which was charitably put...10x better than the offense that Gore was essentially carrying by himself of your cherrypicked 3 year year time span. The Niners needed way less production from Watters than Gore, and the passing game would give Watters easier running lanes because defenses keyed on stopping Young and Rice....with Gore, it was the opposite...teams stacked the box and dared Smith to beat them by passing,

7% think that "you can't stop running waters". Well I got news for you. Ever hear of a dam?