Whose the better player, Willis or Bowman?

Originally posted by biggiep:

This is seriously a first world problems type argument!

The fact is the MLB combo of Willis and Bowman is this decade's version of last decade's Urlacher and Briggs duo.

But better

Until we see how good Bowman is playing without Willis by his side, the answer is Willis.

Remember how good Stubby looked with BY by his side and when he went to the Skins he sucked. Not to say Bowman would suck, but there is a lot to be said for two good players playing together. How much of Bowman's success is bolstered by the presence of Willis?

Originally posted by a49erfan77:

Originally posted by ninerjok:

Totally agree. He should at least be second-team All-Pro and I think Staley or Vernon should at least be first team. East Coast bias media hacks.

How can Vernon be first team over Jimmy Graham? That is just nonsense.

I have no problem with Jimmy Grahm being 1st team and Vernon 2nd but a fair argument could be made for VD.

He's a more complete TE imo, he may not be the RZ monster that Graham is but he is a better blocker and just as dangerous of a receiving threat.

In this case, I think Bowman is legit talent on his own. I think he might even diagnosed plays faster then Willis , even though he may missed more tackles than Willis when he gets there.

Originally posted by NinerNate:
Until we see how good Bowman is playing without Willis by his side, the answer is Willis.

Remember how good Stubby looked with BY by his side and when he went to the Skins he sucked. Not to say Bowman would suck, but there is a lot to be said for two good players playing together. How much of Bowman's success is bolstered by the presence of Willis?

We see it all the time in dime.

I think they each have their strengths, but Willis is better overall. People forget that Willis shifted for Bowman. Bowman is playing the the position best suited for him..Willis is playing the other because he can play both.

The blocking schemes are designed to go at Willis freeing Bowman to look good. We also put Willis in coverage a lot which takes him away from the line of scrimmage and making plays. Because he is much faster (Willis). So there is perception in this thing. If you just look at plays you might think Bowman. But why is Bowman near to the line of scrimmage and not in coverage as much? You have to understand the players strengths.

They both are good. Willis IMO is the better athlete. Bowman is crazy instinctive. Much like Brock. He just seems to always know where the play is going.

Originally posted by NinerNate:

Until we see how good Bowman is playing without Willis by his side, the answer is Willis.

Remember how good Stubby looked with BY by his side and when he went to the Skins he sucked. Not to say Bowman would suck, but there is a lot to be said for two good players playing together. How much of Bowman's success is bolstered by the presence of Willis?

We did, Willis didn't play in stl vs the Rams and Bow was still a beast.

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by NinerNate:
Until we see how good Bowman is playing without Willis by his side, the answer is Willis.

Remember how good Stubby looked with BY by his side and when he went to the Skins he sucked. Not to say Bowman would suck, but there is a lot to be said for two good players playing together. How much of Bowman's success is bolstered by the presence of Willis?

We did, Willis didn't play in stl vs the Rams and Bow was still a beast.

Oh 1 game is a great sample size....

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by NinerNate:
Until we see how good Bowman is playing without Willis by his side, the answer is Willis.

Remember how good Stubby looked with BY by his side and when he went to the Skins he sucked. Not to say Bowman would suck, but there is a lot to be said for two good players playing together. How much of Bowman's success is bolstered by the presence of Willis?

We did, Willis didn't play in stl vs the Rams and Bow was still a beast.

Oh 1 game is a great sample size....

I seem to remember the game against the Packers last year they alternated series in dime. Bowman had a lot more reps because when he was on the field there were more downs. When Willis was on the field they were 3 and out.

I bet cordinators plan for Willis more... But Bowman does deserve this question

I pick Navorrick Willman.

Bowman is much better. No way could Willis have made that play to save the Falcons game and no way would Bowman have gotten beat by a scrub named Luke Willson twice in the same game.

Originally posted by SanDiego49er:

Originally posted by KegBert:

Originally posted by NinerNate:

Until we see how good Bowman is playing without Willis by his side, the answer is Willis.

Remember how good Stubby looked with BY by his side and when he went to the Skins he sucked. Not to say Bowman would suck, but there is a lot to be said for two good players playing together. How much of Bowman's success is bolstered by the presence of Willis?

We did, Willis didn't play in stl vs the Rams and Bow was still a beast.

Oh 1 game is a great sample size....

Never claimed it was lol... Simply pointing out that Bo has played without Pat and did fine.

Originally posted by SashRoxx-1:
Who cares they're both Niners...

The more I think bout it... THIS

Lol at the people who think Willis is faster than Bowman, Willis still has the speed to beat 75% of NFL LB's, but no question Bowman is faster and more importantly quicker to accelerate. If we are giving Madden ratings I say Bowman is a 98 and Willis is a 95 just for fun Aldon is a 97 and Brooks is a 93