MRMADD Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 Betts is 5'10" 220 lbs. He's carried the ball 65 times for 307 yards (4.7 average), with a long run of 27 yards. He's scored once and fumbled the ball away once. He scores 1.5% of the time he touches the ball and fumbles 1.5% of the time. Watson is 5'11" 214 lbs. He's carried the ball 116 times for 534 yards (4.6 average), with a long run of 24 yards. He's scored once and hasn't fumbled. He scores 1% of the time he touches the ball and hasn't lost a fumble yet. Do we really need both of these guys? They look like clones. It's not like one is a power runner and one is a shifty guy. They're the same. (By comparison, Davis is 6'0" 235 lbs. He carried the ball 207 times for 820 yards (4.0 average), with a long of 33 yards. He scored 7 times and lost 4 fumbles. Interestingly, he scores 3.4% of the time he touches the ball and fumbles 2% of the time.) These statistics are largely meaningless, especially because Betts had 37 of those carries in the last two weeks (against Houston and Dallas) where he's averaged 5.8 yards/carry. But they are interesting. Are we taking a risk by heading into next season with the two-headed monster of Watson/Betts carrying the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 They aren't the same at all. Watson is a stop and start runner. He's a darting player. He's very shifty. Betts is more of a north-south guy, who seems able to maintain speed while making fluid changes of direction. They are not the same type of back at all. But, as for needing both, why wouldn't we want or need both? We are clearly taking a risk heading into a season with largely unproven running backs. But, Watson and Betts have both shown a capacity to produce within this offense and both have distinctly different running styles to offer a nice change up to defenses and to generally find a running style that works against a particular type of defense. Watson's style isn't as good against Dallas as Betts' and I think that was something you saw on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathByLinebacker Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 A risk? I think we benefit by having 2 RBs. If one gets hurt, we still have the other. We don't have to give either a ton of carries to wear a defense down with their combined carries. We'll never have to give either a ridiculous contract like we gave SD. The running back by committee appoach has worked for San Francisco over the last couple of years and it worked for Steve Spurrier at Florida and in the USFL. At Florida, his best 3 offensive seasons all involved RBBC. With the Bandits, he had 2 1000 yard rushers in a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nighthawk Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 If the 49'ers can play two RB's with success than why can't we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 The other thing to keep in mind is that betts is a rookie. We can expect improvement there a bit more than we can expect improvement in watson's play. Overall the two look competent and have complementing styles. -DB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted December 30, 2002 Author Share Posted December 30, 2002 I'm not arguing that having two RBs is a risk. I'm wondering if the two RBs we have are the risk. I think if we had two extremely talented RBs (the old Denver model), we'd be fine. But are these two guys capable of carrying the load? Art Watson is a stop and start runner. He's a darting player. He's very shifty. Betts is more of a north-south guy, who seems able to maintain speed while making fluid changes of direction. They are not the same type of back at all. I'm surprised that you think they're so different. By the way, is Betts a north-south guy or a guy who can make fluid changes of direction? Seems like if he can make fluid changes of direction, he's not a north-south guy, which implies that he's a 3 yards-and-a-cloud-of-dust straight-ahead runner. I think they're more similar than different. It's not like Barry Sanders vs. John Riggins here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted December 30, 2002 Author Share Posted December 30, 2002 DB, I think you're right -- it's too early to judge Betts. His stats are meaningless at this point because he's really only been playing for the last three games. We'll see. Maybe he'll surprise us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 MM, Being able to make fluid, at speed directional changes does not mean you aren't a north-south type of runner. I didn't say Betts appeared to be an amazing cut back runner. In many ways he's similar to Davis in that he is good about making moves while still moving up the field. Where Watson will stop his whole body and sometimes jump off two feet sideways to elude a guy, Betts will usually stay at speed and simply plant and keep moving, edging around a guy. Davis was a lot like that in 1999. Davis seems to have a problem now where people take out his feet because he's dragging them a bit and people can get cheap tackles on him. When Spurrier spoke about Watson and Betts keeping their legs up and moving he was taking a shot at what's happened a lot to Davis. But, Betts is more a Davis clone than a Watson clone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 If he comes at a reasonable price, I'd like to see us pick up Olandis Gary as well for insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted December 30, 2002 Author Share Posted December 30, 2002 I don't think he'd be that cheap, but wouldn't he be likely to win the starting job in camp (if healthy)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 I think art's right about them being different but he got it a little wrong. Watson is faster. In the open field he is going to break it far more often then betts. Betts has shown an ability to get people off balance then hit them, then run for more yards. Watson also has a considerable amount of power but would rather rely on his straight line speed. Betts will shift around and find a hole (pretty well sometimes) whereas watson seems to want to get upfield as fast as possible. Both have very good acceleration. So to sum up: Betts has more moves and more strength, which he uses very well in combination. Watson has better straight line speed and is a better reciever. Both are tough enough to get yards up the middle. Betts has a LOT of potential, though and his style bodes well for the future. -DB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 DB, I don't disagree with anything you said and I don't believe I said anything different . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eparadox Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 When you don't have a top 10 back, I think that a RBBC is a better situation if you have two backs of comparable talent. First, each of them only gets around 10-15 carries a game, which makes them much fresher, especially if they're more speed backs, then power backs. Second, they're gonna be cheap, which means you can pump more cash into the OL . Third, it keeps the defense on their toes, they can't really adjust to one distinct style of running. Four, ties into number 3, if you're playing a big, strong, slower defense, you give more of your carries to the speedy guy, but if you're playing a faster, smaller defense, you go with the better North-South runner. Five, if one goes down, its not the end of the world, the other back will sustain decent production until the other guy gets back. Six, it promotes competition, if one of the guys demonstrates that he is progressing into a more talented player, he knows he's gonna get more carries, and eventually become the starter, or get picked up by another team for a better contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor The Invincible Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 Betts is more like Davis in that he is a north south runner. Other than that... Betts is faster, more elusive, and for this season at least, can break more tackles. Watson is a scatback and will wait for a hole to open, and sometimes will wait too long (and get dragged down for a loss). Betts, on finding no hole, will charge into the line and pick up about 3 yards at best. He isn't as fast as Watson but is the better pure runner. Spurrier will probably use him like he used Earnest Graham down at Florida, and use Watson like he used Robert Gillespie down at Florida. Or, he might use Gillespie up here like he used him down there. Remember Gillespie, everyone? I think he might step it up next season and early a spot in the RB rotation as a third down back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eparadox Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 It would also be nice to see Cartwright get 20-30 carries next year. We haven't had a fullback who can run the ball for some time now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 Art, I liked your descriptions, which seem accurate to me. To add a bit more.... There's a reason Betts is a good KR: he's got a good charging ability and good hip swivel, which helps him to hit the crease from the wedge, break through arm tackles, and generally get as much yardage as possible, reliably. Watson wants to juke more, so is less effective at KR: the split second it takes him to do his dancing causes holes to close up. But Watson would probably make a more effective PR, where the player is on his own in space, and one good juke after the catch can add 10 yards to a return. Betts is always going forward, to my eyes: he jukes, but just to cause the defender to lose his leverage. It's one juke step left, then a quick right step forward. With Watson, the second step is sideways more often. Betts is also *much* superior as a pass catcher, to my eyes. He's got a terrific quick hip swivel after the catch, moving forward with momentum and then accelerating further. Much better than Davis and also better than Watson, who seems unprepared for the catch sometimes, with little momentum after the catch. But, Watson's numbers show that he's been effective. I'm surprised the numbers are as close as they are. It may be that Watson is better at creating opportunities from nothing, so on runs where Betts gets no gain because no hole existed, Watson finds a way to bounce outside and get a few yards. This is certainly useful, especially against teams that are strong inside against the run. Watson's creativity and juking may also be particularly useful on draws, and perhaps on outside sweeps. Neither player shows the ability to flatten a defender inside against a solid hit. This bodes badly for our goal-line offense and 4th-and-1 type plays. I think the solution is to bulk up inside at LG and center with better run-blocking players, so Betts and Watson (and Ramsey, on sneaks) can get the short-yardage gains inside when the defense knows what's coming. (Tre Johnson is strong enough to perform this role at RG.) I haven't focused enough on Betts and Watson as blockers to judge them. Watson had a beautiful pickup of a blitz against Dallas at one point, but then blew a block that caused Ramsey's fumble. Betts I think was thought to be a blocking liability in preseason, but I haven't noticed if he's improved. Overall, I'd grade Betts higher, except for the problem of "creating something from nothing", where Watson might be better. If I were running the offense, I'd play Betts more on plays where the RB would be an eligible receiver, and Watson more on short yardage and sweeps. And to avoid tipping the playcalling, I'd mix it up the rest of the time, which also helps to determine if either RB has the hot hand that day. Certainly having both RBs as options is much better than one, going into next season without a proven returning starter. Now, *both* have to be disappointing, which is unlikely. And the competition should give them the edge I think we're seeing in their game appearances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted December 30, 2002 Author Share Posted December 30, 2002 So is this a Stephen Davis vs. Skip Hicks offseason, where these guys battle it out to decide the starter, or are we convinced that they should be used together? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yank Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 A couple of observations from the Dallas game: 1. Watson tends to jump the cutback too soon sometimes. On a few off tackle plays Watson had blockers continuing their blocks toward the outside but he cut back into traffic where there was no help. 2. Watson showed good power on his touchdown - a pleasant surprise. If he can get a bit more of the Emmitt - follow his blockers as far as they can take him - his shiftiness and ample power says he might have more potential than he's shown. 3. Betts made a good burst off tackle on his long run. However, it was a DE (Ekuban) that caught him from behind at the goal line - not a real good thing. 4. Both Watson and Betts play until they're down and the whistle blows - not something SD always did. Neither Watson nor Betts are in the Riggins/SD mold but neither are the two the same type of back. They both are better than SD in the passing game. If we need a Heavy Jumbo goal line play for a yard - go with Rock. Otherwise I like what I've seen from both Watson and Betts as RBs. I also think that our improvement over the last month or so (e.g., 151 rushing yards yesterday vs 81 on Thanksgiving) can be credited in large part to an improved OL. Having Tre in playing shape and playing the whole game combined with a healthy Samuels has resulted in better control of the line of scrimmage. Having Ramsey in there to make defenses respect the downfield passing game has been another factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 I think we'd be wise to settle on a primary back and use the other guy in spots. But, the idea of getting these guys equal carries has worked the last two weeks so maybe that's not dumb either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamebreaker Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 Originally posted by yank 3. Betts made a good burst off tackle on his long run. However, it was a DE (Ekuban) that caught him from behind at the goal line - not a real good thing. Betts was caught by Ekuban because he slowed down thinking he had himself a touchdown. Which kind of negates your other comment: 4. Both Watson and Betts play until they're down and the whistle blows - not something SD always did. The same goes for running hard until you're in the endzone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckydevil Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 I have been very impressed with Betts. He seems to be more patient than Watson. Like others have metioned Watson is the better wr, he was a wr in college.I think in time Betts will clearly become the better rb, he seems to have more potential( maybe Synder crew know what they were doing when they drafted him) I predict by the middle of next season Betts will be the primary rb while watson will be a 3rd down back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 These statistics are largely meaningless, especially because Betts had 37 of those carries in the last two weeks (against Houston and Dallas) where he's averaged 5.8 yards/carry. But they are interesting. Both of those teams have decent defenses. And honestly after watching these last 2 games with these guys back there running, how could anyone want Davis back. I'd bet we broke more 10+ yard runs in those last 2 games then Davis had all year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeypeet Posted December 30, 2002 Share Posted December 30, 2002 Neither player shows the ability to flatten a defender inside against a solid hit. This bodes badly for our goal-line offense and 4th-and-1 type plays That could also be an are Cartwright helps us with. He could possibly become our short yardage back ala' Crockett in Oakland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlanta Skins Fan Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 Originally posted by luckydevi Like others have metioned Watson is the better wr, he was a wr in college. Well, I argued the reverse in this thread, and I think I was the only one who commented on pass-catching much. Maybe you read what you wanted to read? I know Watson was a WR in college, but I think Betts is the better pass-catching RB. Watson has looked unprepared for catches much of the time, has dropped catches, and doesn't seem to have momentum on those short passes when he's turned back to the QB. Betts seems to swivel quickly on those short passes and turn upfield quickly. Yes, I know Watson has turned a few passes for long gains, but I'm talking about tendencies and the way the players look on the field. I had this opinion prior to the Thanksgiving Dallas game. When Watson dropped the world's easiest pass from Wuerffel and almost single-handedly gave the game to Dallas with Roy Williams's INT/TD -- well, let's just say that Watson has a long climb before he deserves consideration as the team's primary pass-catching RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted December 31, 2002 Share Posted December 31, 2002 Oakland is the best example of a running back committe- you've got different guys coming in fresh every couple of plays that can do different things to defenses-and hopefully Cartright can be our short yardage guy as well as a good blocker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.