Golden Nuggets: I decree... that Foster can stay.

by Ninjames on Dec 15, 2008 2:32 AM PST in Golden Nuggets Comment 10 comments

First off, I'm pretty upset with the loss. We played well in many areas and I have to say if Rossum was there for better field position and Sims wasn't useless I'm certain that game would've been ours. At any rate I haven't much else to talk about other than admitting that I was wrong about Foster. He's shown he's a capable backup and fine.. fine, he can stay. You guys can keep him. Just be sure to feed, clean up after.. etc. Anyway, enjoy your links.

Here's a post game article from Niner Insider. (SFGate.com)

Singletary is open to second-guesssing. Do you think the game woudl've ended differently had Vernon Davis been on the field for the final play to block Porter? (SFGate.com)

Here's a game review from the Chronicle. (SFGate.com)

Vernon Davis thinks he could've changed the outcome of the game had he been in on the final play. I kind of believe him, for once. (PressDemocrat.com)

DeShaun Foster played well. (SFGate.com)

And here's more on him as well as other notes. (SacBee.com)

Vernon Davis kept his cool. He seems to be maturing very well. (SFGate.com)

We seemed to dominate yesterday's game and still somehow came out with a loss. (SFGate.com)

I'm tired of Mark Roman, get rid of him. That's all. (SacBee.com)

Samuel Lam gives some post-game thoughts in this article. (MVN.com)

No touchdowns, no victory. Simple. (SacBee.com)

And another post-game article. I just like reading summations, I suppose. (Scout.com)

"Porter Gets Best of 49ers." (49ers.com)

This article states that the Dolphins "wanted it more." I'm not sure I agree. But hey, whatever. (49ers.com)

Aaand how about ESPN's post-game article. (ESPN.com)

That's all for now, but one last thing. No Thomas Clayton sighting = I'm sad.

0 recs | Comment 10 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

We want Clayton

Can I say it right now? The Michael Robinson experiment is over. He doesn’t seem to be able to find the holes and the seams, and that is fatal if you are trying to reinvent yourself as a running back. Yesterday he was averaging 1.6 yards a carry, over the year I think he’s around 2.5 or less. Robinson works okay as a third down back catching a short pass out of the backfield. He’s the ultimate short yardage runner in that whatever yardage you need he’ll almost always come up short.

Two games left, at St. Louis and home against the Skins. The Niners can’t win the division or a playoff spot, can’t improve their position all that much. They’ll finish second to the Cardinals. I would love to see the Niners give Clayton a look in action. He’s been very good in preseason. How does he run in a real game? Can he catch the ball under pressure?

Foster has shown that he’s a good backup. Robinson, not so much. Gore hasn’t shown much breakaway ability over the last half of the season, and less this year than last. He may be wearing down. I hope Frank bounces back next year, but if Clayton can be a good, quick alternative off the bench, it would certainly give us a better running game, and good passing flows from a respect for the run.

by Bob On The Coast on Dec 15, 2008 6:59 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I completely agree with you. I always thought the point of Robinson was to have a viable backup who could also toss the ball to a receiver on an outside pitch play. Since he is not much of a backup, and we have not used him on RB pass trick plays (maybe he would’ve been a little more succesful than Bruce was yesterday) than why is he still here, wasting precious rushing attempts. Clayton seems to be pretty solid, lets see what he can do.

For this season, I say get Frank his 22 yards and sit him the rest of the season. That man takes a pounding out there and it would be nice to have him around for a few more years. These next two games should mainly feature Foster and Clayton to evaluate the two. Luckily we have the Rams next so after the 1st quarter we should have a good enough lead to just pound the ball with them two the rest of the game.

by Sebaz49 on Dec 15, 2008 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Robinson

If the team was so intent on turning him into a running back, I always thought he’d be best used as a third down back (or the back in passing situations). Being an ex-QB, he has the ability to read the D, which helps in pass protection. He is also shown to be a decent receiving option. I think missing the preseason during the installation of Martz’ offense hurt him tremendously.

If Martz sticks around, I think it’s very possible that Robinson begins to take receptions away from Frank Gore, as that’s the only role he could really fill on the team.

by sfgfan on Dec 15, 2008 11:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The problem I see with this is that it would be a dead giveaway as to what the play is. If he either stays in to block or runs a route everytime he’s on the field, teams will catch on. I’m not sure if this is exactly what you’re saying so please correct me if I’m wrong. But I would prefer to work on the blocking and catching techniques of a back that is a solid running back and have him be a 2-way threat, rather than just telegraph to the other team that its a pass play. On 3rd and 3, if you have a back that can get the 3 yards needed on the ground, stay in to pass block or go out and catch a short pass it forces the defense to account for everything.

Obviously having him as a fullback or split with another RB will keep the defense guessing, but I would rather have a true fullback on the team and backup RBs that can run the ball more successfully. I’m no expert, but I think teaching players how to block, run decent routes and catch(aside from VD, that man’s inability to catch astonishes me) is easier than teaching players how to be a runningback.

by Sebaz49 on Dec 15, 2008 1:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It really...

… isn’t any different than that team putting Billy Bajema in there, either. In any case, MANY teams have had featured third down backs, and they have had some level of success.

I understand your point about announcing to the world that the next play will be a passing play, but it’s actually a very common thing in the NFL. Other examples include using “pass rush specialists” on passing downs, as you’re obviously not going to send them into coverage. Blocking TEs. Blocking FBs. The list goes on and on.

by sfgfan on Dec 15, 2008 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I understand where you’re coming from. Yes teams do it and have done it, and succeed with it. My point was more that, as of now, Robinson hasn’t shown anything special. He might be good, but I and apparently a decent amount of people aren’t impressed.

As such, I was saying I would rather see more Foster and especially Clayton, to see what we do have in the back field. I’m not saying Clayton is the answer for sure, but well, we don’t know. He might be a nice 1-2 punch with Gore. I see Gore as a pretty complete back. He can do it all. Robinson seems more situational. I just want to see Clayton play to see if he is a more complete back than Robinson. If he is, I rather have 2 RBs that the team can have on 1st-3rd down, rather than 1 1st-2nd down back and 1 3rd down back.

Again I understand where you’re coming from and yes, many players are down/situation specific. But I just want to find out if the guy that’s been tearing it up in the preseason can do that when it counts and have a monster Gore/Clayton backfield. If he can’t cut it, oh well, no huge loss at this point.

by Sebaz49 on Dec 15, 2008 7:35 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

You can't

judge Robinson based on his numbers, because he isn’t asked to do much more than get 2.5 yards. He is a decent/pretty good power back who can run guys over at first contact, as was seen yesterday on a couple plays. Having said that, that first contact can’t be in his own backfield right when he touches the ball and the line gives unbelievable penetration to the d-line. That is unfair to Robinson. I think for what he is asked to do, he does a fine job.

Also that catch on the last drive was phenomenal, to take that hit and still hang on and then proceed to jump straight up as if nothing happened.

when will the Kenny Thomas Reign of Terror end?!!??

by diehardkingsfan5 on Dec 15, 2008 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Robinson.

I disagree that all he’s being asked to do (at least in yesterdays game) was get “tough” yards. He was in there as the running back in normal situations, too. I really like Robinson, I really do. I just don’t think he can be treated like a normal running back. I’m not sure if Clayton would have done a lot better in those “normal” situations, but it wouldn’t have hurt to find out.

by sfgfan on Dec 15, 2008 2:26 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Yesterday

he wasn’t just asked to get tough yards because he was the number two back rather than the number three.

He hasn’t been in “normal situations” much at all this whole year. I see what your saying (and everyone for that matter) that it isn’t a bad idea to give Clayton a try, especially now at the end of the season. But I don’t love the fact that everyone is so fully against Foster (not anymore after that solid game) and Robinson.

when will the Kenny Thomas Reign of Terror end?!!??

by diehardkingsfan5 on Dec 15, 2008 3:58 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re:

I’m not really in the “against Foster” camp. I believe he is the better running back (in a complete package sense) when you compare him to Clayton.

My feelings for Robinson are a little more muddled. I really don’t think he’s cut out to be a pure runner. He just isn’t, otherwise he probably would have been just that in college. He does bring some VERY versatile skills to the offense. If he can learn to use those skills to his advantage, he can be a very useful Swiss Army knife in any offense.

I’m not really all “rah rah rah” for Clayton either. After seeing what everyone saw from Robinson as a pure runner this week, though, I would be surprised if the 49ers counted on Robinson to do that again.

by sfgfan on Dec 16, 2008 9:28 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs