Originally posted by eastcoast49ersfan:
Originally posted by Travisty13:Archer and Thomas or nearly identical in size (Thomas 1 inch taller, 1 lbs more) and arms/hands (Archer 1 1/8 inch longer arms, and 6/8 of an inch bigger hands) . So discrediting Thomas for those attributes, should also discredit Archer.
Plus Thomas put up more yards receiving, catches, and TDs plus has more experience in kick returns than Archer (neither has much Punt Return experience; 16 returns for Thomas, and 6 returns for Archer). Thomas had 500 less rushing yards and 2 more rushing TDs despite less attempts. All in 1 year less of work and playing against remarkably better competition. So don't say Archer put up big #s and Thomas is just a return man, when Thomas has proven statically to be better than Archer in everything in 1 less year to do it.
Archer was 3 pounds heavier at the combine and the gap in hand size and arm length is actually pretty significant when they both have small arms and hands. Archer is functionally bigger and is much faster than Thomas. I doubt there is a WR in the league with hands as small as Thomas'. Archer has those physical advantages in addition to more speed.
Archer barely played his first 2 seasons, but he put up 2000 yards from scrimmage his junior year which is way more impressive than anything Thomas has done. Thomas' stats are also inflated from playing in an extremely explosive offense that wore teams down. He wouldn't have averaged the yard per carry that he did in most offenses. Yes, he played against better competition, but he had significantly better teammates as well and played in an offense that always puts up gaudy numbers and yards/play. De'Anthony Thomas's stats declined each year.
I still can't get over the fact that you're saying Thomas is statistically better because Archer played a few downs his freshman and sophomore year. If he played one down would you still count that as a full season? If he hadn't played at all back then, does that make him a better player? Archer's stats the past 2 seasons (the only seasons he's played consistently) are much better than any 2 of Thomas's seasons.
Archer, if anything by your argument, is that he played in only 1 full season than. Was hurt most of his Sr year. He had 58, 40, 159, and 68 carries from frosh to senior year. So on a bad Kent State team he couldn't even get on the field his 1st 2 years, than in a predominantly run oriented offense his Jr. year finally excelled, only 2 play sporadically his Sr. year. So if anything he's a 1 year wonder that looked good at the Combine. I'm not knocking Archer (I'd actually like us to draft him), but saying he's way better just isn't the case in my opinion. I don't view either as a RB, I think both are OW (Offensive Weapon) but Thomas has shown more as a WR/Returner/and RB than Archer has. And Thomas' stats didn't decline each year (he increased his yards from Freshman to Soph than declined some his Jr year because of an ankle injury that held him out of almost 4 games). Also, when was Thomas a feature back? Never, he's shared time with a stacked backfield yet still was so explosive they found ways to utilize him. I'm going to bet Archer wouldn't have ever gotten that same attention if the roles were reversed. I'm not an Oregon nor a Pac12 fanboy either (I'm a Purdue/b1g guy), so I have no biased in this debate. The only thing that Archer has him beat at is timed speed at the Combine.
And saying Thomas would have the smallest hands - Terrance Williams measured 8 3/4th last year (a big 1/2 inch bigger than Thomas) and he certainly did fine his rookie year. Chris Givens has 8 1/4 hands, Kendall Wright 8 5/8th.
All I'm saying is I think Archer (slated to go about 2 rounds higher) is being overrated by some way to much. When, essentially, the same exact player can be had later in Thomas.