Michael Thomas gets pissy with DeVante Parker
- Thread starter SCLSU Mud Dogs
- Start date
Lmaooooo!!!
I must have been under a rock last year. What WR catches 149 balls? Good for him but just shows how much the game has changed. These guys couldn’t hold players like Lance Alworth or Paul Warfield’s jock but they’ll push them so far down the stat sheet you’ll need to turn to page 78 to find them. Dang.
I haven’t watched this cat play but there is something to having too much of the O go through one player. It seldom wins championships - think TO, Beckham, Keyshawn, Randy Moss, etc. You have to spread it around. If you look at the last 20 years, I don’t think there’s been a SB winner who had a guy w such lopsided stats be ir receptions or carries.
EJay
Scout Team
I believe, for the most part, you’re right.
However, to be fair to the Saints, they were an awful non-PI call away from playing in the SB a couple seasons ago and very well might have become one of those seldom teams.
Better question is:
If Michael Thomas and Devante Parker had to go up and make the catch on the same ball, who comes down with it?
Gun to my head, my life rests in DVP’s hands.
No question Thomas has been the better pro and as an OSU I really wanted to draft him.
Parker just scratched the surface of what he’s capable of.
WRs are babies.
If Michael Thomas and Devante Parker had to go up and make the catch on the same ball, who comes down with it?
Gun to my head, my life rests in DVP’s hands.
No question Thomas has been the better pro and as an OSU I really wanted to draft him.
Parker just scratched the surface of what he’s capable of.
WRs are babies.
EJay
Scout Team
I’ve already stated my opinion on MT being a crybaby, so I’m not defending him on that front.
But with regard to the comments above, it goes both ways.
When folks are fighting to defend a QB, they’ll say he had no one worthwhile to throw to. When it’s the WR, he has no one worthwhile to throw it to him.
In this case, we all know Drew Brees has been a top notch QB for a long while now. But that doesn’t also mean his receivers, namely Thomas, aren’t top notch too.
I mean, I’ve stated many times that Joe Montana had Jerry Rice on the end of a lot of his passes. Which surely made SF a much better team. But that doesn’t mean Montana wasn’t as great as everyone thinks he was.
Randy Moss caught 23 TD passes while playing in NE and catching passes from Tom Brady. When Randy played in OAK for a lesser team, he didn’t look so good. But we still know that Moss was an all time great.
Point is, all great players need great teammates around them to succeed at the highest level.
Could Parker trade places with Thomas and blow up similarly? Possibly. Talent wise, sure. But we have no way of knowing production wise. Often, players fit into systems differently than others. Parker might not fit Thomas’ role in NO offense as well as Thomas does. Plus, there were still the health issues to overcome.
All in all, with regard to a stud QB throwing to stud WR’s, it’s always gonna seem like a chicken or the egg situation.
you have a good point. Landry got 15 passes a game here but he never got in the end zone or broke the game open and it showed in the wins column.
Overall it's a total coward move from Thomas. Parker answered a simple question by picking then choice he completed. Then Thomas freaked out and attacked Parker. If you gotta tear down a guy less succesful than you and brag about your accomplishments, then you are insecure anywhere in life
Yes fair enough. They should have gone to the SB. They would have had to win it though, but point taken.
Randy Moss w the Raiders for two years is a great example. They had no QB and his stat line was so unproductive you actually forgot he was still in the league. Two completely wasted seasons for him. It does go both ways for sure. Just like O-linemen and RBs. The age old, does the great RB make the line or vice versa? I think the same logic as your QB - WR argument applies.
EJay
Scout Team
I think Emmitt Smith and the Cowboys all-time great offensive line is another great example. There’s a faction of fans that don’t believe Emmitt is among the greatest RB’s because he benefitted from such a dominant offensive line.
But I feel both can be true. He was an all-time great and he ran behind an all-time great line. And that team had a good QB, good receivers, good defense, etc so they won championships.
Just like Montana throwing to Rice and Taylor. And having Roger Craig, a talented line and good defense.
Just like Brady having all kinds of different talent to throw the ball to and hand off too. And great defenses and a HOF kicker bailing him out at times.
While I do subscribe to a RB such as Barry Sanders being a better player, as I believe he proved behind nowhere near the same level of offensive line, I still give Emmitt a ton of credit for being a great player in his own right. He was a physical runner that would play hurt. Remember him fighting through a separated shoulder? Wow.
It could also be argued that his running style was a better fit for that offensive line, in terms of hitting the hole hard and running physically, versus a guy like Sanders that was more of a finesse find his own hole type of player. Although I think he ran a bit more downhill while at OKST. so I believe he could do that too.
Regardless, the point circles back to the idea that it’s possible both things can be great at the same time.
I’ll conclude by contributing to the topic at hand again by saying, Michael Thomas is a sensitive crybaby
A great QB means the world. You do have to ask if you switched QBs Parker had vs Thomas having Brees how would the results be. No question Brees helps Thomas be who he is
100% on all counts. Barry was so much more fun to watch though!I think Emmitt Smith and the Cowboys all-time great offensive line is another great example. There’s a faction of fans that don’t believe Emmitt is among the greatest RB’s because he benefitted from such a dominant offensive line.
But I feel both can be true. He was an all-time great and he ran behind an all-time great line. And that team had a good QB, good receivers, good defense, etc so they won championships.
Just like Montana throwing to Rice and Taylor. And having Roger Craig, a talented line and good defense.
Just like Brady having all kinds of different talent to throw the ball to and hand off too. And great defenses and a HOF kicker bailing him out at times.
While I do subscribe to a RB such as Barry Sanders being a better player, as I believe he proved behind nowhere near the same level of offensive line, I still give Emmitt a ton of credit for being a great player in his own right. He was a physical runner that would play hurt. Remember him fighting through a separated shoulder? Wow.
It could also be argued that his running style was a better fit for that offensive line, in terms of hitting the hole hard and running physically, versus a guy like Sanders that was more of a finesse find his own hole type of player. Although I think he ran a bit more downhill while at OKST. so I believe he could do that too.
Regardless, the point circles back to the idea that it’s possible both things can be great at the same time.
I’ll conclude by contributing to the topic at hand again by saying, Michael Thomas is a sensitive crybaby