[jayasena]

And just to bounce the rubble,  I'm not sure why some people around the Stanford program think that denigrating Trent Richardson is an intellectually honest activity.  Richardson really  IS all that.  I don't want him to win the Voldemort,  I want our guy to win the Voldemort.  But trying to diminish him is just bogus.  I watched a lot of Richardson  (no choice in the matter)  If he were playing for Stanford he would be the starting.  And if that were the case you'd love him.  Toby kind of love.  Taylor is good.  Richardson is better.  Not by leaps and bounds, but better.  He's also got 322 yards receiving for a 12.4 per catch average.  Stanford doesn't have some receivers who have that.  And, like Taylor he's  good in traffic.  Runs really tough. Moves the pile.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here. First, you (rightly) claim that we shouldn't denigrate Richardson. Then you go and say he's marginally better than a Stanford guy who's not even remotely in the discussion for the Voldemort. Are we witnessing some sort of a discussion between your Stanford-loyal personality and the Alabama-brainwashed personality unfolding on a public forum?

[jayasena]

And just to bounce the rubble,  I'm not sure why some people around the Stanford program think that denigrating Trent Richardson is an intellectually honest activity.  Richardson really  IS all that.  I don't want him to win the Voldemort,  I want our guy to win the Voldemort.  But trying to diminish him is just bogus.  I watched a lot of Richardson  (no choice in the matter)  If he were playing for Stanford he would be the starting.  And if that were the case you'd love him.  Toby kind of love.  Taylor is good.  Richardson is better.  Not by leaps and bounds, but better.  He's also got 322 yards receiving for a 12.4 per catch average.  Stanford doesn't have some receivers who have that.  And, like Taylor he's  good in traffic.  Runs really tough. Moves the pile.

I'm not sure I follow the logic here. First, you (rightly) claim that we shouldn't denigrate Richardson. Then you go and say he's marginally better than a Stanford guy who's not even remotely in the discussion for the Voldemort. Are we witnessing some sort of a discussion between your Stanford-loyal personality and the Alabama-brainwashed personality unfolding on a public forum?