A friend of mine who is a self-proclaimed "college football purist" (whatever that means) and I are having a debate and I was hoping to get the opinion of some of the people on this board because I very much respect the overall knowledge of the community here. It involves Denard, his rushing stats, and his place in the Michigan record books.
His opinion is that Denard's rushing stats shouldn't be compared to the rushing stats of the running backs Michigan has had because he had a distinct advantage over every one of them: He worked with an extra blocker for 99% of his career.
My opinion is that, while an interesting point, it's a wash because he was on less balanced offenses than most of those backs and defenses geared basically 100% to stop him his whole career.
What do you folks think? I realize it's a pety argument, but the dude basically discounted Denard's entire career very calmly and nonchalantly and it kinda infuriated me in my loins. I appreciate any insight.