Montario Hardesty v. Ben Tate (1 Viewer)

[Rip517]

Both franchises moved up in the draft to select 'their guy' to carry the rock (future).... The jury is still out on which rookie will better flourish/succeed under the given circumstances/situation....

Given the choice/option, which 'rook' do you see having the better career (longterm)....?

 

[Abraham]

What do you think of each?

 

[TheDirtyWord]

I would bet on Hardesty.

1) Already two studs on the O-Line in Thomas & Mack.

2) An offense that clearly hasn't found it's identity and lacks elite skill position players.

3) Competition at the position seems to favor Hardesty - I think people are writing off Slaton too quickly and the Texans seem to like Foster.

 

[saintfool]

I would bet on Hardesty.

1) Already two studs on the O-Line in Thomas & Mack.

2) An offense that clearly hasn't found it's identity and lacks elite skill position players.

3) Competition at the position seems to favor Hardesty - I think people are writing off Slaton too quickly and the Texans seem to like Foster.

i can agree with the slaton part on some level but not so much with the foster bit. slaton might be the most talented of the texan rbs but the question of durability (and fumbles) is a real concern. foster was pressed into duty last year and had two nice games in weeks 16-17. yes, he was given first crack atop the depth chart. however, slaton was recovering from neck surgery and only got clearance for contact drills last week. tate missed most of the OTAs because of a hamstring problem. to my mind, people are being a little hasty to anoint Foster. circumstances have put him in this position more than anything else. at the end of the day, the texans invested a R2 pick on tate and that's too valuable to just dismiss. they had time to look at foster and still decided to draft tate. the onus is on tate and slaton to take the job but i expect the texans to give them every opportunity to do so.

all that said, i like hardesty's situation better in cleveland.

 

[sholditch]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Then you have to think about the health situation in Cleveland. Two words: staph infection.

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty. First time I really heard about him was on this board. After watching his highlights I'm actually less impressed with him than guys like Dixon, Dwyer, and Gerhart.

I say neither are great longterm investments but I'd gamble on Tate way before Hardesty.

 

[zamboni]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Sounds a lot like the argument many years back over whether to go with Michael Bennett over LT.Go with the player, not the situation since the latter could change over time. We're talking long-term here.That said, I haven't seen enough yet to know which player is better.

 

[Siegfried]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Sounds a lot like the argument many years back over whether to go with Michael Bennett over LT.Go with the player, not the situation since the latter could change over time. We're talking long-term here.That said, I haven't seen enough yet to know which player is better.

Starting RB on Hou >>>> valuable than starting RB on ClevThere is competetion in both cities for playing timeHardesty has to fight with HarrisonTate has to fight with Foster and SlatenTate is probably has the better upside. Hardesty will probably get the first shot at carrying the rock.

 

[SSOG]

I don't love either, but if I was on the clock with the #5 rookie pick, I'd be taking Hardesty over Tate every single time.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Hardesty is a bigger injury risk.

Tate is more mediocre.

Houston actually traded down to get Tate. They let Minnesota go up 11 spots to grab Gerhart. Tate was who was left when they finally picked. They probably think they need a RB of the future, but I think that signals they needed a warm body more than having a preference towards Tate. It was clear they weren't resigning Brown or Moats, so that just left injured Slaton and 2nd year UFA Foster on the roster. If they were in love with Tate, they wouldn't have gambled trading down with a team that took a RB.

Cleveland did trade up to get Hardesty. But he was essentially the last RB in that tier. They let other teams get Tate and Gerhart, and then made a move to make sure they got someone serviceable. That doesn't necessarily really mean they love Hardesty. It means they knew they'd continue to be a running team and needed someone with a good chance to help now.

That said, news on Hardesty has been pretty good. It seems like he is a good student at camp and has pretty much won the starting job. Tate has been hurt, so the jury is out, but it has given Foster a chance to look good enough, and I think Houston will wait for Foster to lose the job before handing it over to Tate, either by fumbling in a key situation or just being much less effective than last year.

 

[zamboni]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Sounds a lot like the argument many years back over whether to go with Michael Bennett over LT.Go with the player, not the situation since the latter could change over time. We're talking long-term here.That said, I haven't seen enough yet to know which player is better.

Starting RB on Hou >>>> valuable than starting RB on ClevThere is competetion in both cities for playing timeHardesty has to fight with HarrisonTate has to fight with Foster and SlatenTate is probably has the better upside. Hardesty will probably get the first shot at carrying the rock.

I'm not sure if Tate has the better upside, but most of your comments would be re-draft oriented. Again, we're talking long-term here - the situation in Cleveland could improve and the situation in Houston could decline over time.

 

[Abraham]

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty.

You follow the SEC closely but didn't really notice Hardesty's 146 total yards against Auburn (a game where Tate performed very well aslo) or his 114 in a nationally televised game against Alabama or his two touchdowns on Halloween night against South Carolina or his 100 total yards against the Gators? Interesting.

 

[sholditch]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Sounds a lot like the argument many years back over whether to go with Michael Bennett over LT.Go with the player, not the situation since the latter could change over time. We're talking long-term here.That said, I haven't seen enough yet to know which player is better.

keep readingAlso, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty. First time I really heard about him was on this board. After watching his highlights I'm actually less impressed with him than guys like Dixon, Dwyer, and Gerhart.

 

[SSOG]

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty.

You follow the SEC closely but didn't really notice Hardesty's 146 total yards against Auburn (a game where Tate performed very well aslo) or his 114 in a nationally televised game against Alabama or his two touchdowns on Halloween night against South Carolina or his 100 total yards against the Gators? Interesting.

Those are impressive games by NFL standards. By college standards... not so much. Same thing with his 4.8 ypc. He only topped 100 rushing yards against one credible defense (South Carolina- he also had 100 yard rushing performances against Western Kentucky, Ohio, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt).He had a lot of solid performances, but he was short on legitimately great rushing performances. As a positive, he was pretty active in the receiving game.

 

[sholditch]

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty.

You follow the SEC closely but didn't really notice Hardesty's 146 total yards against Auburn (a game where Tate performed very well aslo) or his 114 in a nationally televised game against Alabama or his two touchdowns on Halloween night against South Carolina or his 100 total yards against the Gators? Interesting.

I watch games and don't read game logs. And no, he never wowed me. Eric Berry I noticed. Crompton I noticed. Hardesty not so much.

 

[Siegfried]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Sounds a lot like the argument many years back over whether to go with Michael Bennett over LT.Go with the player, not the situation since the latter could change over time. We're talking long-term here.That said, I haven't seen enough yet to know which player is better.

Starting RB on Hou >>>> valuable than starting RB on ClevThere is competetion in both cities for playing timeHardesty has to fight with HarrisonTate has to fight with Foster and SlatenTate is probably has the better upside. Hardesty will probably get the first shot at carrying the rock.

I'm not sure if Tate has the better upside, but most of your comments would be re-draft oriented. Again, we're talking long-term here - the situation in Cleveland could improve and the situation in Houston could decline over time.

Very TrueI am thinking more in the next 3 year time frame.

 

[destro]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Sounds a lot like the argument many years back over whether to go with Michael Bennett over LT.Go with the player, not the situation since the latter could change over time. We're talking long-term here.That said, I haven't seen enough yet to know which player is better.

Starting RB on Hou >>>> valuable than starting RB on ClevThere is competetion in both cities for playing timeHardesty has to fight with HarrisonTate has to fight with Foster and SlatenTate is probably has the better upside. Hardesty will probably get the first shot at carrying the rock.

I'm not sure if Tate has the better upside, but most of your comments would be re-draft oriented. Again, we're talking long-term here - the situation in Cleveland could improve and the situation in Houston could decline over time.

Even if Clevelands situation does not "improve," so to speak, it's still very possible for a RB to produce on a team that bad. This is the whole "If passing game bad, rushing game must also be bad" fallacy again. Once Harrison and Chris Jennings started getting carries, Cleveland actually had an effective rushing game, despite having one of the worst passing offenses I've seen in a long time. If the Cleveland staff like Hardesty more than Harrison, why do we think that this year, unlike last year, the bad passing game will prevent him from producing? Meanwhile, Tate has been injured, and Slaton and Foster still seem likely to be heavily involved. Further, I think the Houston passing situation almost hurts Tate's chances, since they are clearly going to be a pass-first offense. I think the answer here is clear. Long term? Hardesty.Short term? Still Hardesty.

 

[Abraham]

games by NFL standards. By college standards... not so much. Same thing with his 4.8 ypc. He only topped 100 rushing yards against one credible defense (South Carolina- he also had 100 yard rushing performances against Western Kentucky, Ohio, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt).He had a lot of solid performances, but he was short on legitimately great rushing performances. As a positive, he was pretty active in the receiving game.

He ran for 857 yards in 8 SEC games while splitting time with the #1 overall recruit in the country. He certainly wasn't Ronnie Brown, but he was impressive many times.

I watch games and don't read game logs. And no, he never wowed me. Eric Berry I noticed. Crompton I noticed. Hardesty not so much.

Interesting perspective. My view on Hardesty is that he has excellent balance and vision and if he can remain healthy (an admittedly big task) he has a chance to be a good RB for a few years. His style reminds me of Carnell Wililams, wherein his body control and balance create opportunities for extra chunks of yards instead of an easy tackle. His role in the passing game and open-field moves remind me a bit of Kevin Jones. For the purposes of this discussion, I like Hardesty more for four reasons: I believe he is more talented (arguable), I believe he has less real competition for carries (inarguable), I believe the Browns will want/need to run the ball more then the Texans, and I believe his O-line is better.Hardesty's main challenge will be health whereas Tate's main challenge will be Slaton, Foster, and the fact that Schaub-to-Johnson is the keystone of the offense.

 

[Splicer]

Reminds all too much of 2007 when most of us chose between Brandon Jackson(GB) and Chris Henry(Tenn). After Adrian Peterson, Calvin Johnson, and Marshawn Lynch those were the 2 next picks, right? I don't think I'm buying in either Tate or Hardesty long or short term. Go a different direction or trade the pick and let someone deal with it.

 

[The Real Hipster Doofus]

I am not big on either Hardesty or Tate from a dynasty perspective. I think they are totally average talents in comparison to their RB peers. I do, however, really like Hardesty at his ADP for redraft.

Cleveland has invested a lot in their O-Line and quietly has one of the better units in the league. They are a team that loves to run the ball. I think he will probably start slow, with Harrison getting more of the work early in the year. I think as the year goes on, he is a RB who could help you win some games down the stretch.

 

[Abraham]

I am not big on either Hardesty or Tate from a dynasty perspective. I think they are totally average talents in comparison to their RB peers. I do, however, really like Hardesty at his ADP for redraft. Cleveland has invested a lot in their O-Line and quietly has one of the better units in the league. They are a team that loves to run the ball. I think he will probably start slow, with Harrison getting more of the work early in the year. I think as the year goes on, he is a RB who could help you win some games down the stretch.

 

[GreatLakesMike]

I don't see what there is to like in Cleveland. They've been a basement dweller in the league for years and seem to have very little emphasis on defense which is a running backs best friend. Houston doesn't have a great defense but they've made some strides getting big producers in the draft in recent years. Plus they have one of the best offenses in the league and won't ever see 8 men in the box.

Then you have to think about the health situation in Cleveland. Two words: staph infection.

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty. First time I really heard about him was on this board. After watching his highlights I'm actually less impressed with him than guys like Dixon, Dwyer, and Gerhart.

I say neither are great longterm investments but I'd gamble on Tate way before Hardesty.

1st round - Joe Haden CB2nd round - T.J. Ward Safety

5th round - Larry Asante Safety

6th round - Geathers Clifton DE

Mangini was a DC before he became a head coach, and Rob Ryan (brother of Rex) is the Browns current defensive coordinator. Priority #1 in the draft was to address the secondary, which was awful last season. The Browns had 40 sacks last season, which ranked 8th in the league, yet were horrible against the pass.... because the secondary was horrible.

In Ryan’s five seasons with the Raiders he helped develop a pair of Pro Bowlers in defensive end Derrick Burgess and cornerback Nnamdi Asomugha. Burgess boasted 38.5 sacks in his four seasons under Ryan’s tutelage, including an NFL-high 16 in 2005. Asomugha ranked third in the NFL in 2006 with eight interceptions. In 2006, the Raiders led the NFL in pass defense (150.8 yards per game) and ranked third in total defense (284.8 yards per game). That year, Ryan was named USA Today’s “All-Joe” and Bill Arnsparger’s “Football Insiders” Defensive Coordinator of the Year. Before joining the Raiders, Ryan spent four seasons (2000-03) as linebackers coach on Bill Belichick's New England coaching staff. Ryan's unit helped contribute to Patriots wins in Super Bowls XXXVI and XXXVIII, as Tedy Bruschi emerged as one of the NFL’s top linebackers. In addition, linebacker Willie McGinest was selected to the AFC Pro Bowl squad following the 2003 season. The son of former NFL head coach Buddy Ryan, Rob originally entered the NFL coaching ranks in 1994 as defensive backs coach on his father's staff at Arizona, as the Cardinals’ defense ranked third in the NFL in total defense that year. With Ryan as his position coach, cornerback Aeneas Williams earned two trips to the Pro Bowl, in 1994 and 1995. In 1995, the Cardinals led the NFL with 42 total takeaways. Following a one-year stint as defensive coordinator at Hutchinson (Kansas) Community College (1996), Ryan was Oklahoma State's defensive coordinator from 1997-99, where the Cowboys’ defense continually ranked among the best in the nation. He was named Coordinator of the Year by The Sporting News in 1997. In 1999, Oklahoma State ranked 10th in the nation in total defense, and in 1998 were second in the nation with 41 sacks. Ryan began his coaching career as a graduate assistant at Western Kentucky in 1987. He moved on to a similar position at Ohio State in 1988. Ryan then spent five seasons on a full-time basis at Tennessee State, where he coached running backs (1989-91), linebackers (1992) and the defensive line (1993).

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/team/coache...26-5b41e51570a9

 

[Buckna]

Hardesty is a bigger injury risk.Tate is more mediocre.Houston actually traded down to get Tate. They let Minnesota go up 11 spots to grab Gerhart. Tate was who was left when they finally picked. They probably think they need a RB of the future, but I think that signals they needed a warm body more than having a preference towards Tate. It was clear they weren't resigning Brown or Moats, so that just left injured Slaton and 2nd year UFA Foster on the roster. If they were in love with Tate, they wouldn't have gambled trading down with a team that took a RB.Cleveland did trade up to get Hardesty. But he was essentially the last RB in that tier. They let other teams get Tate and Gerhart, and then made a move to make sure they got someone serviceable. That doesn't necessarily really mean they love Hardesty. It means they knew they'd continue to be a running team and needed someone with a good chance to help now.That said, news on Hardesty has been pretty good. It seems like he is a good student at camp and has pretty much won the starting job. Tate has been hurt, so the jury is out, but it has given Foster a chance to look good enough, and I think Houston will wait for Foster to lose the job before handing it over to Tate, either by fumbling in a key situation or just being much less effective than last year.

Houston traded down 11 spots to pick up an extra third from Minn because they liked both Tate & Gerhart and felt they could wait for one of them. No one expected Minn to be trading up to take a backup RB to ADP in the 2nd round. Houston then traded back UP 5 spots in the 2nd round to select Tate.FWIW, Houston said they didn't like Hardesty at all. Thought Foster was a better player than him actually. They did split time together at Tennesee.

 

[navoner]

Admittedly, this is from watching highlight clips as oppose to full game film, but I thought Hardesty looked great, with a style that would translate very well to the NFL. Great balance, often using that balance to create something out of nothing on a two yard run up the middle. I'm trying to grab him in all my redraft leagues.

 

[pecorino]

i've never seen either of them run in a game but i have been doing online research on both players for the past two days. it seems to me that Tate wowed at the combine and was drafted higher than maybe his true running ability warranted. at this point with limited info, i'll steer clear of the workout warrior and draft hardesty.

 

[EBF]

How about neither?

I had Tate ranked slightly above Hardesty in my rookie rankings because I felt he had a better upside, but with a gun to my head I might prefer Hardesty because I think it's easier to project his game to the NFL level. He will most likely be a serviceable back with no glaring weaknesses, but no spectacular traits. I would say he's comparable to Joseph Addai, except Addai has the luxury of playing on a dynamic offense whereas Hardesty is trapped on a rudderless Cleveland franchise that quite possibly has the worst offensive talent of any team in the NFL. He could pull a Matt Forte 2008 if he gets the workload, but a more likely scenario is FF mediocrity.

I haven't drafted either of these guys in any of my leagues. The odds say there's a decent chance that at least one of them will be successful, but I'm content to let other people take that gamble.

 

[GreatLakesMike]

How about neither?

I had Tate ranked slightly above Hardesty in my rookie rankings because I felt he had a better upside, but with a gun to my head I might prefer Hardesty because I think it's easier to project his game to the NFL level. He will most likely be a serviceable back with no glaring weaknesses, but no spectacular traits. I would say he's comparable to Joseph Addai, except Addai has the luxury of playing on a dynamic offense whereas Hardesty is trapped on a rudderless Cleveland franchise that quite possibly has the worst offensive talent of any team in the NFL. He could pull a Matt Forte 2008 if he gets the workload, but a more likely scenario is FF mediocrity.

I haven't drafted either of these guys in any of my leagues. The odds say there's a decent chance that at least one of them will be successful, but I'm content to let other people take that gamble.

I assume you're talking about skill positions?

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty. First time I really heard about him was on this board. After watching his highlights I'm actually less impressed with him than guys like Dixon, Dwyer, and Gerhart.

Interesting, because I also follow the SEC very closely and came away with the exact opposite impression.Tate was always a guy that seemed like a plain old running back to me for the majority of his career. His teammate, Brad Lester, was 10x the running back he was and if Lester had been able to stay healthy and out of trouble I wouldn't have been surprised to see Tate transfer or rot on the bench. When rooting against Auburn I was always happy to see Tate come in. That said, he did show a major improvement in his senior year, but still nothing that seemed in any way special to me.

Hardesty on the other hand always impressed me, even before he "broke out". He was tough to bring down, hit the hole hard, and had surprising agility for a "pounder". And that spin move...wow. I don't see how anyone can not be impressed when watching his highlight package, especially the plays against Florida where he carried guys with him, or made that cut where three Gators fell over. Everyone always talks about "doing it against NFL players", well that Florida defense had what, 5 players selected in the 1st two rounds this year? Those were NFL players, and Hardesty made them look stupid.

What's even more impressive about what Hardesty did is that Tennessee, especially in the 1st half of the season, had the worst passing attack in the SEC and one of the worst in the entire country. Kiffin literally didn't trust Crompton to throw the ball more than 5 yards downfield and even with that knowledge, even the #1 defense in the country had trouble with Hardesty. Cleveland's passing attack will seem like Utopia compared to the dreg that Tennessee rolled out with last year.

With this last comment I don't mean to stir anything up, but how could anyone possibly "follow the SEC closely" and not have heard of Hardesty? Those two things just don't jive. Anyone who followed the SEC knew all about Hardesty even before he busted out, and he was 2nd team all-sec last year.

 

[RockHard]

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty.

You follow the SEC closely but didn't really notice Hardesty's 146 total yards against Auburn (a game where Tate performed very well aslo) or his 114 in a nationally televised game against Alabama or his two touchdowns on Halloween night against South Carolina or his 100 total yards against the Gators? Interesting.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Reminds all too much of 2007 when most of us chose between Brandon Jackson(GB) and Chris Henry(Tenn). After Adrian Peterson, Calvin Johnson, and Marshawn Lynch those were the 2 next picks, right? I don't think I'm buying in either Tate or Hardesty long or short term. Go a different direction or trade the pick and let someone deal with it.

Or 2006 where we were picking between MJD and LenDale White, or 2008 when we were picking between Matt Forte and Ray Rice, right?Oh wait...

 

[LittlePhatty]

Then you have to think about the health situation in Cleveland. Two words: staph infection.

That's pretty much an NFL-wide problem, not just in Cleveland.

 

[sholditch]

Also, I was impressed with Tate at the college level (follow SEC closely) but really never noticed Hardesty. First time I really heard about him was on this board. After watching his highlights I'm actually less impressed with him than guys like Dixon, Dwyer, and Gerhart.

Interesting, because I also follow the SEC very closely and came away with the exact opposite impression.Tate was always a guy that seemed like a plain old running back to me for the majority of his career. His teammate, Brad Lester, was 10x the running back he was and if Lester had been able to stay healthy and out of trouble I wouldn't have been surprised to see Tate transfer or rot on the bench. When rooting against Auburn I was always happy to see Tate come in. That said, he did show a major improvement in his senior year, but still nothing that seemed in any way special to me.

Hardesty on the other hand always impressed me, even before he "broke out". He was tough to bring down, hit the hole hard, and had surprising agility for a "pounder". And that spin move...wow. I don't see how anyone can not be impressed when watching his highlight package, especially the plays against Florida where he carried guys with him, or made that cut where three Gators fell over. Everyone always talks about "doing it against NFL players", well that Florida defense had what, 5 players selected in the 1st two rounds this year? Those were NFL players, and Hardesty made them look stupid.

What's even more impressive about what Hardesty did is that Tennessee, especially in the 1st half of the season, had the worst passing attack in the SEC and one of the worst in the entire country. Kiffin literally didn't trust Crompton to throw the ball more than 5 yards downfield and even with that knowledge, even the #1 defense in the country had trouble with Hardesty. Cleveland's passing attack will seem like Utopia compared to the dreg that Tennessee rolled out with last year.

With this last comment I don't mean to stir anything up, but how could anyone possibly "follow the SEC closely" and not have heard of Hardesty? Those two things just don't jive. Anyone who followed the SEC knew all about Hardesty even before he busted out, and he was 2nd team all-sec last year.

I'm a Bama fan. I was a little more concerned with other things than Tennessee's running game. Do I have to know every single player on every single team to follow the SEC? I'm sorry, that's just a pretty asinine statement. I watch the SEC for what the teams do, not individuals, and most of the time I watch the SEC I have a drink in my hand. So if one running back on Tennessee escaped my notice that means I'm full of it? Just trying to get straight to exactly what you're trying to say here. FWIW I agree with you about Lester. But he wasn't on the field and was a lot smaller than Tate anyway. And if you think he would have put Tate on the bench I don't think you have any idea just how shallow Auburn was last year or how they typically run the football.

Anyway, I don't think he's anything special. Doesn't mean I don't follow SEC ball. Just means we have different opinions.

But since we're questioning each other's footballness on this, let's break out the stats

Tate had 100+ yards against the following teams his senior season:

La Tech (117)

Mississippi State (157)

Tennessee (128)

Arkansas (184)

Kentucky (132)

Mississippi (144)

6 game, 5 against SEC teams

Hardesty, same

Western Kentucky (160)

Ohio (140)

South Carolina (121)

Vanderbilt (171)

Kentucky (179)

5 games, 3 against SEC teams

also, if you want to talk about Tate's 2008, I have two words for you and if you follow the SEC they should be all I need: Tony Franklin. I'm sure you also know that Vanderbilt and Kentucky have been cupcake teams for a while and that they finished last and next to last in rushing yards allowed last season.

Also, what exactly impressed you about Hardesty before he broke out? His 3.6 average in 2006? His 4.2 average in 2007? Or his 3.6 average in 2008? For comparison, Tate averaged 7.3, 4.5, and 4.2 in the same years, before averaging 5.2 in '09 to Hardesty's 4.8.

So, I'm not going to call you out for "not following the SEC", instead I'm going to acknowledge the obvious fact the different people can look at the same thing and see two different things. I bet we both watched a lot of Bama, and we might have different thoughts on who the best running back on that team was, or who the best linebacker was. Doesn't mean we weren't both watching games.