Correct - talent and and place on the depth chart are 2 completely separate things. The more talented player isn't always higher on the depth chart.Youre playing semantics or getting caught up in wordplay.. There is a difference between their place and talent, especially when they are coming in at different times...Cam Harris was the better player as soon as he arrived on campus. Sound better? The point still stands.
Not an unfounded take...check the forums, plenty of people thought Harris was better as a prospect before they stepped foot on campus.
I feel like you think I'm saying Lingard was higher than Cam on the depth chart as Freshman to prove Lingard was more talented - and I'm not. I'm saying it because it's a fact that's gotten skewed. And it's weirdly a fact that's gotten skewed to the point that it's been accepted as true - so I'm trying to correct that.
Saying Cam was immediately higher on the depth chart is just wrong. It has nothing to do with their talent, or semantics & wordplay - it's just a fact.
For Example:
- I can say Chaney was the most talented RB on the roster last year, but I can't say he was higher on the depth chart than Cam, because that never happened.
- I can say Duke Johnson was more talented than Mike James from Day 1, but I can't say Duke was higher on the depth chart, because that never happened.
So yes - saying "Cam Harris was the better player as soon as he arrived on campus" does sounds better. There's no need to distort the facts about the depth chart. IMO - denying Lingard was ever higher than Cam on the depth chart, on top of being incorrect, just seems odd and unnecessary. It's pretty simple to prove Cam is better - just point to the stats.
Last edited: