Ray Rice vs. Mike Hart - Poll

If Ray Rice had stayed for a 4th year he would have been the NCAA career rushing leader.  He looks like a spinning image of Maurice Jones-Drew.

What are your opinions?

Rice is good and may have a great career, but I still feel Hart is a better back.  He had an injury plagued career in a superior football conference.  Now that is hard for me to say being that I HATE the Big 10, but it's hard for me to side for anyone out of the Big East.  I know some of you will see that I am an OU fan and make reference to what WV did to my boys in the Fiesta Bowl, touche'.  However it is a statistically weak conference and I think Rutgers hit alot of people on their heels by surprise.  And being that outside of one year, Ray Rice was their ONLY offensive threat, it's easier to be a career rushing leader. 

Now keep in mind I did say he's good and may go on to be great, but it's a tough comparison.

As for a Jones-Drew, I don't think so.  Drew looks alot quicker and IS much, much stronger.

Trey - a lot of the statements you made are contradictory to your belief.

1)  Mentioning Hart's injury - that's BAD.  Rice was a workhorse 3 years no injuries.

2)  Rice was their only offensive threat - While it is not true, if Rice was the only offensive threat as you suggest, how did he run for so many yards when teams stacked the box??

3)  Weak conference?  I have gotten into huge arguments on this.  The Big East only has 8 teams.  There are no bottom teams.  Pittsburgh and Syracuse have been the bottom dwellers, and Pitt has been sniffing at making a bowl the past two years.  Since the Big East doesn't have as many "bottom" teams like the Big Ten, it would make sense they have a weaker conference.

But I will admit that the Michigan win over Florida was impressive.