Once again you bring up an argument of how a particular player matched up against Nadal not in his prime. It has nothing to do with him. I am bringing up Federer's lack of competition on GS level. Were the guys I mentioned good? Yes. Were they ever a threat? No (apart from that AO semi in 2005). Thus the overinflated records of 10 slam finals in a row and 23GS semis in a row.
Did he have a strong rival off clay during his dominant years (Roddicks/Hewitts/ don't count they are more like his personal jesters)?
Those in glass houses should not throw stones. Federers opponents in his slams won were equally merited on the particular surface he beat them on, as Nadals opponents in RG have been. Are you in favor of discounting Nadal's seven RGs citing lack of opposition? Beating grass and HC champions on clay is no more an achievement than beating Usain Bolt on the 400 meters, no?