This is not fanboyism - and I really should not even bother acknowledging the accusation. Every time criticism is levelled against Sanderson, people like you play this card. It is predictible and unfruitful.

As to your actual "point", if you think TGS and - particularly - ToM were better than WH and CoT as literature, there is really nothing more to say. Except, of course, that Sanderson's decisions in terms of structure, chronology, scope, character interpretation etc. have been consistently deplorable. His work has in almost every aspect represented a clear divergence from the direction the series was going before he took over the responsibility. For an unexperienced author who was supposed to bring an established series past the finish line, that is unforgivable. The sheer amount of serious, plot-altering continuity mistakes also deserves a mention here.

As for your criticsm against Jordan's style, I certainly understand your sentiment. It is not Nobel prize material. The fact is, however, that many people appreciate Jordan for the same reason that they appreciate authors like Dumas. When presented with Sanderson's naked prose as a replacement, it should not come as a surprise that those who had a few conscious thought processes about what they were reading have some objections.