Originally posted by UNCGrad2014:
Outscoring opponents by 257 points doesn't mean that there needs to be an open completion at the QB position. How much did the QB truly contribute to the offense? Let's be real about it. If you didn't attend any of the games to see what was going on on the field, I'll find it hard to view your posts as credible. A great running game has covered up a glaring inefficiency in the Raider offense since Tedarius left, and that's that the passing game has become more icosistent by the year to the point that we may as well be a Bob Paroli offense (no offense). Balance wins championships. If you're more inclined to worry about stats, that gets you only so far, but not where you want to be. Millbrook should've lost by at least 21 if not more. I knew that we were going to be in trouble eventually with such an imbalance. If we keep Luke in there, a traditional offense would be perfect for him. The kid can throw in rhythm. He has a strong arm, but he hardly was allowed to drop straight back. It was a version of play action or rolling of the pocket. If there's no change in offensive philosophy, then Luke has to definitely prove that he's improved considerably over the offseason. It's as simple as that.