Unequivocally is a stronger term than I feel or would use. I believe it is riskier to start someone other than Levi right now, that is all.
Vic, I get your point of view. You are going to support whomever starts at QB for the Ragin' Cajuns, regardless of the name on the back of the jersey. You trust Napier's judgement from what he is seeing in practice, on film and in games that he is the best option for Louisiana to win games. I agree with all those points.
I think it is a fair statement that the offense, in general, and Levi in particular has not performed up to capabilities and/or expectations this season, but even through those struggles we are still winning.
For me, I really don't mind winning ugly, and it has been winning REALLY UGLY this season, as long as we are winning. For the most part, that has been the formula the last 2.5 seasons with this team. In the last 2.5 seasons, we have won 25 games, which is OUTSTANDING, but we can probably count on one hand how many were pretty wins. The Iowa State game was a HUGE win, but it sure wasn't pretty.
I fully support Napier and Levi, and want them to win every game. I think everyone that bleeds Vermilion and White agree with that statement. What everyone doesn't believe is that Levi is the QB to win the rest of the games this season.
I suspect the answer is a curve, highly dependent upon whether the INTs are a function of poor decisions or aggressive play (or the ratio of same). So therefore dependent upon the QB and different for each.
I could play 100% conservatively (from an INT perspective) and run every down. Zero INTs. Or I could play 100% recklessly and throw every down, into double coverage etc and throw a ton of picks. Somewhere in between is the sweet spot where I am aggressive enough to maximize scoring while tolerating some INTs. (And minimizing negative affects on actually winning the game).
The question for Lewis, is “are we too close to the conservative end of the curve to maximize scoring”? The goal of the offense is maximum score, not minimize INTs. And it is NOT axiomatic that minimum INTs means maximum score.
We play to win the game. That is the goal - to win the game. Nothing else really matters. We play to win the game.
The goal of the office is not just to maximize scores. To give a ridiculous example to make my point, if the Offense scored every other time they got possession of the ball, but on alternate possessions threw a pick six, that would not be good. So it is something more than maximizing score. It seems to me that is maximizing score without giving your opponent a chance to score off of Offensive mistakes. Just a thought.
There is a football phrase "He's throwing the game away."
There are currently 13 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 13 guests)