Thank you so much for making my case (unintentional I assume).
Earlier in this thread, I posted the following:
“In all honesty, the biggest difference between any of our QBs is how good the defense is playing. If we score 24 ppg and the defense is giving up 12, that QB is going to be remembered far more fondly than the QB who led an offense that garnered 24 ppg and the defense gave up 32.
It’s not right…but it’s absolutely true”
In 2010, CL’s junior year, Lehigh’s offense averaged 23.3 ppg. Their defense only allowed 23 points in 3 games. They lost all 3. We did however win the PL, thanks in large part to the defense and we remember the QB play with great affection.
This year, our offense under a junior QB (mostly) is averaging 26.6 ppg. Our defense has held the opposition under 23 ppg in 3 games. We won all 3. The “eye test” however now wants to bench the QB and fire the OC. For some reason, after we beat Bucknell by only scoring 21 points, the “eye test” talked about how good our offense looked that game. Why can’t anyone other than Rich see how screwed up this logic is?
Don’t even bother comparing the stats of the junior QBs. It doesn’t help your argument.