Talking through the QB situation Part 3
There are a couple different arguments and counter arguments regarding the QB situation and the need for a change. I'll try to address them in separate posts this week. I don't think anything will change, but I am firmly in the give Davis at least one, first-half series camp. I don't know what the staff is thinking or debating. So based on pure speculation, this is part 3 of the issue.
"Our best offensive playmakers are Gunnell, Momah, Robinson, Purvis and Jarvis. They need someone who can throw the ball all over the field to them. Also, Haden and Harris will be bottled up without a passing threat. Crane has the arm to make the offense go."
The other positions I cannot rationalize. This one I sort of can understand. We are not built for a pound away and win 13-10 team. Our kicking game is too suspect. Our special teams are too suspect. And to win in that sort of scheme, you really need a QB who won't make mistakes. In a low scoring, minimal possession ballgame, one turnover can kill you.
BC tried to make Crane a game manager and play dink and dunk. It led to the Georgia Tech loss and the the first half struggles against UCF. Once they opened the offense things started clicking. Crane keeps making mistakes, but we have seen some upside.
Davis might be able to operate in a ultra-conservative offense, but I think the best scheme is one that opens this up and uses all our pieces.
I don't want to have a Part 4 of this series, but Friday's articles makes me think the story is not over. Check out these quotes:
"It's not like you have a waiver wire," said Jagodzinski, who said his use of Crane will be as much about "feel" as anything else.
If the offense is functioning smoothly, Crane will stay in the game. If it sputters or the rash of turnovers continues, the Eagles could very well go back to Davis. But there are no guarantees.
And this one:
Does this sound over?