Originally Posted by niel89
So Luck's system is in question but RG3 is beyond reproach?
Thatís a fair question. Hereís why I think Stanfordís system was more suspect:
Mediocre QBs do put up great numbers in the Art Briles/Mike Leach offense. Most of those great numbers, however, are compiled against mediocre defenses. When facing good defenses, particularly with time to prepare, that offense hasnít performed well. Leachís offenses consistently underperformed in bowl games, for example.
That drop off against good defenses didnít happen with RGIII though, at least not this last year. He faced TCU, which had the best defense in the country for two straight years, the first game of the year. TCU had a month to prepare for that game, and Baylor still tore them up. They scored at will.
Meanwhile, although Luck played in a traditional offense, he did it with a great running game and a great offensive line. Play action passing makes a quarterback look better. It makes his decision-making easier, because he usually only has to read one or two guys. We know that system made at least one **** QB (Alex Smith) look great. We also know that without Luck, Stanford easily covered the spread against Oklahoma in their 2010 bowl game.