Where is the evidence that Lumberton has a "decent" D? Lumberton has played one full game against a school with less than 600 kids (and isn't WO-S), a school that is a perennial bottom feeder in its own classification. PNG already has shown the ability to make stops against good backs when it matters, so I don't know what indications exist that PNG won't stop Lumberton's run game. There isn't a Calvin Tyler playing for Lumberton, and even if there was, we would be okay. Lumberton may be better than recent years -- Maybe even better than last year. But Lumberton is unproven, and history is not on its side (Lumberton is 1-16 against PNG all time, and that one victory was in a year where PNG went 3-6).
Think about that-- At Lumberton's best (2008), they managed to beat one of PNG's worst by a mere seven points.
Statistics don't win games, but they are at least an interesting indicator of potential future outcomes. In the series, PNG has outscored Lumberton 656-238. PNG averages 38.6 ppg against Lumberton. Lumberton averages 14. Last year, when Lumberton finally looked like it might be turning a corner, PNG scored easily and often.
Lumberton will have to stop PNG's QB, running back, receivers, and o-line, all of whom have demonstrable ability to produce. Lumberton also has to somehow overpower a PNG defensive line that has been fairly successful against much faster backs than what Lumberton has waiting in the stables. I'll admit, I haven't seen Lumberton play, but I did get a chance to see PNG against WO-S in August (scrimmage) -- PNG can hang with the run.
It may be a good game -- It might also be incredibly boring.