Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="OldSchool101" data-source="post: 1083753" data-attributes="member: 10086">True. There’s a couple very relevant arguments though. I think part of that strategy was using the “Dan Campbell” approach. If you recall we had just lost our starting RT (and several others). It’s very possible we were thinking about that Bears game. Denver is very similar to the Bears in the way they’ve won games. If you let them hang around they more often than not will close the gap and come out on top.  One approach is to put Denver in a position they haven’t seen themselves. Down 3 scores.THEN.. you flip the switch and go the other approach.  It was still earlier 3rd Quarter. Conservative works better in Q4. I’d be very mad at Matt if he took the foot off the gas and went conservative. We’ve won games by trusting Jordan Love, not by using a more timid approach mid Q3 if that makes sense?  I’m not suggesting that’s your plan, but had we lost the game trying to run clock in Q3,4 I’m pretty sure even worse sentiment would be directed at MLF.Matt sais this statement quite often. So I’m assuming it’s an integral part of his overall strategy.“No Risk..No Reward”.That philosophy thus far has won a historical number of games. Us older guys remember the 1970’s-80’s. My brother used to use the term accurately. Run-Run-Pass-PuntRun-Run-Pass-Punt.Please dear God don’t make mistake again! lol</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 1,036 (members: 0, guests: 1,036)