Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaid
I don't understand how this is so difficult to understand. In basketball, you get the ball back with 20 seconds left at half court and you are ahead by one point. You don't score right away, you let the clock run a bit and try to score with a few seconds left. That puts the other side in a bad position where its tough to come back.
Here, we are talking minutes instead of seconds but the same concept applies. Yes you want to score and that is the first priority but you can waste the clock by methodically moving down the field. We gave them a bunch of time and plenty of timeouts to go get a touchdown. Every time they needed to score, they did. They got stopped early on when they had the lead but when they needed it, they kept converting. You can't trust your defense to stop them.
Again, look at how the Patriots win so many of their games. They waste the clock when they need to and give the other team hardly any time to go get back the lead. It's the formula for their multiple Super Bowl appearances and wins.
If it's earlier in the game, hell yeah push the ball down the field, get ahead and put the pressure on the other team. When you are in the last part of the game, you have to play the clock. If you don't, you lose. It's exactly how we lost this game, it's how we lost the last Patriots game, it's how we lost the Rams game. How many losses do we need to have this way before people can see it's a problem?
|
The difference with football and basketball is that in football it’s difficult to even get in scoring range.
In basketball, you easily walk down the court and set your offense in scoring range for the optimal shot. In football, every yard of ground is contested. Just getting into scoring range is hard enough, let alone scoring. Reid would’ve loved to have the ball 1st and goal at the Pats 3 with 1 minute left, but there was no guarantee we could get into that situation, and no guarantee a series of short passes and runs even gets us into scoring range.