It is easy to criticize with the benefit of hindsight.
Part of Dan’s success has been his aggressiveness. Part of Dan’s failings have been his aggressiveness. So sure, his gambles were costly this game because we lost. But I am not going to be all, “burn the witches!!!” here. It is part of our DNA right now.
I think you missed it , seems he was talking about changing that approach at the end of the game. And also about how this lost could really hurt at the end of the season.
Just interesting opinion on some things we talked about here.
I think I missed it too. Been that kind of day.
I like going for it on 4th down … if you’ve identified a true mismatch, and you are very confident the players can execute the play. Yes, occasionally the defense wins. They are getting paid as well.
I don’t like going on 4th when the play you just called isn’t really identifying a mismatch, or true weakness.
Dan’s just got to mix it up more, like a poker player. Can’t always play to your tendencies.
And it’s okay to be conservative in certain situations.
It wasn’t sunday
I think in hindsight we’d like to flip a couple of decisions, but the point stands I think.
All i know is…to win this division and to win in the playoffs…the 4th down shit HAS TO STOP!
What was the final 3rd down call about? I keep watching it again and again and I just don’t get it. You have an out by LaPorta, 3 hooks short of the first down and Marvin clearing things out. I just don’t get what the objective was there.
Go ahead and write them off for the season then. This is who he is and this is who the team is.
It may need to stop but probably isn’t going to. I don’t think you can know what impact it will have. To be honest I think over the long haul it probably evens out but I have not seen studies to indicate one way or another. I could be mistaken though.
His attempts are calculated.
Sunday’s early attempts wreak of fear. Points were there but he was afraid to go toe-to-toe with Carroll’s Seahawks, knowing that they’re capable of out-gritting the Lions.
Not a good look for Dan, IMO. Get your points. Follow the numbers. <50 FG, get it. Minus territory near the 50, punt it. You know? Those aren’t conservative, those are basic. I think his decisions were outside of even his own comfort-zone, but his comfort level with exchanging blows with Carroll was even lower, so he tried putting pressure on them. It didn’t work and they lost because of it. No telling what would have transpired in the 2nd half if the 1st half is called better.
And keep in mind, this is the FIRST time I’ve ever been critical of DC’s strategy. This was bad.
Totally agree about not taking the three in the second quarter being a significant mistake. It wouldn’t surprise me if he wants that one back. I don’t think it was out of fear but rather greed. I also think you’re creating more out of the Carroll vs. Campbell dynamic than was really there.
I think it’s more so just Dan trying to be aggressive even when it’s perhaps not the best course of action. I really doubt the coaching matchup played much into Dan’s decisions.
Not specifically a Dan v Pete thing, but he definitely didn’t want them hanging around. I’m Ok with terming that “getting greedy”.
I totally agree with you that Dan wanted to get up multiple scores and Put the pressure on Seattle and when that didn’t happen failed to have a solid plan B.
I like our staff. I think they are good teachers. Outside of AG I think they are good with scheme. BUT pivoting mid game in a timely manner is something that they all need to get better at.
Ok do you agree or disagree with the point I made??
I would say I agree much more with Line and CH more than I do with you. I’m just generally not a fan of speaking in absolutes, something that plagues many on here after wins and much more so after losses.
If that’s who he is why did he go all Conservative at the end. That what I see a lot questioning there is a few write ups about it.
I’m more worried about personal then Dans calls on 4th down. He hit on a lot , there is good and bad to being aggressive . And Iike his aggressive nature for the most part.
Im more worried about the guys on that Dline, 2 back up OTs and I believe there was another back up in there too. And we got 0 pressures from everyone not name Hutch. That’s worse then Horrible. And that same Dline gave there QB 3.11 sec avg. to throw the ball. It’s hard to be that bad. Lol