[qwerty49]

I think it makes sense to play more conservatively when you are a better team, and take more risks when you are not as good a team.  A “high beta “ strategy makes more sense when you are the underdog by increasing the chances of lower probability events.  But since a blowout loss counts the same as a narrow loss, why not take the chance.

Also, I figure the Notre Dame fumble was karma for the uncalled hold on fourth down.

BC

Are we talking past each other?  My point is that the way our D was playing in the first half was encouraging.  Taking a 2-score lead into the halftime and then getting the ball first was absolutely the right decision.  Lucky for us we got the ball back and had a second chance to make that decision -- correctly.

When your offense is sputtering you don't do the high beta stuff.  How many times did we convert a 4th down last night?

[qwerty49]

I think it makes sense to play more conservatively when you are a better team, and take more risks when you are not as good a team.  A “high beta “ strategy makes more sense when you are the underdog by increasing the chances of lower probability events.  But since a blowout loss counts the same as a narrow loss, why not take the chance.

Also, I figure the Notre Dame fumble was karma for the uncalled hold on fourth down.

BC

Are we talking past each other?  My point is that the way our D was playing in the first half was encouraging.  Taking a 2-score lead into the halftime and then getting the ball first was absolutely the right decision.  Lucky for us we got the ball back and had a second chance to make that decision -- correctly.

When your offense is sputtering you don't do the high beta stuff.  How many times did we convert a 4th down last night?