Originally posted by ninermedic:
Originally posted by mella8:
Rewatching that game, we are sooooooooo capable of making every drive like our opening drive. This could have easily been a 45-12 blowout. We scored our first TD in 4 plays, and that included an incomplete pass on the first play. Then we went into milking the clock mode, slowing down the game, etc...and it kinda let the Lions hang around. Im not complaining about our offensive strategy --- Im well aware this team is built on clock management "run first / pass second" mentality, but still. Sometimes I feel like it's so easy (felt the same way vs that Packers) but we just hold ourselves back just so we can kill the clock a bit.
I hope as the season progresses, we start mixing the 2 styles. Id like to see us slow the game down (bc it plays into our strengths), but once in awhile it doesnt hurt to suckerpunch the opponent with a quick strike TD.
There's a debate to be had over the effectiveness of the slow strangle--which we've been using the last couple games--and quickly breaking the neck and burying them (under an avalanche of points)
Well there's risk and reward for both styles of offense.
The "slow stangle" approach can be deafening, but you're really relying on minimal mistakes and mental lapses to execute it. The concept is to drain the clock and squeeze your opponent from having enough time to make a comeback; but at the same time, you're guaranteeing that said 'milking' will eventually give you the points at the end to win. With a mistake free offense like ours, this is a great philosophy --- but the risk is taking the clock down to no time (with no points) and then making a mistake (eg turnover) --- now the other team might have the last chance to win it.
The "neck break" approach relies on shellshocking your opponents into submission. Just run up the score and make them change their offensive strategy so they can play keep up. This is a great approach as well, especially if you have a great defense (hint hint) bc now your opponent becomes one dimensional trying to keep the game close --- and that means lots of turnovers. The problem with this strategy is high risk - high reward. More long passes = lesser probability for completions and increased risk on INTs. An off day (see P.Manning on MNF) could spell disaster and put your own team out of its misery pretty quick.
I think the Niners can play both ways. I just dont want us to get too comfortable in just one style; especially since we have shown this year that we can make a quick strike if needed. Id like to see us do a combo of the two.