Yes, you are correct, if the tackle had been made we would NOT be having
these conversations. However, whenever we play like today with a one
possession lead, we DO have these conversations.

You play to win the game...not to NOT lose the game.

Just my opinion...

Lawrence

"Chuck D." webtv.net> wrote in message
news:15823-45204045-984@storefull-3236.bay.webtv.net...

On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:56:36 GMT, "Lawrence D. Elliott"
nospam.com> wrote:

Oh totally, Lawrence. But... Did Air Coryell ever lose??? He wasn't
conservative at all, furthest from it And even he lost. Again I say (w/
some revised words, mostly for Randall): Had Cromartie stopped Heap from
scoring, our chances of holding the win would have been GREATLY
increased.

If you guys don't like that, too bad! It is, what it is. Marty had his
players in position to win. It comes down to one player not executing
properly. I choose to use the best example, i.e. the Heap TD. If he
doesn't make it, we most likely win. Our Defense had McNair's # for most
of the day, I like our chances in those tight confines. But, that's just
me. FWIW, WINM! :)

!!!GO BOLTS!!!

Chuck D. wrote:

But don't you agree that this offense has far too much talent on it to
play THAT conservatively instead of going for the throat?

I understand why Coach played like that, he had confidence in his
Defense. But, yes. Too little, too early.

Although... Had Cro... Nevermind! :)

!!!GO BOLTS!!!

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:58:03 -0700, Frotus@webtv.net (Chuck D.) wrote:

Big difference. Coryell's losses were beyond his control. He didn't
all of sudden stop playing for points and give the opponent many more
chances for points. He had shitty defenses. Big difference.

On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:58:03 -0700, Frotus@webtv.net (Chuck D.) wrote:

And if Coryell had his offense and this defense do you think he would
have throttled it down? How many games would he have won with a
decent defense?

In article <7566-4520627E-741@storefull-3234.bay.webtv.net>,
Frotus@webtv.net says...

OK then. That's alllll I was looking for. Just a little
acknowledgement that the play-calling was too vanilla too conservative
too early given the amount of offensive talent on this team.

Hmmm I do not know. It is common belief about how bad their defense
was. But in the first few of the Coryell years the defense was good and
had the best defensive line in the NFL (one year three of the four made
it to the Pro Bowl - Fred Dean, Louie Kelcher, and Gary 'Big Hands'
Johnson). The D that year (1979) had that dominating front D line,
decent linebackers, and an average secondary.

Both the offense and the defense ended up rating in the top 5 as per
total yardage stats.

I would say that team compares (actually exceeds) this one in talent
and completeness. They crushed both Super Bowl teams that year during
the regular season (beat Rams and Steelers in total blowouts). But they
lost in the playoffs to Houston as they had decoded the offensive hand
signals and Fouts had 5 picks.

- Kevin

That's my point about Coryell, bol. He DIDN'T play conservatively and we
STILL lost games. How does airing it out fix the problems of his losses?
A loss is a loss, whether you're too conservative or not. THAT'S all I'm
saying.

!!!GO BOLTS!!!