Actually yes, I am familiar with that.
However, you seem to have a problem understanding the relationship between scoring and winning.
Let me fill you in:
There is not a specific scoring goal that has been set prior to the game, say for example, 40 points.
You only have to score more points than your opponent.
Here is the important part:
Let us say that the circumstances dictate a conservative gameplan. Perhaps you are playing a difficult division opponent. Or perhaps it is openig day and you recognize the fact that you have a young team with good, but new changes. The circumstances might even involve some outside distraction requiring more focus on execution without getting cute.
Hey, you never know, it could even involve all three of these type circumstances.
So, anyway, in addition to this conservative plan, you have discovered that your defense isn't half bad so long as you can control the clock and add incremental points. One additional requirement is that you don't get behind. Let's suppose that you're a pretty intelligent coach so you know everything can be turned upside down with some ill-timed turnovers.
Really, all you want to do is get out of that stadium with any kind of a win. you can work on quality as the season progresses.
So you do the right thing. You don't put any of the really cool but riskier plays in the gameplan. You don't have to. You tell your qb to go for those boring low risk plays. They might not get you consistantly in the endzone but, hey, you got the most accurate kicker in the league. Why risk it?
You tell your qb, if it isn't there , dont do it. Even if it is there, err on the side of caution, the first priority isn't scoring TD's, it's avoiding crippling turnovers. If you just methodically and consistently move the ball, you could score, but at the very least they can't as the clock ticks the game away.
You claim the Cowboys had trouble finishing but the Giants had two drives that started in the 4th quarter, the first one lasted 38 seconds on the clock, the 2nd one lasted a minute and 55 seconds producing zero points. The Cowboys countered with two 4th quarter drives that combined for more than ten minutes and enough points to insure that even two TD's with 2 point conversions wouldn't be enough to give the Giants victory. How in the world is that not finishing a game?
Pay attention, this is the punch line:
That particular gameplan doesn't mean your qb can't win the game for you by producing big plays if needed. In fact, Dak has demonstrated that he is one of the few guys that can do it. But why risk it? Save his heroics for a game when you will need all that he is and don't worry....he will produce when he has to....just lke he did all of last season, every time the experts were waiting for a game to be too big for him. They are still waiting.
One more thing:
You don't have to "finish" something your opponent could never start.
The Cowboys won because they deprived the Giants of opportunity by eating the clock. They did that by consistently driving the ball down the field, hence my reference to the end of each drive and the first downs They did not give away any of those signature cheap TD's that typically give new life to an opponent. .
Not giving away cheap TD's is far better than scoring to even up the cheap TD you gave away.
