Question: How big a lead should a team have, before the play-calling and scheme shifts to "conservative"

[Guest Spearfeather]

All it takes is a fumble returned for a TD to turn your 17 point lead into a 2 score game.

Yep,....or an interception returned for a TD, but running the ball in general is going to take more time off the clock.

[GhostofSparta]

Yep,....or an interception returned for a TD, but running the ball in general is going to take more time off the clock.

I agree, anything is possible. I'm just saying that there's nothing wrong with a conservative game plan, provided it's effective. If your RB can rip off 4 yards per attempt because the other defense is tired, but all means keep at it until they stop you. If Ryan Torrain can rip off a 20 yard run with 9 men in the box because they know a run is coming...you keep feeding him the ball until you're in 3rd and long. I just don't equate conservative with 1-dimensional. I understand running the ball when you're up big, as there's less that can go wrong with a run (loss of yards, fumble) than a pass (sack, sack/fumble, INT, catch/fumble) when you're trying to control a game. Conservative game plans still have to be effective, or else it's just quitting on the game and hoping the other team does the same.

Mainly, I was initially just arguing that mid-3rd quarter is waaaaaay too early to start going away from your gameplan to milk the clock and protect the lead, as I feel that in the NFL the talent level isn't great enough to consider a lead safe at that point. If you change the timeframe to the 4th, then I totally agree that you run the ball and milk the clock. I mean even if you go 3 and out twice in the 4th, that's still over 4 minutes that you've killed with the other team needing 3 scores. I just think anytime before the start of the 4th with anything less than a 5 TD lead is a bad idea.....but I've also grown up watching the Redskins since the mid-90s, so I can't speak for what consistently good teams should do ::silly

[Chachie]

Don't ask Bill Belichick.

[jnhay]

It depends on who you're playing. If you're playing the Colts, you'd play conservative only when you have a really big lead (though since their run d sucks, conservative would probably be effective anyway). Another team with an offense you've dominated all day, you might play conservative with a 14 point lead.

[HailGreen28]

Don't ask Bill Belichick.

Sadly, a plurality of the voting posters agree with him on this one.

[Guest Spearfeather]

After all, if your O is going into prevent mode, the D might follow suit. I know they're professionals, but if Peyton can phone in the last quarter, why can't Freeney or Mathis? Hard to keep half your team motivated while the other half gets to half-ass the rest of the game.

I don't really equate running the ball when you have a 17 point lead, as half assing it. You're just giving the other team fewer possessions with the football, and it's going to take them at least three. Minimizing the amount of the other teams possessions, also minimizes the amount of points they can score.

[panel]

Depends on how much time is left.I think everyone one would agree, if you have the game locked up, you take a knee, the ultimate conservative play. If you are up in the 4th, you should run the ball more to kill that clock.