You see, Mitt needed a win. And knowing that he only needed a tie, Obama played not to lose, and lost. It was the political equivalent of a football team playing prevent defense. You send three linemen at the quarterback and drop the other 8 into coverage. Most of the time, playing prevent defense allows the quarterback time to throw, and receivers more time to shake the defenders, allowing the offense to march down the field. It's cost the University of Utah several games against BYU the past several years (and almost cost them this year's game).
It's bad to play prevent defense when you are up by less than a touchdown, but even worse when you are down 17 in the 4th. A stop makes it very difficult to win. Allowing a touchdown gives your opponent momentum and confidence. But, you're still up 10 points. The game isn't over. Do you run down the clock, hoping your prevent defense will last until election day? Or do you play your norm, moving the ball effectively and efficiently down the field, hoping to play just as much offense to run the clock to 0:00? Or, do you run wide-open aggressiveness, hoping you can stick the final nail in the coffin, but also hoping you don't throw an interception, allowing your opponent to have good field position.
I think a good place to start is by pointing out that It's easy to
We'll see what kind of coaches Team Obama has. I just hope it's not Kyle Wittingham.
-Bob
