All good points however I remain steadfast in saying that it is a game and as such should be played to win, never to avoid losing which is exactly what playing for a tie is the ultimate expression of, and also if you want anything worthwhile in life you will never get anywhere if you are more afraid of losing than you are of not winning.
Just my opinion.
No offense, but this mindset is the problem with the fanbase. You are projecting your personal life philosophy onto a football game, and assuming there are only 2 outcomes: a win or a loss. Despite Donovan McNabb not being aware, a tie is also possible. Which is by definition not as good as a win, but better than a loss.
We try to boil it down to "if you're not playing to win" nonsense. Really, its Kliff's job to play for the best outcome for the team, which is usually a win. In this case, historically on a 4th and 7 you have a 30% or less chance to convert, then if you can't get another first down, what is our kicker's accuracy from 50+? Maybe 65%? So both those things have to happen, bringing our chance at a win down into the 20's. A turnover there raises the Lions chance of driving into field goal range by quite a bit versus being pinned down at their own 5 yard line after a punt. So, the coach's job is to assess the pros/cons and general probabilities of a win, loss, or in this case tie depending on going for it or not.
Yes we all want to win, and maybe going for it would have resulted in a win, but historically speaking this was probably about a 1 in 4 chance had we gone for it. Obviously there are no guarantees either way, but when we all talk about a coach "putting his team in the best position to succeed" this should be what we're referring to.
Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk