No, it's not way off. The fact that you don't understand that speaks volumes to me. You give any good coach blue chip talent like JJ Taylor and Javon McKinley, along with an exceptionally large roster of talent like CC has and they would achieve the same if not better. Hell, Raul Lara was often criticized for not being the brightest bulb in the box yet look how POLY did under his tenure -- largely because of the talent disparity.
The North has a winning record in the Open and D1 games because they've had better coaching than the South -- not better talent.
You guys can argue all you want, but what Casey Taylor accomplished with Del Oro this season was much tougher to pull off than what Logan did with CC.
Wrong again. Believe what you want, but when playing an evenly matched game -- ie. when talent is similar -- the margin for error is so slim that forgoing several short FG attempts could have and probably did make the difference. That's why in D1 and the NFL, you see the coaches make more conservative calls -- because the talent on the field is so similar and the games typically so close that forgoing points might lose the game. When facing a defense like DLS, you can't afford to come up empty so many times. So they scored once -- big deal. They came up empty at least 3 times using the same strategy. In short, they came up with fewer points than they likely would have scored had they kicked in each and every situation which then put less pressure on DLS as a result.
Regardless, just because you happen to disagree for whatever reason doesn't at all mean anything was soundly refuted. There a quite a few people that agree with me so it's certainly a valid debate. Like any game, we have no idea what would have transpired had they elected to kick FG's or how the game would have unfolded differently as a result. All I'm saying is that in such an evenly matched game against a stellar defense, your odds are maximized by electing to try FG's in those situations.
