I am sure you think it was obviously correct-- we just disagree. Say on 3rd and 17, Rams gained nothing, or 3 or 5-- good decision. It was a calculated risk that ultimately made a two-yard negative difference. Given that Rams went for it and gained 12, you saying it was a big difference is an interesting opinion with which I disagree. If they gained 5 you might have a point. But taking or declining the penalty, IMO, was a matter of judgment and McD took a more aggressive approach than you would have. Which is kind of ironic that you prefer the cautious approach. Candidly I could have gone either way.