The game was lost because players failed to make plays at key times.
The game was close (and therfore "losable"), because MM had a conservative "play not to lose" approach.

But ... For 57 minutes they were well-positioned to win the game because of what MM did in preparing them for the game, and perhaps even because of his conservative approach to this game. Not many gave them much of a chance to win this one. Getting at least some points from every scoring opportunity in a game almost predestined to be low scoring is a solid approach to winning that type of game. Going for max points is well and good in hindsight, but getting nothing from a scoring opportunity against a good defense also can be fatal.

Personally, I had no problem with the first FG, because I think getting an early lead was important. As the lead built, I would like to have seen him be more aggressive on 4th and short when 3 points doen't make a one score lead into a two score lead, or a two score lead into a three score lead. I would not go for it on 4th and short when it is a punting situation. Against a struggling offense, I want to keep the field long.