Bottom Line on Pitt Loss

Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
1,367
Likes
1,726
#1
Pitt has consistently and persistently recruited the kinds of running backs and athletes that Syracuse wants and doesn't get.

Pitt also gets the exact running backs (see Qadre Ollison) and athletes that Syracuse recruits. So they just line up and bully us into submission.

This is exactly what Pitt was gunning for all game--keep running until our athletes plow over your athletes in the 4th quarter. That's it

Nuff said, peeps
 

djorange1989

All American
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
5,272
Likes
8,407
#3
we played sloppy and inefficient football, they had their backs to the wall staring at 2-4 with a trip to Notre Dame next, they were at home, and they do one thing well, run the football, and stopping the run is what we do worse than anything else. add that all up and that is why we lost. they definitely recruit better RBs than we do, that is for sure. overall, however, we have better players. Even giving up all that yardage on the ground, if we had been even semi-sharp out there (ie not turning it over, moving the ball efficiently on offense) we win the game easily. we played poorly.
 
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
1,367
Likes
1,726
#4
They've gotten some really good RBs. That doesn't mean they are outrecruiting us for athletes. We didn't lose because we had inferior athletes.
But I would argue we lost because Pitt had running backs every bit as big as our linebackers, and then some.

Gotta figure out a way to deal with it anyway, otherwise we lose the rest of the games on our schedule
 
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
1,387
Likes
919
#5
They've gotten some really good RBs. That doesn't mean they are outrecruiting us for athletes. We didn't lose because we had inferior athletes.
It could be argued that our linebackers lack the requisite size and ability to take down a runner with one hit, and are not fit for purpose in the ACC.

That said, there were a number of reasons we lost, and it was a perfect storm of garbage.
 

djorange1989

All American
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
5,272
Likes
8,407
#6
But I would argue we lost because Pitt had running backs every bit as big as our linebackers, and then some.

Gotta figure out a way to deal with it anyway, otherwise we lose the rest of the games on our schedule
agree that we need to figure something out, don't agree that we will lose out otherwise. we lost by a combined 11 points on the road, one of those to the second best program in America, and in the other we played terribly in several areas beyond run defense . home against NC and Louisville will be ok (he says with just a hint of trepidation), and Wake's run defense makes ours look like Clemson's, so there is that game too.
 

RF2044

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
20,333
Likes
45,428
#7
Pitt has consistently and persistently recruited the kinds of running backs and athletes that Syracuse wants and doesn't get.

Pitt also gets the exact running backs (see Qadre Ollison) and athletes that Syracuse recruits. So they just line up and bully us into submission.

This is exactly what Pitt was gunning for all game--keep running until our athletes plow over your athletes in the 4th quarter. That's it

Nuff said, peeps
That strategy was facilitated by them getting a defensive score, and a long touchdown on a broken play to offset our early 14-0 lead. If we'd played from ahead all game, they wouldn't have been able to grind it into a slow down running game.

We played into their hands by allowing them to keep it close into the fourth, more then it being some great strategy.
 

007

All Conference
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
3,466
Likes
5,020
#8
Pitt has consistently and persistently recruited the kinds of running backs and athletes that Syracuse wants and doesn't get.

Pitt also gets the exact running backs (see Qadre Ollison) and athletes that Syracuse recruits. So they just line up and bully us into submission.

This is exactly what Pitt was gunning for all game--keep running until our athletes plow over your athletes in the 4th quarter. That's it

Nuff said, peeps
If only the "bottom line" was this simplistic.
 

Ish88888

All American
Joined
Oct 25, 2015
Messages
4,323
Likes
2,966
#9
They've gotten some really good RBs. That doesn't mean they are outrecruiting us for athletes. We didn't lose because we had inferior athletes.
Pitts recruiting may have taken a dip the past few years, not sure how good narduzzi is. He is one of the last rah rah guys left along with Addazio. That said Pitt has cont to out recruit us from rbs and wrs. They have pumped out some incredible pros. Even playing in a pro stadium with no juice in front of 30-40k, they cont to bring in talent.
 

Ish88888

All American
Joined
Oct 25, 2015
Messages
4,323
Likes
2,966
#11
That strategy was facilitated by them getting a defensive score, and a long touchdown on a broken play to offset our early 14-0 lead. If we'd played from ahead all game, they wouldn't have been able to grind it into a slow down running game.

We played into their hands by allowing them to keep it close into the fourth, more then it being some great strategy.
Good point and that's why playing this D scheme we need to pull away when we have some momentum as this scheme is dependent on offenses playing from behind and having to air it out.Thats wht this loss is as much on the O aa it is the D.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
1,724
Likes
2,363
#12
They didn't play great either.fumble set up our second score. They threw a pick in end zone. Failed to get TDs on short drives. Neither team played well.
 

Alsacs

Warning: My opinion isn’t to be taken as fact
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
34,508
Likes
36,848
#13
Pitts recruiting may have taken a dip the past few years, not sure how good narduzzi is. He is one of the last rah rah guys left along with Addazio. That said Pitt has cont to out recruit us from rbs and wrs. They have pumped out some incredible pros. Even playing in a pro stadium with no juice in front of 30-40k, they cont to bring in talent.
You just described Scott Shafer minus the pumping out some incredible pros.
Hiring Narduzzi is slowing destroying them.
 

storange

All Conference
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
2,255
Likes
2,596
#17
Pitt has consistently and persistently recruited the kinds of running backs and athletes that Syracuse wants and doesn't get.

Pitt also gets the exact running backs (see Qadre Ollison) and athletes that Syracuse recruits. So they just line up and bully us into submission.

This is exactly what Pitt was gunning for all game--keep running until our athletes plow over your athletes in the 4th quarter. That's it

Nuff said, peeps
Agree about running backs nothing else.
 

djorange1989

All American
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Messages
5,272
Likes
8,407
#20
They aren't losing the rest of the games are on their schedule. Not a chance.
No they aren’t. No one wants to see our run D get beaten on like it has, but we were one stop away from winning each of the last two games, both away games, one against an elite team. We are not losing to NC or Louisville. Hopefully not Wake either
 
Joined
Jun 30, 2012
Messages
1,367
Likes
1,726
#22
They aren't losing the rest of the games are on their schedule. Not a chance.
Definitely not saying they will. But everyone was feeling Pitt was a sure win, and now everyone is saying, "well, they'll beat NC, Lousiville and Wake." But nothing is a gimme

I'm not saying Pitt is a good football team. And if they are not, then why did Cuse lose? Everyone has their thoughts. What I saw out of Pitt was not some great strategy, or offensive prowess, but a realization that they could just hand it to their backs and not worry about the rest. Which is what they did. And Cuse lost

Is this a simple version of reasoning? Yes. But it was a core matter in this game ...no doubt about it
 

RF2044

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
20,333
Likes
45,428
#24
Definitely not saying they will. But everyone was feeling Pitt was a sure win, and now everyone is saying, "well, they'll beat NC, Lousiville and Wake." But nothing is a gimme

I'm not saying Pitt is a good football team. And if they are not, then why did Cuse lose? Everyone has their thoughts. What I saw out of Pitt was not some great strategy, or offensive prowess, but a realization that they could just hand it to their backs and not worry about the rest. Which is what they did. And Cuse lost

Is this a simple version of reasoning? Yes. But it was a core matter in this game ...no doubt about it
  • We gave up a defensive score
  • We gave up two long / one-play touchdowns
  • Our offense didn't move the ball consistently
  • The weather sucked, which didn't help the bullet point above
  • Our LBs struggled against the run
  • We failed to maintain our early lead, which would have driven them out of ball control mode and forced them to play catch up and throw more
  • We settled for a long FG on our last scoring drive, when 7 would have iced the game
  • Pitt got a good spot on a key 4th down after we'd stopped them behind the LOS
  • Eric Dungey seemed "off"

There isn't any one magic bullet to why we lost. And if we could change any number of single plays throughout the game, we win it. Which is why much of the doom and gloom is unwarranted, and reeks of pessimism.

I certainly don't argue that it was a missed opportunity.
 

Top Bottom