All on Narduzzi

[Gunga_Galunga]

They threw on 1st down. Tried a run on second and barely got back to the LOS, and probably lost a yard but got a favorable spot. The 3rd down pass was open, but two blockers didn't put a finger on whoever was rushing. He was on Pickett instantly. The OL had zero push all day. Running into a stacked D with an OL producing zero push is not a good plan.

There is no way I kick the field goal in that situation. But, that play did not lose the game for Pitt. Likely less than 50% chance they score there. At best they tie and at worst they are still down 7.

If we do score, you have no idea what PSU does next series. You can't extrapolate the following series because their situation would be different. We do get to OT, you have no idea how that plays out.

It was a bad call. However, it didn't lose the game and this talk of firing the guy is absurd. Most of it coming from people who predicted a blowout.

 

[Las Panteras]

Boberly is a veteran OL coach who has had success. He fashioned a very effective line last season with less than impressive talent available.

Whipple was brought in to improve the passing game. That is where all the emphasis has been placed. Boberly has assembled an effective pass blocking line without impressive talent.

After the UCF game, I think Whipple will be satisfied he has made the additions that we're need for a passing game. I feel he will begin to incorporate the running game. Borberly will have his line ready when that happens. We will have an adequate running game. It will not have the stats of last years running game, both because of emphasis and the absence of Ollison and Hall.

Ok fair enough.

I think your optimism while commendable, places too much on prediction, as in the running game will be adequate.

The numbers say otherwise. And while we have seen 2 of the better defenses on our schedule, I'm not convinced.

We shall see how it plays out

 

[TD_6082]

No you are absolutely wrong. The one thing you do not want to do one first down is lose yardage. You risk that running anything outside or anything with a delay.

The play needs to be a QB sneak with push from behind.

I totally agree with you here. That said, after Pitt exhausted 3 downs, everybody and their brother knew what would be coming had Pitt went for it on 4th down. So, staying in the moment and not rehashing what transpired on downs 1 through 3, I don't think kicking it on 4th down was a bad decision at all.

Boil it down to one play and ask if you think Pitt scores a TD on 4th and 1 or not. I don't think so.

 

[gary2]

I totally agree with you here. That said, after Pitt exhausted 3 downs, everybody and their brother knew what would be coming had Pitt went for it on 4th down. So, staying in the moment and not rehashing what transpired on downs 1 through 3, I don't think kicking it on 4th down was a bad decision at all.

Boil it down to one play and ask if you think Pitt scores a TD on 4th and 1 or not. I don't think so.

Well, the first three plays were kinda key, but I will play along.

I think the odds were about 40% converting 4th down. Conceding they don't make it, you are still better off with PSU at the one.

At that point Pitt had only scored 10 points in the entire game. Why would anyone think they first stop PSU without a first down and then drive the better part of the field to score a winning TD with little time and probably no timeouts?

 

[Pitt2006]

Maryland had four stuffed rubs against temples vaunted d. It’s hard to throw so close to the end zone. I still would have gone for it, however, had they made the field goal they did get the subsequent stop...Not always cut and dry after emotional frustration dies down.

 

[BFo8]

Mathematically wise going for it and getting stuffed is probably still preferable to the FG even if he had made it.

Hopefully he learns from this and never does anything that dumb ever again.

 

[cashisking884]

Boberly is a veteran OL coach who has had success. He fashioned a very effective line last season with less than impressive talent available.

Whipple was brought in to improve the passing game. That is where all the emphasis has been placed. Boberly has assembled an effective pass blocking line without impressive talent.

After the UCF game, I think Whipple will be satisfied he has made the additions that we're need for a passing game. I feel he will begin to incorporate the running game. Borberly will have his line ready when that happens. We will have an adequate running game. It will not have the stats of last years running game, both because of emphasis and the absence of Ollison and Hall.

Whipple was brought in to score points.
So far he has not done that.

 

[gary2]

Whipple was brought in to score points.
So far he has not done that.

Can't argue that

 

[superstein61a]

That series at the 1 was poor, but Whipple has called 3 outstanding games.

I would say 2 very good games, not 3. But that is natural as given he is new to the team, it takes a bit of time to adjust and see what you have in game action. Whipple has done a good job putting guys in position to do what they do well.

The coaching staff had a very good game plan for PSU and did a lot of things well. The play calling at the 1 was suspect and going for the FG boneheaded but the staff put the team in position to win when nearly everyone (including many here) were predicting a big blowout

 

[Black_Man_Panther]

A,J. hasn't the burst OR the top end speed....he's been caught twice this year where a fast guy probably scores. Vince may lack a bit of size....but we need gamebreakers.

I'm trying to figure out what exactly his skill set is other than able to run to daylight in the open field. He is brutal as an every down tail back. He can't break tackles, has no quickness, can't power thru folks and seems to lack vision at the LOS.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

What has been so outstanding about Whipple’s 3 games of play-calling. It’s not like he has the opposing defenses consistently confused with our guys running free all over the place.

When our streak of games with ZERO second half TDs is extended from 3 to 6 that really doesn’t classify as outstanding.

Yeah
I’m not understanding the whipple praise
We can’t run and we don’t score .
Other than that the offense is great

 

[Cavalier Panther]

I'm not convinced that the 4th quarter plays were all Whipple. Not going for the punt and then kicking the field goal stunk of overly-conservative-blue-collar-bullshit-D-coordinator-nonsense. I wouldn't be surprised if Narduzzi took the reins for those plays.

 

[Panther Holla]

To use a Civil War analogy, if Pitt was the Union army, Naduzzi would make a splendid Gen. George B. McClellan. Great on the parade ground, too cautious on the battlefield. Robert E. Lee kicked his ass over and over.

Give me a hell raiser like William T. Sherman, who marched through Georgia with an attitude.

 

[DiehardPanther]

To use a Civil War analogy, if Pitt was the Union army, Naduzzi would make a splendid Gen. George B. McClellan. Great on the parade ground, too cautious on the battlefield. Robert E. Lee kicked his ass over and over.

Give me a hell raiser like William T. Sherman, who marched through Georgia with an attitude.

Interesting analogy considering I like American History. I would counter by saying Narduzzi was aggressive, aside from deciding to kick at the goal line. He went for it 3 different times on 4th down, and the one was a very aggressive pass play. We threw the ball a ton which goes against the conservative idea as well.

 

[lilspainishflea]

To use a Civil War analogy, if Pitt was the Union army, Naduzzi would make a splendid Gen. George B. McClellan. Great on the parade ground, too cautious on the battlefield. Robert E. Lee kicked his ass over and over.

Give me a hell raiser like William T. Sherman, who marched through Georgia with an attitude.

If that's your analogy, James Franklin is easily the McClellan. More talented team, at home, must win game where he's HUGELY favored and he barely squeaks out a win because of a few chunk plays.

Narduzzi is probably more like Longstreet. Generally did a good job with less resources than his competition. Made a notable mistake in judgment (delaying the attack) in the big game (Gettysburg) which probably wouldn't have changed things significantly even if the mistake had not occurred. Nevertheless, that the game was even in doubt so late given all of his disadvantages was in no small part because of his overall talent as a commander.

 

[BFo8]

I will compare Narduzzi to Joseph Hooker. Brash, aggressive, borderline obnoxious, but loses his nerve at the key moment (Chancellorsville).

 

[Panther Holla]

If that's your analogy, James Franklin is easily the McClellan. More talented team, at home, must win game where he's HUGELY favored and he barely squeaks out a win because of a few chunk plays.

Narduzzi is probably more like Longstreet. Generally did a good job with less resources than his competition. Made a notable mistake in judgment (delaying the attack) in the big game (Gettysburg) which probably wouldn't have changed things significantly even if the mistake had not occurred. Nevertheless, that the game was even in doubt so late given all of his disadvantages was in no small part because of his overall talent as a commander.

I like your analogy better.

 

[Panther Holla]

I will compare Narduzzi to Joseph Hooker. Brash, aggressive, borderline obnoxious, but loses his nerve at the key moment (Chancellorsville).

Oh, yes. Cannonball coming!!!!!

 

[Panther Holla]

Interesting analogy considering I like American History. I would counter by saying Narduzzi was aggressive, aside from deciding to kick at the goal line. He went for it 3 different times on 4th down, and the one was a very aggressive pass play. We threw the ball a ton which goes against the conservative idea as well.

That was the maddening aspect. The play action pass was brilliant. And yet.... he lived in his fears at the goal line. That was a hard angle for the placekicker. And another in a long litany of missed field goals in the series where Penn State's kickers (1987 excluded) rarely fail.