Looking back at Narduzzi's press from his time at MSU, I see just praise for his defensive coaching acumen. Why does he suck at Pitt??
For all of you Narduzzi fans
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
9-3 when favored in all 12 games may not be a disaster but it would be very disappointing. 8-4 would be a disaster.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I am guessing you think 8-4 despite being favored in all 12 would be considered a good season.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
They were a Vegas over/under at 7 wins and preseason #4 in the Coastal. Why suddenly favored in all 12 games? Is Narduzzi doing a better coaching job than his peers?
This is one time that SMF actually said something that was true. But he still doesn't understand the math.
Pitt has been favored in each of their first 8 games. And they are likely to be favored in each of the final four games, unless Pickett gets hurt.
Yes... the Vegas O/U was 7 preseason. But that doesn't change the objective fact that Pitt has been favored ... and will be favored .... in each of their 12 regular season games.
Think of it this way: If you have a 60% chance to win each game.... the odds are that you will go 7-5 or 8-4. Just because something has a greater chance of happening doesn't mean it will always happen. That's where SMF gets it wrong. Being favored in every game does *NOT* imply that a team should go 12-0.... not unless they have a 100% chance of winning each game.
Pitt has had between a 53% and 96% chance of winning every game so far (the lowest was the Tennessee game at 53%, the highest was New Hampshire at 96%).
SMF is bad at math and probabilities and thinks that if a team has a 51% chance of winning each game that implies they should be undefeated.
Last edited:
Because they are favored in all 12 does not mean they "should" go 12-0 but it means they have a better chance of going 12-0 than all but a handful of college football teams. Upsets happen of course. Pitt has been upset twice and may be upset 1-2 more times but being upset in 4 of your 12 games is extremely rare and its a sign your coach isnt any good. And lets not forget, they are/were significant favorites in most ot these games. These arent 1-2 point lines.
If this team goes 8-4, it will be BY FAR, BY FAR his worst coaching job. What Vegas thought he was going to do in July is irrelevant. They factored in an above average QB and didn't know he would be the #1 pick in the draft in some mocks
Depends on how "favored" you were.
Pitt was a FG favorite against Tennessee and VT and Clemson... and less than a TD favorite against GT.
Their odds of winning each of those games was between 53% and 65%. They went 4-0 in those games, when the probability was something like 2.4-1.6. Based on the probabilities of the season so far... they should be about 5.8-2.2 - which is right where they are.
If you and I played heads-up Texas Hold 'Em and I dealt you pocket aces for 12 straight hands and myself 2-7-offsuit for those same 12 hands...... the odds are you would win 10 of the 12 hands. Not 12 of 12. You would have an overwhelming advantage in EVERY hand, but you would have a very low chance of winning all 12.
That's what you fail to understand. Repeatedly.
You're bad at math.
ps. You also said this: "being upset in 4 of your 12 games is extremely rare".
Being upset in 4/12 of your games as a favorite is a LOT LESS RARE than going 12-0 as a favorite. You're bad at math.
How many teams have lost 4 games as 5+ point favorites the last 10 years? My guess would be 0. Narduzzi can be the 1st.
Pitt hasn't lost 4 games as a 5+ point favorite.
They've lost 2.
Which isn't rare at all. There probably have been a couple dozen teams that have lost twice as 5+ point favorites this year.
He's good at the trolling game though. He gets us all looped in even though I continue to tell myself I'm not responding to him anymore.
It actually doesn’t suck at all when your program has suffered years, decades of instability and upheaval… many times embarrassingly so…it’s actually a damned important metric. I lived through that shit… it wasn’t fun.
Correct. 2 is whatever. He has a chance to lose 2 more. And if he does, it will be a historically bad coaching job.
P5 Teams that lost this year as 5+ point favorite..... sorted by the biggest point spread.
Minnesota (-30.5)
FSU (-27.5)
PSU (-24.5)
Washington (-22.5)
Vanderbilt (-21)
Georgia Tech (-19)
Alabama (-18.5)
North Carolina (-17.5)
USC (-17.5)
Washington State (-17)
Arizona State (-16)
Pitt (-14.5)
North Carolina (-14.5)
Ohio State (-14.5)
Florida (-12.5)
Iowa (-11)
USC (-11)
Clemson (-10.5)
TCU (-9.5)
Pitt (-9)
Oregon (-8.5)
Iowa State (-7.5)
Nebraska (-7.5)
Florida (-7.5)
WVU (-7.5)
Texas A&M (-7)
Iowa State (-7)
Miami (-7)
Utah (-7)
Nebraska (-6.5)
Duke (-6.5)
Wisconsin (-6)
Texas (-6)
Wisconsin (-5.5)
North Carolina (-5.5)
And the season is not even 2/3 done. And that's just P5. It isn't a "rare" event... and UNC has already done it 3 times.
And 3 of the teams above.... (Alabama, Ohio State, Oregon)... are still in the hunt for playoff spots.
If you want to see a bad coaching job for 2021, look at Florida, LSU, Missouri, or Arizona State.
Nope. Happy with a football program that now has some stability to it and is winning more then it is losing. Pat Narduzzi IS the right coach for the Pitt Football program.
You're right. If you like mediocrity and if the stars align once every 10 years and he gets us to 9 wins maybe then yup, he's your man. He's the textbook definition of mediocre.
We’ve won 9 or more games “3 Times” over the last 37 seasons. 9 wins would be a good season. 10 would be excellent.
Why did you post that? I said its rare for a team to lose 4 times as a 5+ point favorite which is what Pitt may do this season. Individual upsets happen all the time. But if Pitt ends up losing 4, they may go down in history.
We were favored in every game in 2009. Fired our coach a year later for what? Mike Haywood? Narduzzi had us in the playoff discussion in late October. Most programs would kill for that. His recruiting is getting better and we rarely lose players to the transfer portal.
Hail to Pitt!
Dave
pittdan77
Athletic Director
By the end of the year there will be a handful of teams that did exactly that. As there are every year.
And Pitt won't be one of them. For two reasons:
They will be favored by 5+ in only 3 of their remaining games, not 4. And they won't lose 2 of those 3.
You're presenting a negative hypothetical as if it is already a fact.
No checkmate. They are favored in all 12 because:
- Clemson, Miami, UNC, and VT are worse than expected
- Vegas did not think Pickett would be a 1st Rounder.
If you want to credit Narduzzi for Pickett, fine, but I account most of that to luck. Pickett is the best QB we've had since Marino and we won't have another like him for another 40 years. It takes a lot of luck to have a player like that. Its not something you can replicate.
IMO getting the extra COVID year made Pickett, he's literally twice as good in every way including stats than the previous years, in an alternate universe he may be on an NFL practice squad or out of football right now.
Yea but if they weren't all given an extra year for Covid, he likely would have gotten a redshirt for his FR season when he played in 4 games, and really only extended time in 2.
True, but
should they do better than 8-4, especially since we have had a bunch of games we are 75% or higher including Miami.
He has no idea what he's talking about. They had 4 guaranteed wins based on the probabilities (UMass, NH, WMU, Duke). Then the other 8, they were/will be 60%-80% (besides Tennessee). They would not be expected to split those 8 to go 8-4. If you ran a model of all Pitt's win probabilities, it would spit out 10-2
Prior to the season, 9-3 would have been a solid campaign. However, prior to the season, Clemson was a top two team, UNC was a top ten team, and Miami was a top 15 team. You absolutely have to change your grading scale as those other variables change. SMF has it right in that regard. As I've said, it's likely that none of our twelve regular season foes finish in the top 25. So 8-4 (which is 6-4 when you subtract the two freebies) would be disappointing with that in mind. 8-4 against our 2016 schedule? Pretty good. 8-4 against this schedule? Not good.
College football is all about scoring points. You need an offense. Most teams are running some type of spread offense with inside/outside zone blocking. The problem in this game was not getting off blocks on the bubble screen which netted over 100 yards total, poor tackling, one bad series at the five yard line , two picks, and poor officiating in the ACC. There were a couple busts on defensive coverages but Pitt was still in position to win the game at the end.
So Narduzzi has coached his team up better than Dabo, Diaz, Mack, and Fuente?
Why is Pickett a potential first rounder? All that natural ability he had when he stepped on campus? Or a lot of hard work and good coaching?
Besides, there is a shit load more involved to having a good season than having a great season. Sam Howell & Brennan Armstrong are potential first grounders too, ya know?
And just a FYI, the last time Pitt won the Coastal, the #1 QB in the draft played for the Coastal 4th place Duke Blue Devils.
It's moronic NOT to credit Narduzzi for Pickett. Who the hell wouldn't?Recruiting is an inexact science. Coaches recruit on potential/projection and need, and obviously on who they think they can sign. QB has been in pretty capable hands almost the entire time Narduzzi has been HC.
Pickett is like 25% credit to Narduzzi. 75% pure luck. Its like offering a 6'11 Center in basketball with terrible offers and then taking credit when he becomes the #1 pick in the NBA Draft. Sure, the coach gets some credit there but a lot of that is just luck and its not something that can be replicated. We will never have a QB as good as Pickett again so can Narduzzi win with just OK quarterbacks? He hasnt yet. An NFL backup got him to 8-4. A 1st Rounder to maybe 9-3.
Id argue but UPitt is doing a great job
If you have a 60%, 60%, 60%, 60% and 60% chance of winning 5 games, you have a 7% chance of being 5-0 and your most probable record would be 3-2
If you had a 90%,80%, 96%, 15% (say Alabama is on our schedge) and 80%, you have an 8.3% chance of being 5-0 and a most probable record of 4-1
So far, you'd have to say Narduzzi is doing a great job with this team. We are 6-2 with 2 loses by a combined 7 points and only one bad game. With a OCC victory at an SEC school. Probably his best year. But, still got lots of season left. If we flub he did a poor job, if we sniff 10 wins with this defense and losing 6 starters on D youd have to give him a round of applause.
pittdan77
Athletic Director
You do realize that Narduzzi is going to have had 3 NFL QB's that came through his program by the time April rolls around, next year? I wouldn't exactly call the guy a QB guru but you seem to be claiming he's the luckiest SOB to ever coach the game while operating on the premise that an NFL QB is all that matters and yet so many college superstar QB's flame out.
Seriously, if you're going to troll, you should pick topics you actually understand.
In your example of the 6'11" center... it means he was COACHED UP to become a #1 pick.
Mark Whipple coached Pickett up to becoming a #1 pick.
And Narduzzi hired Mark Whipple, for that exact purpose.
Last edited:
Yeah, not understanding that at all. UNH, WMU, Umass, and Duke are all layups (or should have been). Syracuse and GT. Their other 3 remaining games beyond Duke are 75% or more. Miami was 81%, Clemson 63%, VT was 73%, GT was actually only 54%. I bet if you reran GT and VT as it stands today those percentages are higher.
Things obviously changed as we saw what Pickett was, but with a schedule with essentially two 50/50 games, one 60-65 game, then everything else 75% or higher is expect 9-3 at absolute worst. 8-4 would be underachieving
As Jay Bilas says, you don't develop lottery picks, you recruit them. I agree that there is some credit due to "coaching up" but the majority of it is due to luck. The 6'11 clumsy kid that nobody wanted developed more coordinarion, got stronger, more mature. Most of that would have come with normal human development.
I am sorry but I dont believe Kenny Pickett would have been any worse of a QB at other places.
If someone posted the percentages for any team before a season which showed 2 50/50 games, 1 60/65 game, and 9 >75% games, the minimum expectation would be 10-2. 8-4 against this schedule is an epic disaster and would EASILY be Narduzzi's worst coaching job.
Similar threads
