I for one see nothing wrong with your approach here, particularly when it is factual and balances some of the unrelenting negativity that gets posted frequently.
Let's Go Narduzzi, We Need to Start Seeing More Players Drafted
- Thread starter counselor10
- Start date
I for one see nothing wrong with your approach here, particularly when it is factual and balances some of the unrelenting negativity that gets posted frequently.
Q: What does a Scottish golfer call a mulligan?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A: Lying three.
I’d like to objectively, respectfully debate this topic with you further. Let me do some research tonight. I’ll stick with conference games in the Heinz field era.
You very well may be right. It’s an interesting debate though. To be continued
Dang. Got me for going by memory. So with 2018 being in the 40's and last year being in the mid 50's, are you satisfied with recruiting or are you going to just run another victory lap on me?
im never satisfied. lots of room for improvement. just like 7-7 has lots of room for improvement. It was nice to win coastal but a ton of work to do..
If we go 8-4 or 9-3, we will have a good year and guess what, i'll still want improvement. Never be satisfied.. Listen man, you took a little wallop there but just lick your wounds and keep trudging along. We all get carried away with our posts and occasionally get called out on it. no shame in this.. you fell off the saddle, we've all been there.
Oh, I thought you said things were "trending upwards"?
So which is it? Recruiting is sliding. I'm also not sure what you thought the UNC game was last year. Originally let that be. Getting blown out by an O5 school probably wasn't great but that might be semantics.
Did you fall off the saddle, too?
And if back to back 7 loss seasons don’t convince you.
You are still trying to salvage this?? Really man? I love the fight in you.
So I blew up your statement about our recruiting rankings being in 30s once every four years. I mean, I blew it up to hell and back. So now, you are switching the argument. I get it, it’s pretty much the only card you have left to play.
Sure, I’ll play along. I respect a poster who gets their ass handed to them and keeps coming back for more. So with that said, what’s the new topic we are debating?
Last edited:
Last year the teams ranked around 20th had between 10-13 4 stars. I’m not sure I see the 20 class having that many 4’s
Looked again and #21, 22, 23 etc had around 6 4 stars. That seems attainable with a good year
Odd debate here; Pitt's roster was the 34 best roster based off of recruiting rankings. That was good enough to win the coastal; almost beat ND but not good enough to beat a Clemson or UCF. Pitt played 3 teams that went undefeated in the regular seseason plus a pedst team. That the primary reason they ended 7-7 and not 9-5.
Pitt's recruiting rankings could have been higher without some of the bad luck and bad performing 4* recruits who recently left. Narduzzi hasn't always made the right choices in regards to his staff or their recruiting- but it's not like he hasn't tried to address their deficiencies rather quickly.
It's going to take time and an AD who can figure out playing more than 1 difficult OOC game is idiotic in today's college football. Again, successful football programs play as easy of a schedule as they can book to stack wins and get ranked.
Pitt's recruiting rankings could have been higher without some of the bad luck and bad performing 4* recruits who recently left. Narduzzi hasn't always made the right choices in regards to his staff or their recruiting- but it's not like he hasn't tried to address their deficiencies rather quickly.
It's going to take time and an AD who can figure out playing more than 1 difficult OOC game is idiotic in today's college football. Again, successful football programs play as easy of a schedule as they can book to stack wins and get ranked.
But artificially stacking wins wouldn’t really be different than artificially stacking losses in terms of assessing how objectively good a team is, as both are irrelevant.
In the end, we finished 61st in the S&P+ last year. So objectively we probably were the quality of about a .500 football team. So it’s not like the schedule skewed the “real” Pitt.
I do agree that the 4 year cycle isn’t that horrible. But this class needs to be relatively strong. Last year’s class was 55th. 2018 was 46th. The 30th ranked class is largely about to come off the books. If the 4 year class window is dominated by the 55th, 46th, and then another dud, we’re going to be wayyyyy lower in the talent team composite.
I’d argue that as Pitt has transitioned to a student base from outside of Allegheny County and Western PA, we have seen attendance reduce a bit. You are right that Pitt will never be a Big10 state school when it comes to attendance. I would say when your alumni are more likely to live further away, you’ll get less back to attend games outside of maybe the big marquee game. That’s likely what we’re seeing with the attendance drop. Less local fans so the attendance is down 5-10k for traditional conference opponents. Sure other big schools cast a larger net with enrollment now, however their alumni bases are larger so they aren’t as highly impacted. The locals that can’t get into Pitt will be PSU sheep and the cycle continues.
Objective measurements of a team's talent doesn't attract fans to games and recruits to your team but winning games does.
While last year's class included more kids limited offer sheets than you would like to see- it's a small class and this year's class looks like it will be more similar to Narduzzi's 2nd class.
While last year's class included more kids limited offer sheets than you would like to see- it's a small class and this year's class looks like it will be more similar to Narduzzi's 2nd class.
In addition to moving more guys to the NFL, winning, PITT needs a few exciting Star players.
We haven't had a good QB, combined with a great receiver and RB.
No: Baldwins, Dions, Shady's, Palko's, Revis's, Fitzgerald's, Savage's, Clemming's, Boyd's, Donald's
In addition to winning an exciting light the field up player always helps make the show better!
We haven't had a good QB, combined with a great receiver and RB.
No: Baldwins, Dions, Shady's, Palko's, Revis's, Fitzgerald's, Savage's, Clemming's, Boyd's, Donald's
In addition to winning an exciting light the field up player always helps make the show better!
Did you really include Tom Savage’s name on this list? Am I reading this correctly?
Yep. Say we play Akron and Bowling Green or someone and win those games, which Narduzzi has been able to do, instead of PSU and UCF, we are 9-5, Coastal champs, and people like souf that just point at the 7 losses will have to bitch about the weak SOS.
Nope. The discussion is the same. We're talking recruiting. I missed a stat and you're taking victory laps.
So is everything fine with recruiting or not? You went from saying everyone is idiots for thinking it's not great to Pitt has to do better. Topic is the same but you're teetering.
you said our recruiting classes are in the 30's once every four years. I blew that up and now you are backpedaling. again, i'll play along though, you seem like a good guy..
So to answer your question, on paper, last year was not good and the two years before that were pretty much par for pitt over the last 20 years and in '16, it was better than what we are used to.. This upcoming year, to be determined..
Is everything fine with recruiting? No its not but it never has been. Under Pat, Walt, Wanny, Chryst, Graham. I mean the last time Recruiting has been considered fine is under Gottfried in the mid 80's but of course you had great classes that under achieved and lost to teams like boston college and temple. So in theory, those classes weren't "fine" either..
Is there any program in the country where the fans think recruiting is "Fine?" Maybe alabama, Georgia, ohio state. the other 115+ programs in D1 have fans that want more, want better. We are one of those..
no one is saying "we've arrived" pittdan77, still tons of work to do.. Some very good things happened last year and some very bad things happened. reasons to pat each other on the back and reasons to pull our hair out.
Here is a prediction for '19, we are going to have some things that we love with this program and guess what, there are going to be moments, games where we are angry. I mean, that is going to happen.. By this time next year, not one pitt fan on this earth is going to look back at the 2019 football season and say, "Finally, Pitt football is exactly where I want them to be." That will not happen..
That's all im saying.
Being 61st in the S&P+ probably means Pitt overachieved record wise at 7-7. And that was with a roster "in the 30's" as @joeydavid says. That feels more like coaching.
This is the greater point. It's not because there aren't any good players on the team. The top of his classes have been good. The problem is what the bottom half averages. Moreover, Pitt is averaging like the 8th or 9th roster in the ACC. That's a much bigger problem.
Truth is probably somewhere in the middle. Recruiting isn't as bad as some make it, but not as great other others make it. We definitely need to improve though.
Yes, this is so blatantly obvious yet people still go overboard, one way or the other.
Narduzzi needs to recruit better. And when he does, the next year, he needs to recruit better. Chryst, when he was at pitt, needed to recruit better, same with Walt and Wanny. I mean, we all know this, it SHOULD be a given. We are stating the obvious. When your program is mediocre to decent, which it has been since 1984, you need to recruit better and you need to coach better.
Everyone that has been a HC at PItt since before Back the the Future came out on theaters needed to Recruit better. im going out on a limb here and saying now, before hand, that our next Head coach, the one after Narduzzi, we will all be complaining that he needs to recruit better. I am guaranteeing this will happen..
Last edited:
Yes I liked Savage could put the ball in the air and make it interesting.
I'm getting tired of Pickett's 5 yard completions!
5 yard completions? Where are those? what I wouldn't give to see pickett get a couple 5 yard completions
I’m all for scheduling bankable wins.
I’m simply responded to the idea that we were “good” last year but a tough schedule skewed that. We finished with about the exact record the analytics said we should finish with. We were hurt by a tough OOC schedule, but helped by a conference schedule that featured a bunch of teams that just bottomed out.
This year’s class I’d like to see with an average recruit ranking of 86-something. That would balance out that last two classes, and be a slight up tick in quality. Considering it’s now year 5, coming off an ACC Coastal championship, and hired a legit recruiter, that should be reasonable.
A
anon_vmuicqnzlyp3u
Guest
There was good reason not go in the 90's. If you don't think interest is falling at a pretty good pace and the attendance isn't falling then we must be going to different Pitt games on Saturdays
A
anon_vmuicqnzlyp3u
Guest
So, if you think recruiting is where it should be and we can only manage a 7-7 record then it must be coaching then correct?
I’m sure we are going to same games, I just think your memory of attendance at pitt games 10-15 years ago is wrong.
Not sure if you are new here but trust me, 2004, 2009, 2014, sane posters were complaining about poor attendance for home pitt games. Same as they are now.
A
anon_vmuicqnzlyp3u
Guest
I've been a former player here and a season ticket holder since 1988 and saw my first game in 1973. Not new here at all. As for attendance I see less and less each game.
Pitt has always had attendance issues. Pitt averaged 40k at Pitt Stadium in the mid to late 80’s. We actually saw a spike in attendance the first few years at Heinz with 2003 being the best. Pitt is a lot more similar to BC and GT than Clemson and FSU. We are stuck in a pro town. We are surrounded by large land grant universities. The university is not centered around football.
im actually crunching some quick attendance numbers, sticking with Heinz field era..
My man goadie might be on to something. I left 2002 out of it cause that year was bad ass (in a good way). Quick glance (using wiki) and I got '08 and '09 attendance numbers are decent. a lot of these games are consistently in the 40k plus. In 2008, im looking at games like l'ville at 44k, buffalo at 42k, Rutgers at 51k.
in 2012, temple at home, 42k, va tech at 48k, in 2014 I see Akron at 40k, Va tech at 43k, Ga teck at 44k.
I am trying to pick random games in random years, , in conference and Ooc. leaving the wvu, ND games out of it, truly trying to be objective all in an effort to disprove him..
as of now, he's got a valid point.. I truly hate when I work this hard to prove someone wrong and all I do is validate their point and disprove mine..
That stat leads to a question for head coaches. Given one or the other, would it be better to spend resources in the states that produce the greatest number of D1 recruits, or to go to the states that produce the greatest percentage of football players recruited by other D1 schools?
Isn't that the same? Maybe I don't understand what you're asking.
yeah, im with pittdan77 here, is there a difference? Have to imagine these two groups have a strong correlation. You cant be a D1 recruit unless you are being recruited by D1 coaches.
Is there a state out there that has a lot of D1 players that coaches aren't recruiting? If so, lets go to that state and keep it hush hush..
That's probably being facetious. But no matter what 'secret' others will eventually find out. For example i think Pitt mined New Jersey particularly well for talent in the late 70s and 80s, maybe more than contemporaries. I think Penn State and others moved in and ended that fairly soon thereafter. Of course we also had conspicuously decided to get out of the high level recruiting stakes about the same time.
Locally, the Clairton and Aliquippa and Woody Hills mines have recently gone dry for us as others now are more willing to fish in those heretofore 'dirty' waters.
Too bad Jamie is gone, maybe we could have leveraged his New Zealand connections for football.
I always thought we'd have good success in Ohio with Narduzzi but we just seem to be de-escalating our priorities there. we've had 10 total from ohio in 4 classes under Narduzzi (I am not counting '15 or '20) but 1/2 of that was in '16 and I think all ohio recruits that year left the program, doing nothing for us..
zero recruits in ohio last year, 1 the year prior (Bentley). that's discouraging. maybe after that '16 ohio class of Hill, MacVittie, Flowers, Moss, they feel snake bitten, cant say I blame them..
Possibly Kentucky is becoming more competition there (for the Ohio tier that OSU doesn't have space for)? Just a guess.
