ADVERTISEMENT

Magazine Pre season predictions

jivecat

Senior
Jul 5, 2001
4,538
1,019
113
For those who resist digital delivery of information, I paged through a pre season college football publication. I won't say which one. They had the PITT over/under at 6 wins. The schedule is not very difficult (on paper) but it made it clear that this is one of our weaker teams in the past 10 years. It seems if we are definitely middle of the pack but could drop to the lower end if we drop games to BC, Cuse, and Louisville. I'll give Narduzzi his due, he always has this team ready to play hard regardless if they have the talent. I am optimistically giving us 7 wins with the highlight win being the "novelty" game against Cal.
 
7-5, with this offensive talent (or lack of), especially at WR. i'll sign up for that right now.. That would be a win for narduzzi, even with this schedule.

it takes 3 years minimum to implement a whole new offensive system. pitt fans need to be patient on this process and getting players recruited to play into it.
 
I don't know why people are surprised. We were 3-9 last year. We lost some guys who were being counted on. We really don't have many playmakers. We are breaking in a completely new offense this year, and sometimes that takes a season or so of reps to get it down.

I am thinking 5-7 is about as good as it is going to get this year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jctrack
I recently picked up Phil Steele and Pick 6 Previews. Both are very computer, analytic centric.

You don’t appreciate how bad the offense was until you see Pick 6’s analytic column laying out the specific categories of the offense.

98 in points per play.
88 in yards per play.
116 in scoring and total offense.

119 in OL-Run Push (this is rush yards attributed to the OL doing its job)
100 in Explosive Rush

Oddly enough, as bad as the passing offense was, it at least ranked in the “yellow” in some categories.
45 in explosive pass is at least something.

Defense was way better, at least in the rushing defense.
32 in yards per carry.
22 in negative play yards.
43 in explosive rush.

The passing defense was worse than I remembered. With every category being in the red.
122 in explosive pass rate and 94 in completion % were daggers last year.

The offense could make huge improvements, and that would still be a bad offense, just because of how bad it was last year. Probably something to keep in mind when judging the offense this year.

Really, the key to the season will be the defense. Assuming the offense does make a reasonable jump, and that still results in a bad offense, the defense at least needs to hold serve. Pick 6 had it at 25th last year when adjusting for competition and pace of play and situations the offense puts it in.

Top 25 defense and a bad offense? Probably enough to go bowling again. Bad offense and bad defense? Probably not.
 
I recently picked up Phil Steele and Pick 6 Previews. Both are very computer, analytic centric.

You don’t appreciate how bad the offense was until you see Pick 6’s analytic column laying out the specific categories of the offense.

98 in points per play.
88 in yards per play.
116 in scoring and total offense.

119 in OL-Run Push (this is rush yards attributed to the OL doing its job)
100 in Explosive Rush

Oddly enough, as bad as the passing offense was, it at least ranked in the “yellow” in some categories.
45 in explosive pass is at least something.

Defense was way better, at least in the rushing defense.
32 in yards per carry.
22 in negative play yards.
43 in explosive rush.

The passing defense was worse than I remembered. With every category being in the red.
122 in explosive pass rate and 94 in completion % were daggers last year.

The offense could make huge improvements, and that would still be a bad offense, just because of how bad it was last year. Probably something to keep in mind when judging the offense this year.

Really, the key to the season will be the defense. Assuming the offense does make a reasonable jump, and that still results in a bad offense, the defense at least needs to hold serve. Pick 6 had it at 25th last year when adjusting for competition and pace of play and situations the offense puts it in.

Top 25 defense and a bad offense? Probably enough to go bowling again. Bad offense and bad defense? Probably not.
Fair to say the offense can't be worse than last year?
 
This team will actually be less talented than last year's team. But the schedule has one more freebie and the QB position will hopefully not be historically bad again.

5 or 6 wins is how I see it. And I don't see us scoring very many points.
 
Well it's definitely better than Connelly is predicting for Pitt.
TEAMSP+ (RK)OFF.DEF.AVG. WCONF. WSOS RK
Florida St.21.4 (12)36.9 (16)15.5 (10)9.36.232
Clemson19.8 (14)37.0 (15)17.1 (13)9.16.330
Miami14.4 (19)36.9 (18)22.5 (36)8.85.562
SMU12.9 (23)36.3 (22)23.4 (39)9.15.684
Louisville10.8 (28)29.6 (57)18.9 (23)7.65.240
NC St.10.6 (29)29.7 (56)19.1 (25)8.55.465
Va. Tech9.7 (32)31.5 (42)21.7 (33)8.45.182
Duke4.6 (47)26.5 (70)21.9 (34)6.73.354
N. Carolina3.8 (50)32.1 (36)28.3 (65)7.24.374
California1.9 (52)32.6 (34)30.7 (88)6.13.549
Ga. Tech-0.6 (63)32.5 (35)33.2 (99)4.22.315
Syracuse-0.9 (64)25.7 (73)26.6 (54)6.23.490
Boston Coll.-3.8 (75)25.2 (77)29.1 (72)4.62.538
Virginia-4.5 (77)25.5 (75)29.9 (81)4.12.542
Wake Forest-4.5 (78)23.0 (86)27.4 (59)4.72.444
Pittsburgh-4.8 (81)21.5 (97)26.4 (53)4.62.564
Stanford-5.6 (84)26.0 (71)31.6 (94)3.82.033



 
Well it's definitely better than Connelly is predicting for Pitt.
TEAMSP+ (RK)OFF.DEF.AVG. WCONF. WSOS RK
Florida St.21.4 (12)36.9 (16)15.5 (10)9.36.232
Clemson19.8 (14)37.0 (15)17.1 (13)9.16.330
Miami14.4 (19)36.9 (18)22.5 (36)8.85.562
SMU12.9 (23)36.3 (22)23.4 (39)9.15.684
Louisville10.8 (28)29.6 (57)18.9 (23)7.65.240
NC St.10.6 (29)29.7 (56)19.1 (25)8.55.465
Va. Tech9.7 (32)31.5 (42)21.7 (33)8.45.182
Duke4.6 (47)26.5 (70)21.9 (34)6.73.354
N. Carolina3.8 (50)32.1 (36)28.3 (65)7.24.374
California1.9 (52)32.6 (34)30.7 (88)6.13.549
Ga. Tech-0.6 (63)32.5 (35)33.2 (99)4.22.315
Syracuse-0.9 (64)25.7 (73)26.6 (54)6.23.490
Boston Coll.-3.8 (75)25.2 (77)29.1 (72)4.62.538
Virginia-4.5 (77)25.5 (75)29.9 (81)4.12.542
Wake Forest-4.5 (78)23.0 (86)27.4 (59)4.72.444
Pittsburgh-4.8 (81)21.5 (97)26.4 (53)4.62.564
Stanford-5.6 (84)26.0 (71)31.6 (94)3.82.033




Seems more realistic than some of the predictions I'm seeing casually getting tossed around. I watched one of those Peak and Jim podcasts about a month and a half ago, and it's just absurd how out of touch fans are (I think even Peak predicted like 8 wins). This team sucks. We lost to 1-7 in conference Wake Forest, 1-8 in conference Cincinnati, and 2-6 in conference Syracuse last season. And then we lost our top 5 d-linemen.

I'm willing to leave a little wiggle room, because a lot of things can happen in college football, but I'd love to know how anyone can predict stuff like 8-4, 9-3, or 10-2 with a straight face.
 
Seems more realistic than some of the predictions I'm seeing casually getting tossed around. I watched one of those Peak and Jim podcasts about a month and a half ago, and it's just absurd how out of touch fans are (I think even Peak predicted like 8 wins). This team sucks. We lost to 1-7 in conference Wake Forest, 1-8 in conference Cincinnati, and 2-6 in conference Syracuse last season. And then we lost our top 5 d-linemen.

I'm willing to leave a little wiggle room, because a lot of things can happen in college football, but I'd love to know how anyone can predict stuff like 8-4, 9-3, or 10-2 with a straight face.

Peak does what a lot of fans do:

He keeps all other teams stagnant, and changes the dial up on some aspect of the team he cheers for.

His Win Total podcast was basically just 45 minutes of him doing that

“With average QB play Pitt would have beaten WVU and Syracuse and etc., and I think Pitt will get at least average QB play next year, therefore increase the win total this year by 3 or 4.”

The problem with that is average QB play does not beat the team WVU became by like Week 6 or 7. That got wayyyy better once they found their QB. They started dominating a lot of P4 teams.

Syracuse played last year with a TE at QB. Do we think it’s possible that average QB play maybe doesn’t beat a Syracuse team playing an actual QB at QB?
 
Peak does what a lot of fans do:

He keeps all other teams stagnant, and changes the dial up on some aspect of the team he cheers for.

His Win Total podcast was basically just 45 minutes of him doing that

“With average QB play Pitt would have beaten WVU and Syracuse and etc., and I think Pitt will get at least average QB play next year, therefore increase the win total this year by 3 or 4.”

The problem with that is average QB play does not beat the team WVU became by like Week 6 or 7. That got wayyyy better once they found their QB. They started dominating a lot of P4 teams.

Syracuse played last year with a TE at QB. Do we think it’s possible that average QB play maybe doesn’t beat a Syracuse team playing an actual QB at QB?

I'm also not ready to call Nate Yarnell average, yet. He may be. He may even be very good. But I'll need to see it first. I'll need to see if Cignetti truly was incompetent enough to relegate an average starter to third string while playing the two guys he did ahead of him last season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mikefln
Peak does what a lot of fans do:

He keeps all other teams stagnant, and changes the dial up on some aspect of the team he cheers for.

His Win Total podcast was basically just 45 minutes of him doing that

“With average QB play Pitt would have beaten WVU and Syracuse and etc., and I think Pitt will get at least average QB play next year, therefore increase the win total this year by 3 or 4.”

The problem with that is average QB play does not beat the team WVU became by like Week 6 or 7. That got wayyyy better once they found their QB. They started dominating a lot of P4 teams.

Syracuse played last year with a TE at QB. Do we think it’s possible that average QB play maybe doesn’t beat a Syracuse team playing an actual QB at QB?
But isnt that what you are doing? Because you are basing this season on last season. So you are keeping Pitt stagnant.

None of you, just like none of those guys making predictions have any knowledge what Pitt or any other team is going to do. Pitt changed its whole offense, which it needed to do. Based on that alone, noone has a clue what will happen.
 
The problem with that is average QB play does not beat the team WVU became by like Week 6 or 7. That got wayyyy better once they found their QB. They started dominating a lot of P4 teams.


Starting with their sixth game, West Virginia lost (to a team that only won one other conference game all season), lost, beat a team that went 3-6 in conference, then one that went 2-7, then lost to a good team by 39, then beat a team that went 1-8 and one that went 2-7. They literally did not beat one good team in that stretch. Now to be fair, they only played one good team in that stretch. But they lost that game 59-20. The best team they beat in conference all season finished tied for 7th. The combined conference records of the teams that they beat was 16-38.

They beat a bunch of bad teams. Us included. And hey, that beats the alternative. But the only way you can say they got wayyyy better is if you ignore who they played.
 
Starting with their sixth game, West Virginia lost (to a team that only won one other conference game all season), lost, beat a team that went 3-6 in conference, then one that went 2-7, then lost to a good team by 39, then beat a team that went 1-8 and one that went 2-7. They literally did not beat one good team in that stretch. Now to be fair, they only played one good team in that stretch. But they lost that game 59-20. The best team they beat in conference all season finished tied for 7th. The combined conference records of the teams that they beat was 16-38.

They beat a bunch of bad teams. Us included. And hey, that beats the alternative. But the only way you can say they got wayyyy better is if you ignore who they played.

I’m going by their analytic numbers. Which doesn’t ignore who they played, but accounts for it.

They played bad teams. Fine. But I’m more interested in how they played them?

The team that played Pitt was as bad as Pitt. Meaning it graded out at a bottom tier level.

The team by the mid-way point graded out:

73.2UCF
93.5
1.1
77.8
56.6
87.7 UNC (I hate using bowls, but whatever)

That is wayyyy better in terms of objective quality compared to early in the year. Which is why they finished as a Top 40 team in the analytics.
 
Analytics behind baseball seem to be an great indicator but I am not as sold on football.
 
Analytics behind baseball seem to be an great indicator but I am not as sold on football.

I can’t find it at the moment.
But somebody once did a study and looked at some analytic model’s power ranking vs W-L record, and tried to see which one was a better predictor of future success. Bill Parcells’ “you are what your record says you are” put to the test.
It found that the analytic power ranking was the better predictor of future success than your record was. Basically your record will end up reflecting where the analytics say you should be based on your level of play.
 
I can’t find it at the moment.
But somebody once did a study and looked at some analytic model’s power ranking vs W-L record, and tried to see which one was a better predictor of future success. Bill Parcells’ “you are what your record says you are” put to the test.
It found that the analytic power ranking was the better predictor of future success than your record was. Basically your record will end up reflecting where the analytics say you should be based on your level of play.
4-4 and 7-5.
 
Not a magazine prediction. But Cover 3 Podcast did their O/U win totals for the second half of the ACC.

Kanell was on the under for Pitt.
But the other 3 were all on the over.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT