ADVERTISEMENT

Mason Heintschel

pittmeister

Assistant Coach
May 26, 2010
9,009
9,311
113
 
GLua9XpX0AAEX9P
 
How long until he switches his commitment to Colorado? 😀
 
I said it in his commitment thread, his tape is impressive. Especially when you consider he's running for his life or has a defender in his face on many of his throws. Juniors in HS who can keep their eyes downfield under a rush, while buying time to complete a pass aren't your everyday find. Good wheels, good vision, and good enough arm. He'll do well in this system.
 
I said it in his commitment thread, his tape is impressive. Especially when you consider he's running for his life or has a defender in his face on many of his throws. Juniors in HS who can keep their eyes downfield under a rush, while buying time to complete a pass aren't your everyday find. Good wheels, good vision, and good enough arm. He'll do well in this system.
Think Pitt did a nice job evaluating and recruiting him. Now the job will be to keep the wolves away.

This is CFB today. Stinks, IMO. But that’s how it is. So you either deal with it or not. 🤷‍♂️
 
EVERY school is being taunted by NIL!
True, but the Blue Bloods have the money to not flinch. Pitt and schools like it do not have that luxury. Pitt had many opportunities over the last 100 years to be I'm that position and they pissed it away every time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: djbpitt
True, but the Blue Bloods have the money to not flinch. Pitt and schools like it do not have that luxury. Pitt had many opportunities over the last 100 years to be I'm that position and they pissed it away every time.
Do you really think that Pitt ever had any prospect of being able to compete with the top level of college football programs? Once money became the driving force in the sport, Pitt was always going to be left behind. Blaming Pitt is like blaming the Sun for hot weather in the summer.
 
Do you really think that Pitt ever had any prospect of being able to compete with the top level of college football programs? Once money became the driving force in the sport, Pitt was always going to be left behind. Blaming Pitt is like blaming the Sun for hot weather in the summer.
In the 1920/30's Pitt was on top and they blew it up. In the 70's they were right there and could of cashed in with the rest of the now blue bloods and they blew it up. So 2 times they could have been blue bloods but they purposely blew it up. In the 80s Pitt's name was right there with all the blue bloods. There was money for them. Now there is not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pittguy81
In the 1920/30's Pitt was on top and they blew it up. In the 70's they were right there and could of cashed in with the rest of the now blue bloods and they blew it up. So 2 times they could have been blue bloods but they purposely blew it up. In the 80s Pitt's name was right there with all the blue bloods. There was money for them. Now there is not.
There's only one true blue blood pro town school in college football and they're in LA. The other was in Miami but has floundered. Think it's pretty tough for a pro town school to be a blue blood in football.
 
  • Like
Reactions: singregardless
Do you really think that Pitt ever had any prospect of being able to compete with the top level of college football programs? Once money became the driving force in the sport, Pitt was always going to be left behind. Blaming Pitt is like blaming the Sun for hot weather in the summer.
For decade from the mid 1970's to the mid 1980's Pitt was like Georgia/Alabama/OSU etc. Once again, our egg heads got in the way because they thought that sports were getting too big and important. The forced Jackie Sherrill out and then the killer B's tanked the program. Pitt boosters had plenty of money and the Golden Panthers distributed it liberally.....and the killer B's ruined that as well
 
  • Like
Reactions: 303vND and Mikefln
There's only one true blue blood pro town school in college football and they're in LA. The other was in Miami but has floundered. Think it's pretty tough for a pro town school to be a blue blood in football.
Agree it is tougher in a pro town, but not impossible. Not sure if you are still Pittsburgh based or if you are out of the area. If you are still around, think of how many college football fans there are in WPA who are fans of other teams? Think if Pitt was good in the 40's to 60's and didn't completely suck in the 90's that they couldn't be a blue blood?

On YouTube there is a Pitt vs Ohio St game from 87 I believe. It was 2 blue bloods playing against each other. What caused the change? Pitt leadership did, and the lack of money followed.
 
For decade from the mid 1970's to the mid 1980's Pitt was like Georgia/Alabama/OSU etc. Once again, our egg heads got in the way because they thought that sports were getting too big and important. The forced Jackie Sherrill out and then the killer B's tanked the program. Pitt boosters had plenty of money and the Golden Panthers distributed it liberally.....and the killer B's ruined that as well
Yep 💯
 
  • Like
Reactions: bschulter
For decade from the mid 1970's to the mid 1980's Pitt was like Georgia/Alabama/OSU etc.


And in typical Pitt fashion, our decade at the top really only lasted for six years, from 1976 to 1981. If you want to stretch it to seven and include 1982 I think that's fair. But by 83 the downslide had started (although we didn't really recognize it yet) and by 84 it was clearly over.

And of course what that really means is that while we did have that stretch of great football, we were never a blue blood at that time. Or really any time after the 30s.
 
There's only one true blue blood pro town school in college football and they're in LA. The other was in Miami but has floundered. Think it's pretty tough for a pro town school to be a blue blood in football.

Imagine if the Rooney's settled in Columbus instead. The roles of Pitt-O$U might have been reversed. Columbus isn't that much smaller than Pittsburgh, although the O$U location/setup in Columbus is a lot different than Pitt/Oakland.
 
For decade from the mid 1970's to the mid 1980's Pitt was like Georgia/Alabama/OSU etc. Once again, our egg heads got in the way because they thought that sports were getting too big and important. The forced Jackie Sherrill out and then the killer B's tanked the program. Pitt boosters had plenty of money and the Golden Panthers distributed it liberally.....and the killer B's ruined that as well

Things were rolling. It was a master class on how to kill a program led by Posvar and Ed Bozik. How they didn't have the foresight to realize it was football that drove the bus and put their eggs in the Big East basket was a decision that haunts the program to this day. Single worse decision in the history of Pitt sports (well, I guess technically the decision to hire Bozik was the worst).

No reason things couldn't have continued. Golden Panthers were as strong as any booster group in college football. Had the "wheels of support" with Baierl, among other things. Sad to think about it really.
 
And in typical Pitt fashion, our decade at the top really only lasted for six years, from 1976 to 1981. If you want to stretch it to seven and include 1982 I think that's fair. But by 83 the downslide had started (although we didn't really recognize it yet) and by 84 it was clearly over.

And of course what that really means is that while we did have that stretch of great football, we were never a blue blood at that time. Or really any time after the 30s.
Look at the talent on those teams that didn't have great records. Pitt was DEFINITELY a Blue Blood. I don;t get the Pitt fan's tendency to self loathing.
 
Look at the talent on those teams that didn't have great records. Pitt was DEFINITELY a Blue Blood. I don;t get the Pitt fan's tendency to self loathing.
Seriously look at that 89 sun bowl team. Completely loaded with NFL talent in all grades. Did they put it all together for a top 5 season? No, but they had top 5 talent. That was easily the most talent rich team Pitt has had since.
 
Look at the talent on those teams that didn't have great records. Pitt was DEFINITELY a Blue Blood. I don;t get the Pitt fan's tendency to self loathing.

You can't become a blue blood in six years. Georgia is not a blue blood, and look at their historical records - including having won 2 of the last 3 national championships - compared to ours.
 
I'm self-loathing because I don't want to call a 6-year version of Pitt a blue blood and then mourn their departure from that status?

More like Yinzernomics in action.
You need to look at the talent on the rest of the 80s teams. It was off the charts. I was to young to explain why it didn't show up in wins, but the talent level would rival any top 10 team in the 80s.
 
You need to look at the talent on the rest of the 80s teams. It was off the charts. I was to young to explain why it didn't show up in wins, but the talent level would rival any top 10 team in the 80s.

I'm not denying that, but it doesn't make a school a blue blood. Just like Georgia - whose talent has been off the charts lately and who has won more than we ever have - still isn't a blue blood.

Pitt football had a hell of a run, but it's just a blip on the radar in the modern era. Clemson isn't a blue blood, either. Not even close. But I get it - fans live through certain eras and will always think their school can get back to that. If Clemson has another period like they had from 1991 - 2010, you can bet there will be fans citing their 2012 - 2020 run and proclaiming they can get back to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PITTstorm
I'm not denying that, but it doesn't make a school a blue blood. Just like Georgia - whose talent has been off the charts lately and who has won more than we ever have - still isn't a blue blood.

Pitt football had a hell of a run, but it's just a blip on the radar in the modern era. Clemson isn't a blue blood, either. Not even close. But I get it - fans live through certain eras and will always think their school can get back to that. If Clemson has another period like they had from 1991 - 2010, you can bet there will be fans citing their 2012 - 2020 run and proclaiming they can get back to that.
Who doesn't consider Georgia a blue blood? I see what you are saying about Clemson and I agree. I would call them a bubble blue blood. Pitt could have been that, but self sabotage is the top tool Pitt administration does.

For sh*t and giggles who do you call blue bloods if you don't consider Georgia to be one?
 
Who doesn't consider Georgia a blue blood? I see what you are saying about Clemson and I agree. I would call them a bubble blue blood. Pitt could have been that, but self sabotage is the top tool Pitt administration does.

For sh*t and giggles who do you call blue bloods if you don't consider Georgia to be one?

It's a little subjective. But I'd say Ohio State, Michigan, and Alabama are the no-brainers.

Next tier maybe Notre Dame, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Georgia, Florida, LSU.

Some of other candidates for that second tier - or perhaps you could even say the next tier down - would be like Nebraska (that seems like a really tough sell now though), Penn State, Tennessee, etc.

But I don't even think Clemson is in the discussion. Maybe they're in the discussion for that third tier, along with some of the aforementioned and Florida State, Miami (another weird one, honestly), Auburn, Oregon, A&M, etc.
 
It's a little subjective. But I'd say Ohio State, Michigan, and Alabama are the no-brainers.

Next tier maybe Notre Dame, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Georgia, Florida, LSU.

Some of other candidates for that second tier - or perhaps you could even say the next tier down - would be like Nebraska (that seems like a really tough sell now though), Penn State, Tennessee, etc.

But I don't even think Clemson is in the discussion. Maybe they're in the discussion for that third tier, along with some of the aforementioned and Florida State, Miami (another weird one, honestly), Auburn, Oregon, A&M, etc.
One of my criteria to be a blue-blood is that it not be coach-dependent. In other words, the dominance is sustained over multiple coaches. That eliminates Clemson.

I wouldn't include Penn State, because it rarely, if ever, contend for the national title post-Paterno.
 
One of my criteria to be a blue-blood is that it not be coach-dependent. In other words, the dominance is sustained over multiple coaches. That eliminates Clemson.

I wouldn't include Penn State, because it rarely, if ever, contend for the national title post-Paterno.

That's not a bad criteria. Like even though Coach K made Duke a blue blood, it wouldn't matter who they hired now - they'd still be one.

I don't include Penn State in that blue blood tier. Just a matter if they're in the next tier down or the one after that.
 
Who doesn't consider Georgia a blue blood? I see what you are saying about Clemson and I agree. I would call them a bubble blue blood. Pitt could have been that, but self sabotage is the top tool Pitt administration does.

For sh*t and giggles who do you call blue bloods if you don't consider Georgia to be one?
 
It's a little subjective. But I'd say Ohio State, Michigan, and Alabama are the no-brainers.

Next tier maybe Notre Dame, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Georgia, Florida, LSU.

Some of other candidates for that second tier - or perhaps you could even say the next tier down - would be like Nebraska (that seems like a really tough sell now though), Penn State, Tennessee, etc.

But I don't even think Clemson is in the discussion. Maybe they're in the discussion for that third tier, along with some of the aforementioned and Florida State, Miami (another weird one, honestly), Auburn, Oregon, A&M, etc.
Alabama before Saban was average. Ohio St under Cooper average. Michigan under RichRod and Hoke sucked. All schools go through peaks and valleys. Some are just more pronounce than others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bjcarroll9
One of my criteria to be a blue-blood is that it not be coach-dependent. In other words, the dominance is sustained over multiple coaches. That eliminates Clemson.

I wouldn't include Penn State, because it rarely, if ever, contend for the national title post-Paterno.
Then no school is a blue blood with your criteria.
 
For decade from the mid 1970's to the mid 1980's Pitt was like Georgia/Alabama/OSU etc. Once again, our egg heads got in the way because they thought that sports were getting too big and important. The forced Jackie Sherrill out and then the killer B's tanked the program. Pitt boosters had plenty of money and the Golden Panthers distributed it liberally.....and the killer B's ruined that as well
They didn't force Jackie Sherrill out. He left for a then-unprecedented amount of money. Not sure there was much anyone could have done about it.
 
Alabama before Saban was average. Ohio St under Cooper average. Michigan under RichRod and Hoke sucked. All schools go through peaks and valleys. Some are just more pronounce than others.

Bear Bryant wasn't average. It can't just be as simple as looking at a team's recent record, though. It transcends all that. If Missouri finds a way to win 5 of the next 10 national championships, they're still not a blue blood. Just like Ohio State still is a blue blood even if they go 0-12 the next five seasons.
 
Bear Bryant wasn't average. It can't just be as simple as looking at a team's recent record, though. It transcends all that. If Missouri finds a way to win 5 of the next 10 national championships, they're still not a blue blood. Just like Ohio State still is a blue blood even if they go 0-12 the next five seasons.
I agree but your parameters of what makes a blue blood is lacking imo. You have Notre Dame in your next tier. They are as blue blood as it gets.

MY LIST:

Alabama
Clemson
Florida St
Florida
Georgia
LSU
Michigan
Notre Dame
Ohio St
Oklahoma
Penn St
Tennessee
Texas
Texas A&M
 USC

Next tier

Auburn
Miami-
Nebraska - they are a shell of themselves and the biggest victim of the new landscape of cfb
Oregon- Johnny come lately because of Nike.
 
Look at the talent on those teams that didn't have great records. Pitt was DEFINITELY a Blue Blood. I don;t get the Pitt fan's tendency to self loathing.


Those teams did have some great talent. But they didn't win. And if you don't win, you aren't a blue blood.

Pitt was a blue blood back in the 20s (the other one, not this one) and 30s. Pitt was not a blue blood in the late 70s and early 80s, because you have to win for more than six or seven years to be a blue blood.

There's a difference between being one of the top programs at any given moment and being a blue blood. At least in my opinion. You opinion can be different, and that's OK. I mean you'd be wrong, but that's OK! ;)
 
I agree but your parameters of what makes a blue blood is lacking imo. You have Notre Dame in your next tier. They are as blue blood as it gets.

MY LIST:

Alabama
Clemson
Florida St
Florida
Georgia
LSU
Michigan
Notre Dame
Ohio St
Oklahoma
Penn St
Tennessee
Texas
Texas A&M
 USC

Next tier

Auburn
Miami-
Nebraska - they are a shell of themselves and the biggest victim of the new landscape of cfb
Oregon- Johnny come lately because of Nike.

See I don't think 20% of the P4 teams can be blue bloods. But it's certainly subjective. I would put it like this, where most teams can move up or down a tier based on opinion. I'm separating 3 into subcategories, but they're still all tier 3.

1. Bluest of Bloods:
Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan

2. Good Case:
Notre Dame, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Georgia, Florida, LSU

3A. Has Beens
Nebraska, Penn State, Tennessee, Miami, etc.

3B. Newbies
Clemson, Oregon

3C. Not Quites
A&M, Florida State, Auburn
 
One of my criteria to be a blue-blood is that it not be coach-dependent. In other words, the dominance is sustained over multiple coaches. That eliminates Clemson.

I wouldn't include Penn State, because it rarely, if ever, contend for the national title post-Paterno.
Every school’s success is coach dependent…look no further than Alabama, Michigan and USC. It may be true, however, that some schools have been more willing than others to pay big bucks for the best coaches so that after hiring a dud they follow that up eventually with a successful hire. Alabama, Michigan and USC all went thru periods when they were coached by duds and their records reflected that.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT