Narduzzi getting on the OC
- Thread starter pittman71
- Start date
Can't imagine Narduzzi being loyal to people who don't perform. But a few more instances of Narduzzi getting on the OC in front of everyone and he may quit before he gets fired
That would clearly be torture, he really should lose some weight, for health reasons
I was at the game so I did not see Narduzzi getting on anyone. However, if he is upset with any of his coaches he should save that for the locker room. There is no reason to EVER embarrass anyone out there - if that is indeed what happened.
Look, I was as frustrated as anyone with the lack of organization at the end of the first half. Also, some of the play calling was not good. However, we are still 6-2 and this guy has done a good job given some of the cards he's been dealt.
Deal with these things in house. That is ALWAYS the best option.
Look, I was as frustrated as anyone with the lack of organization at the end of the first half. Also, some of the play calling was not good. However, we are still 6-2 and this guy has done a good job given some of the cards he's been dealt.
Deal with these things in house. That is ALWAYS the best option.
he did lose his composure on the sideline for the first time this season. It was pretty obvious throughout the night that he was frustrated with the offense. Never more so than when we went three and out after the blocked punt and had to settle for a field goal. Huge squandered opportunity right there. He also looked pretty pissed when we ran the sneak on 3rd and 1 to begin the 4th quarter and didn't get one yard when we really needed to sustain a drive and score.
We have been living dangerously with that possession, low YPP offense all year, it was just a matter of time.
The thing Narduzzi was getting on Chaney about was the delay in plays being called into the game play after play at a critical time with time running out in the half. It is a head coach's job to maximize an effort during the game and if that means lighting a fire under your OC's butt and saying, "get the plays in faster" when he isn't moving fast enough, then so be it.
Pitt had a legitimate chance to score points and close the gap at the end of the half and Chaney was not understanding the urgency of the situation. Even Peterman was growing frustrated and motioning to bring the plays in faster. If he would have waited until halftime to speak up, Pitt wouldn't even have had time for the desperation toss in the end zone.
Most good coaches will speak up "in the moment" to do whatever they can to not miss the opportunity at hand. Nick Saban has been known to speak up on the sideline if it might mean the difference in the game. Brian Kelly has done it. Lou Holtz used to do it. It's nothing personal... Good coaches can't worry about hurting someone's feelings when the game is on the line.
If he blurted out to Chaney something mean like "you are a terrible coach" in front of the players and fans, then of course that would not be acceptable. This is a learning moment for Narduzzi. As a head coach now , he now should realize it is up to him to make sure his team has a 2 and 1 minute drill in place with plays ready to go.
Last edited:
I disagree. If you are already pressed for time the last thing Chaney - or anyone else needs - is to have to manage the game AND his boss. Time is of the essence there. Don;t you think everyone involved realized that they were too slow? So why make it slower?
Save the histrionics for halftime and film study the next day.
Save the histrionics for halftime and film study the next day.
I think PN has a unique way of creating relationships where people know he cares and "jumping down their throats" is more about expectations then personal attacks. This is pretty obviously to see in the energy levels of the players even after getting dogged.
I agree with Doc. Narduzzi's behavior during and post-game in regards to Chaney was a little unprofessional and he has to be careful. If he is searching for a new OC, dont think that candidates won't know how he embarrassed Chaney on national TV. That said, Narduzzi is such a 360 degree change that I'm ok with it for now. Chryst looked dead on the sideline. Narduzzi looks like he is living and dying with every play. Teams are a reflection of their coach. Football needs to be played with passion and while I dont agree with embarrassing people in public, O absolutely love Narduzzi's passion.
Narduzzi obviously wears his emotions on his sleeve. But going off on anyone on the sidelines doesn't help anyone. Save it for closed doors. I noticed on the Ford fumble he came after Ford too. I always found talking go the coach or player in a calm manner, but still getting your point across always got much better results than screaming at them on the sidelines in front of everyone. I've coached with coaches who acted like lunatics in front of other players, fans, the other team's players and I never saw good results come of it.
You guys kill me. Where the hell do you work. Your boss ever make you accountable for stupid mistakes? You think the head coach has to be some genteel, kindly gentleman. This is football you dumb a$$es. This was the 2nd week in a row that the offense squandered an opportunity to score right before the half (same thing happened in Cuse game) because our obese, slow thinking OC is not getting the plays in quickly. Duzzi was simply trying to tell Chaney to stop thinking about his half time donut and get focused on play calling. I am glad Duzzi made Chaney accountable.
If you are a boss or a coach you try to get the best out of your staff and players. Humiliating them in front of others never accomplishes that. If you want to talk accountability, did Narduzzi not hire Chaney? So who is accountable? I have coached many years and I can honestly say that my players and coaches appreciated me for the way I handled them. I know my players would run through a wall for me because of that.
This.... Somebody isn't performing they hear about it but his guys love him.
I was at the game, so I don't know who was yelling at who. If Chaney did what you say, then he is in the wrong. Kids get emotional in games, the coaches are supposed to be the adults and role models. They need to see that someone is in control and you always have to be positive. I've had kids in my face, I just try to calm them down and calmly resolve the issue in a positive way.
No team is immune to adversity. It could happen during a game or a season. A coach has to be calm and positive and pretty much act like nothing surprises them. The players do not need to see a raving lunatic or they may lose faith and the coach may lose the team. All coaches go through this.
No team is immune to adversity. It could happen during a game or a season. A coach has to be calm and positive and pretty much act like nothing surprises them. The players do not need to see a raving lunatic or they may lose faith and the coach may lose the team. All coaches go through this.
Last edited:
I was at the game as well. At some point I said if Chaney did what was said also because it was just what I heard on the radio. The guys on the radio also said they were at the game, but that were rumblings of that being the case when Chaney decided to bench Ollison.
So I'm not even totally sure if he and Ollison were in an argument, but I'm just saying that a) if that's the case, absolutely uncalled for, Chaney needs to worry about helping the team win by doing his job, something that other than a missed block Ollison had been doing... and b) people saying Narduzzi should have not yelled at Chaney on the sideline are too sensitive, he's a grown man that's paid to be a coach, do your job or someone is gonna have something to say about it.
As why I like many of your posts. You've been in these situations and know what it's like. 100% agree, if something did arise between the two, Chaney is to blame mainly because from the sounds of it he didn't even try explaining to the kid what he did wrong, he just screamed at him and pulled him from the game. Not how a coach should talk to a college athlete.
I'm not saying you are wrong. I just try to give examples of things I went through to maybe help others understand who haven't coached. There are many different coaching philosophies and personalities and people use what is best for them.
As for me, I always thought it was best to keep my emotions in check because everyone around me would be showing their emotions freely. A football game is a very emotional event and you have to not show yours as much so you look like you are in control at all times. The kids need that person who is a rock and gives them confidence even though at times I just wanted to blow up. I believed that coaches need their players and coaches to not only have respect for them, but have faith in them and trust that I would be fair and do what is right. I didn't demand respect, I wanted to earn it.
A football game is a long and draining experience and everyone is going to make a mistake at some point, players and coaches and even the head coach. Some of those mistakes will be big and come at the worst possible times. You can't just lose faith in the kid, so you have to put him back out there at some point but not put him in a position where he can fail again. If he makes a mistake, bring him out of the game and calmly tell him what he did wrong, ask him what his thought process was as he tried to make the play. Get into his head and see what he was thinking and then try to get him to see where his mistake was and correct it. Sometimes they will get frustrated and get in your face, but you just have to be the bigger man.
I remember when I played, I didn't like the coaches who reamed kids and other coaches out in the middle of games in front of others. In my experiences, it never accomplished anything and caused even more breakdowns and when adversity struck we lost faith in those coaches because we felt they were not in control. I felt we didn't respond to them as well. It was the coaches who were always positive and acted like they believed in us as players, even if they had no reason to. So I tried to be that coach I wanted to play for. For me it worked because that was my personality. For other coaches, it may not work.
I just wanted to mention that I was there as well and didn't actually see an argument either, it was just a big topic on the radio today. I didn't take anything you said as a disagreement and I as I said I totally agree with most of your posts. That last sentence of yours in the attached quote is as true of a statement that I've heard in a while. No offense meant to any others, but it's always great to hear someone's input that has been involved in coaching as opposed to armchair quarterbacks.
I still don't have an answer as to why Ollison only got 10 carries. That hurt us on that QB sneak which killed us completely. I know that a lot of defensive coaches like offenses that just manage the game, but Narduzzi seems to take a lot of chances which leads me to believe he is not that type of coach. But Pitt has become quite predictable on offense and being held to a field goal after the punt block was a HUGE win for UNC. Pitt has Notre Dame and Duke coming up. Pitt's first real test in the face of adversity. We will see what kind of coach Narduzzi really is.
Absolutely baffling and the main reason I'm so livid about Chaney. I think Narduzzi "is" the guy for Pitt, Chaney is just not up to par right now though.
Actually the opposite. It's a team sport and I feel you should be rewarded by championships or if a player does something extraordinary. I hate trophies and that participation mentality because it gives kids nothing to work for.
Apparently it didn't sink in with Chaney, because he was slow at getting the plays in several times in a row. Like I mentioned before, even Peterman was motioning to the sideline on consecutive plays to hurry up with the call.
Not sure how you can disagree, when, as you pointed out, you were at the game and did not see what was going on. I was watching the game on TV and they clearly showed the situation on the sidelines. It was unacceptable how long it was taking him to call in the plays... He probably wasted 10 more seconds than he should have, which likely cost Pitt points.
Are you saying Narduzzi should have just kept quiet with a big smile on his face while Chaney continued to take his time and in doing so would not even have had time left for a shot at scoring points? Then get into the locker room and say, "Hey, you know I didn't want to interfere with your methodical play calling out there... But you know how the clock expired while you were still deciding on a play... Yeah... Well... I'm thinking next time, we might want to get the plays in a little faster because your actions just may have made it next to impossible for us to come back in this game. But that's okay, because winning isn't everything and there's always next week or maybe the week after that to get it right.
Pat Narduzzi is a coach who demands excellence... instead of waiting until the game is over and a loss has officially occurred, this guy is fighting and scraping to get the best from everyone "in real time" when there is still an opportunity to win.
I don't think he should throw anyone under the bus, but he also shouldn't have to wait until the game or half is over to light the fire under the tails of any of his players or coaches. We've already had a coach (Chryst) who was silent on the sidelines and just said things during post game presses like, "I liked the effort" even when we all knew the effort was crap and we all knew he was oaky about accepting a mediocre effort from his coaches, his players and himself.
I agree that he might want to be a little more careful with his language during the post game press conference. But during the game, he needs to do what he has to in order to win.
Last edited:
The Dooz is struggling a bit with what every first time manager struggles with when he has an experienced subordinate reporting to him. The conundrum is: how much rope do you give the subordinate without micromanaging him. Bottom line though is the buck stops with the Dooz and if there is a significant philosophical difference with a coordinator then he should settle that difference between games(and not in the press conference following the game) and the HC has final say on the matter. The OC has to call the game according to the HC's philosophical leanings. How this team uses Ollison and in what situations they should rely on him should have been resolved by now. This issue first surfaced in the Iowa game when Pitt didn't use Ollison much and the run game struggled. If this team wants to play ball control FB centered on a running game, Ollison needs 85% of the snaps and should always be in the game in redzone situations. The HC needs to ensure the OC gets it and sticks to it.
I mentioned above in my response to Dr. Von Yinzer days ago that Kelly and Saban yell at their assistants (as did Holtz). Hearing that Kelly did it on Saturday just validates my point that many of the best coaches will get on an assistant if they are screwing up. While it is probably is not necessary to grab an assistant, a good coach will do what he believes is necessary DURING THE GAME to get things right and hopefully still come away with a victory.
Being passive when you see things spiraling out of control, is not how to win games. Again, I would never condone a coach yelling at another coach or player with the intent to humiliate them. That is hardly the case here. I have no problem with a coach raising his voice to get through to someone, when that person continues to make the same mistakes again and again.
Hugh, I agree the plays needed to come in faster, especially where we burnt 10 to 12 seconds right before half. However, Peterman, instead of motioning over to the sideline with a frustrated look, should have taken a time out. He's the QB and he's been around the block. Not to shift blame or responsibility, he could have easily called for a time out. We had all three left.
I really like what you wrote here. Think you nailed some issues going on and how they should be addressed.
Clearly Narduzzi was hoping he could let Chaney run the offense, but has since come to the conclusion it is not that easy. As a HC you have a vision of how you want things to happen. To be a successful HC you must make sure everyone is on the same page. That means the head coach and the coordinators knowing and agreeing on the game plan of before the game. It also means not deviating from the plan of Using a certain feature back who gives the team the best chance of success, if that indeed was the plan. It means making sure everyone understands the urgency of calling quick plays when time is running out.
To that point, I think it is not only okay but wise for the HC to speak up during the game if the reason is to try to fix something at that moment of the game which may actually help the team win.
Also, I will just put it out there that Chaney butted heads with his last HC at Arkansas. If realizes Chaney is not cut from the same cloth. He needs to shorten that rope a little bit. While he needs to get through to his OC, he will find it more productive to keep any hint of issues he is having with Chaney out of the post game press conferences.
Two, actually. We wasted one after North Carolina called a time out before they punted the ball.
The coaches should have had enough sense to call time out. Or, conversely, they should have had enough sense to tell Peterman to get everyone to the line and spike the ball if they didn't want to call a timeout. Coaches do not want their players deciding when or if they should take a time out. 100% of the responsibility and blame lies with the coaches, both the offensive coordinator and the head coach.
