He'll fit right in, he can hold and get illegal motion and hands to the face like a pro already!
OT: Steelers 3-7
- Thread starter Fk_Pitt
- Start date
They have to use one of the first 3 picks on a corner. I have no idea how they spent so much salary cap space on defense and wound up with that CB depth chart. Cam Sutton is the only starter in the whole group.
Beyond CB, they defintely need a LT. Moore isn't a starter- he kills way too many drives.
A Cam Heyward successor would be nice, but Leal showed enough promise that I'd be fine rolling with him and bringing Ogunjobi back. Assuming Cam doesn't retire we can reasses there in 2024.
MLB can be handled cheaply in free agency or later in the draft. Just not a position worth using a valuable pick on when you are so bad at so many other spots.
Yep...and I don't know about the processing and arm strength stuff he either.
In 1972 the Steelers brought in a “Terry Whisperer”, Babe Parilli, as a QB coach of sorts, but more as a guy to try to ease TB’s shattered nerves after a horrid rookie season (and very little reassurance from Chuck Noll, who never liked TB to the end, and handled him poorly in that rookie year, as Tomlin has done with Pickett this season, throwing him to the wolves). They kept Parilli there a couple years at least and TB managed to emerge from adversity to end up one of the greatest. Maybe Pickett would benefit from having Whip there for such a role. But as the OC? Don’t be nutty.
Heard him compared to jake Plummer today. That’s a fair comparison but I hope to God he has a better career.
Yeah I wouldn’t want it. Kenny’s probably learned most of what he can from Canada. It’s time for a new resource, one who has been in the league and developed QBs. Time for Rooney to spend a few $ and invest in their #1 pick.
The point is, without the GOAT down in TB, no one would acre about Bryon Leftwich at all and in KC without Mahomes, Eric Bieniemy is just another former RB.
I'd rather leave the QB's play calling to themselves.
That friendly scheme (49ers) is not to dissimilar to what Cigs runs at PITT.
Amazing that against way better athletes on defense, that Shanny's zone, power, heavy set, etc works and is pretty consistent even without having a pro bowl caliber QB.
Also amazing how cignetti is always onto another job after 2 years max and not exactly advancing
How do the 49ers have so much consistency with such archaic strategies?
Strange indeed..
If only ncaaf had a draft for parity
Maybe cig’s can go to back to the nfl
Or at least to Fresno state where he lasted 3 seasons (his max)
ACC seems to have parity. Good thing our coach has an upper hand in parity within the ACC.
I think the major difference is that the 49ers have much better players than we do. Deebo and Kittle in particular are both All Pros when healthy, plus CMC.
For all Jimmy G's faults, he is actually quite good against man. Slovis has never and will never shown the efficiency that Jimmy G plays with.
I think the other thing is that in college you just need a ton of points. Running is always an inefficient decision but it's so much worse in college where you need to routinely score 30+ to have a chance. Cignetti wastes a ton of plays on unproductive calls.
This is all moot because we're not going to pick in the top 3, and due to collapses by guys like Will Levis, TVD, and Anthony Richardson, and Hendon Hooker's injury, there are really only 2 QBs in this class. Both will go in the top 2 to Houston and Carolina who desperately need QB after unwisely punting on it in multiple consecutive drafts.
I agree the 49ers have way better offensive players than us. However, the 49ers aren't seeing ACC defensive talent on a week to week basis. I think it's a moot point. The parity in the NFL is unlike anything we see in college football. But, the one thing that remains in the NFL as the does the same in CFB - the best athletes are on defense. The fact that every single NFL team some more then others, runs traditional pro-style scheme and does it well - goes to show it's not some unsound, outdated, non productive way of playing football.
I don't think Slovis has given an indicator that he can be really efficient, but if a Billy Stull can thrive in this offense, I know we can recruit talent for that position.
I'm not sure what you mean by unproductive play calls. I'm assuming you mean yardage gained. However, a left hook doesn't need to land to make the overhand right devastating. Play calling is the same way. Sometimes you might not net much in yardage on a certain play but OC's are often doing it to protect the rest of their scheme.
I don't think playing a pro style is unsound. I think - and I've said this before - that Pitt is at a talent disadvantage compared to other schools, even in the ACC. Pro style requires talent at the hardest positions for a school like Pitt to obtain it, i.e., QB, WR, OT.
Given Pitt's challenges in recruiting, we should focus our offensive philosophies on stressing the defense in the hopes that we make big plays, rather than committing to a style that leads to a lot of unproductive plays and then asks our sub-par QB to make a long throw to sub-par WR.
Stull was a great example of why we shouldn't play this scheme. Because even when we had better WR and OL than we do now, we still never won anything with Stull against worse competition.
Maybe it is just because they aren't used to this and it is a shock to the system, and also many people here are just Stillers fans and aren't sports fans, but the reaction to this season is hilarious.
It is simply the following:
1) Play Kenny, get him his reps and learning curve accelerated.
2) Wins don't matter. In fact, losing is a good, because this franchise needs an infusion of talent. So having 3 picks (or possibly more) in the top 40 of the draft will benefit this franchise moving forward.
That's it. To agonize and analyze these losses like it is the 2001 AFC Champ game is stupid.
It is simply the following:
1) Play Kenny, get him his reps and learning curve accelerated.
2) Wins don't matter. In fact, losing is a good, because this franchise needs an infusion of talent. So having 3 picks (or possibly more) in the top 40 of the draft will benefit this franchise moving forward.
That's it. To agonize and analyze these losses like it is the 2001 AFC Champ game is stupid.
How does the Spread lessen the burden when it comes to talent at Offensive Tackle?
Over the past 25 years, we've recruited the WR position pretty well.
Depending on how the other variables are around the team, the offense can be very efficient with a pedestrian QB - see Ken Dorsey at the collegiate level. If the variables (other positions) are lacking, the QB has to be better.
Big plays are the result of many variables. I'm not sure the spread by formation or by philosophy is necessarily greater at creating bigger players then any other scheme. Case in point, if you look at receiving statistics from the academies over the past 20-25 years, they put up extraordinary YPC #'s. Much of that is due to lack of volume in the passing game. Much of it is due to the run philosophy they employ. They get simplistic coverages plus the secondary gets way to nosey in stopping the run. They're doing all of this with PSAC and Patriot league type talent.
Stull wasn't some great QB but I'm not sure he was the fault as to why we didn't get over the hump and win a conference title and make the BCS bowl series.
I think our defense let us down in the NC State and Cincy games.
With that being said, I don't care what offense it is whether it's Air Raid or the Wishbone. If we go 10-3 on a regular basis, I think most would be in agreement that was a pretty good season.
Tried to explain this to someone. I watch and want them to win, but when they lose I'm not upset at all. I watch looking for improvement from the QB.
I’m a Steelers fan but I’m more of a Pitt fan, and I totally get that the Steelers losing now is good for the upcoming seasons. But I don’t know that I have faith that they’ll draft well with the new regime (which is de facto Tomlin) doing the drafting. But it is the best chance they have.
I’ll agree that most in the region are alcoholic mullet head ‘tards ( the types that go down to the NS and tailgate despite not going to the actual game). And in that regard, during the game, they know nothing to look at but the QB, and if he doesn’t throw a Td every play, he’s a (burp) bum. If he hands off for Najee’s patented one yard gain, somehow it’s his fault too. And the OC of course.
Normally as the losses build, they would then go after the head coach. But even they know they aren’t allowed to do that. You can’t get on the air with Pomp and Stumpy Howe (or whoever the obscure backup DL from the 1990s is) by saying they want to talk about Tomlin.
They are also influenced by the media they’re spooned, and the media are not much brighter than the fans…and they have the insane impression the defense doesn’t also suck (it most certainly does…40ish points last Saturday as just one example). But Cam talks to them on air regularly, plus the defense is really Tomlin’s baby, so they don’t want to risk that access by being critical.
So every week it is this: Canada. Pickett. Canada. Pickett. They stink. They’re bums. They’d be 20-0 with anyone else. Who else? Burrrrp. But that’s how it is here, and if it was Mitch getting this on and off field abuse (as it should be this year…Pickett is learning nothing but negativity by playing now), I’d actually be laughing at it, but being it’s Pickett, it’s irritating.
Yeah, put me in the camp of "Kenny has played ok for a rookie." He's missed some things but he's also asked to do way more than he should. Our OL stinks and our running game is mostly not there (Bengals game notwithstanding either) plus he had some horrible matchups like at Bills, at Eagles, Dolphins, Bucs and he was not prepped by the team to be the starter.
Kenny is actually great in terms of CPOE (top 5 in NFL). He's struggled in EPA, which basically looks at how the offense scores in total. We haven't scored many points so the EPA metric puts all of that on Kenny, unfairly or not. And he's been a bit below average in PFF grade. But for a rookie, these are all normal. He's playing about even with Russ Wilson, Matt Stafford, and Kyler. And yeah those guys have been bad this year but if we're grading on a curve, and we should be since Kenny is like 5 games into his career, then he's been good enough.
I don't think we should move on because I strongly think both Young and CJ Stroud will be gone by the time we draft. We should absolutely not move on in favor of Will Levis or an injured Hendon Hooker. Give Kenny all of 2023. If he's not league average by then you can consider replacements in what will likely be a deeper QB class.
lilspainishflea said:
How does the Spread lessen the burden when it comes to talent at Offensive Tackle? LSP: easier reads with more WR on the field. Defense can't disguise coverage as much. QB finds the exploitable matchup much faster.
I've never agreed with this. I was a DC for many years and I've coached offense for the past 12 years.
Teams who defend pro-style - base 21 personnel offenses typically are doing so based upon down/distance. On run downs the majority of teams play MOF closed and are either in cover 3 or cover 1. It's pretty easy to decipher in these situations. The 2 high teams are typically playing quarters, again pretty easy to decipher. I don't see a ton pattern match vs these offenses like I do in the spread. Most of the "pro-style" teams become "spread" oriented when they are not in obvious run downs. It's kind of a mute point.
Team who defend 10/11 personnel that are considered spread teams, see every coverage in the kitchen. 2 high means nothing imo because they have every coverage available to them and can still be effective from 2 high. Even the 1 high teams you'll see are going to pattern match you.
Over the past 25 years, we've recruited the WR position pretty well. LSP: It's been totally feast or famine though. For every year with an Addison we have a year like this year or 2017 when our top WR had 700 yards and the next highest one had 500. Just not enough production for modern college football.
I'm just spit balling here and some of the years might be off but has it really been feast or famine
'98 - Murphy/Grim
'99 - Grim/Bryant
'00 - Grim/Bryant/English/Slade
'01 - Bryant/English/Slade
'02 - Fitzgerald/Brockenboro/Slade
'03 - Fitzgerald/ Brockenboro/Lee
'04 - Lee/Delsardo
'05 - Lee/Kinder/Delsardo
'06 - Kinder/Turner/Pestano ----------------- Lean Year
'07 - Porter/Turner/Pestano - -------Lean Year
'08 - Kinder/Turner/Porter/Baldwin/McGee
'09 - Baldwin/Turner/Shannahan/McGee
'10 - Baldwin/Shannahan/Street
'11 - Street/Shannahan
'12 - Street/Shanny
'13 - Boyd/Street
'14 - Boyd/Garner/Weatherspoon - 1 stud but a little lean
'15 - Boyd/Ford
'16 - Weah/Ford/Henderson - Lean but the offense still scored 41ppg
'17 - Weah/Lopes/Henderson - Lean
'18 - Ffrench/Lopes/Mack - Lean
'19 - Ffrench/Mack - Lean
'20 - Turner/Addison/Mack - Lean
'21 - Addison/Wayne/Mack
Since '98, I think we've only had like 7 years with very average talent at that position. The rest of the time, the talent/production is pretty good and some years it's outstanding.
Depending on how the other variables are around the team, the offense can be very efficient with a pedestrian QB - see Ken Dorsey at the collegiate level. LSP: literally played on one of the best teams of all time and he still wasn't a difference maker, you're still proving my point.
I'm not proving your point. I'm showing you that with a pedestrian QB you can win and win big. I do not think PITT will ever reach the heights that Miami did in that Butch Davis and Larry Cokor had. It's not ever going to happen. It doesn't happen to any school above the Mason-Dixon line except OSU.
If the variables (other positions) are lacking, the QB has to be better. LSP: we have one QB in 40 years that really elevated his teammates and he was a 5th year player that unexpectedly developed to play at a high level. He also had a top 15 NFL draft pick at WR. If that's what it takes for Pitt to get production from the QB then we need to rethink our approach.
Meh.. We've had the 1st team all conference QB several times in the past 20 - alone. Rutherford, Palko, Stull, and Pickett. We've also recruited other NFL types that didn't pan out here like Flacco, Getsy, and Dinucci. If we have the best QB in our league, we should be able to push for double digit wins more years then not as long as keeping par on defense.
Big plays are the result of many variables. LSP: I'm not strictly speaking of chunk plays, I'm talking about efficiency and production. We average 5.68 yards per play and we're not in the top 50 most efficient offenses. We average 390 YPG and we're not in the top 50 most productive offenses. We have a lower YPP than Wisconsin, which is mocked for their offensive philosophy and execution and who just fired their coach. We average fewer YPG than Illinois. We need to be more efficient and more productive. We waste too many plays on low-upside plays. This puts us in harder to convert situations, and then we don't and we lose opportunities for more plays.
Efficiency has more to do with talent then it does anything else. We do not have a good QB. We do not have particularly good receivers right now. The OL has shown improvement lately but hasn't been "great" this entire season. The whole "I'd rather run the ball 40x a game" was more tongue in cheek then Duzz making some major proclamation on offensive identity. He was protecting his QB and silently saying this is our best chance to win because we don't throw the ball very well.
LSP: Agree, but this year is shaping up to be disappointing. Coming off a conference championship, pretty talented team, experienced transfer QB who played at a high level. Bad losses and might only win 8 games. Recruiting is bad for what we did last year. Meh.
I don't think we are "pretty" talented. Kenny and Addison covered up a ton of warts. Izzy's pretty good. Other then that - no one we face is really scared of our talent.
Defensively we've got some good players but boy we really scheme stuff to help those kids. So, I'm not so certain we are that talented on that side of the ball either.
Recruiting has to improve regardless of what we run. If we don't start recruiting better on that side of the ball soon, you'll start to a regression there too.
How does the Spread lessen the burden when it comes to talent at Offensive Tackle? LSP: easier reads with more WR on the field. Defense can't disguise coverage as much. QB finds the exploitable matchup much faster.
I've never agreed with this. I was a DC for many years and I've coached offense for the past 12 years.
Teams who defend pro-style - base 21 personnel offenses typically are doing so based upon down/distance. On run downs the majority of teams play MOF closed and are either in cover 3 or cover 1. It's pretty easy to decipher in these situations. The 2 high teams are typically playing quarters, again pretty easy to decipher. I don't see a ton pattern match vs these offenses like I do in the spread. Most of the "pro-style" teams become "spread" oriented when they are not in obvious run downs. It's kind of a mute point.
Team who defend 10/11 personnel that are considered spread teams, see every coverage in the kitchen. 2 high means nothing imo because they have every coverage available to them and can still be effective from 2 high. Even the 1 high teams you'll see are going to pattern match you.
Over the past 25 years, we've recruited the WR position pretty well. LSP: It's been totally feast or famine though. For every year with an Addison we have a year like this year or 2017 when our top WR had 700 yards and the next highest one had 500. Just not enough production for modern college football.
I'm just spit balling here and some of the years might be off but has it really been feast or famine
'98 - Murphy/Grim
'99 - Grim/Bryant
'00 - Grim/Bryant/English/Slade
'01 - Bryant/English/Slade
'02 - Fitzgerald/Brockenboro/Slade
'03 - Fitzgerald/ Brockenboro/Lee
'04 - Lee/Delsardo
'05 - Lee/Kinder/Delsardo
'06 - Kinder/Turner/Pestano ----------------- Lean Year
'07 - Porter/Turner/Pestano - -------Lean Year
'08 - Kinder/Turner/Porter/Baldwin/McGee
'09 - Baldwin/Turner/Shannahan/McGee
'10 - Baldwin/Shannahan/Street
'11 - Street/Shannahan
'12 - Street/Shanny
'13 - Boyd/Street
'14 - Boyd/Garner/Weatherspoon - 1 stud but a little lean
'15 - Boyd/Ford
'16 - Weah/Ford/Henderson - Lean but the offense still scored 41ppg
'17 - Weah/Lopes/Henderson - Lean
'18 - Ffrench/Lopes/Mack - Lean
'19 - Ffrench/Mack - Lean
'20 - Turner/Addison/Mack - Lean
'21 - Addison/Wayne/Mack
Since '98, I think we've only had like 7 years with very average talent at that position. The rest of the time, the talent/production is pretty good and some years it's outstanding.
Depending on how the other variables are around the team, the offense can be very efficient with a pedestrian QB - see Ken Dorsey at the collegiate level. LSP: literally played on one of the best teams of all time and he still wasn't a difference maker, you're still proving my point.
I'm not proving your point. I'm showing you that with a pedestrian QB you can win and win big. I do not think PITT will ever reach the heights that Miami did in that Butch Davis and Larry Cokor had. It's not ever going to happen. It doesn't happen to any school above the Mason-Dixon line except OSU.
If the variables (other positions) are lacking, the QB has to be better. LSP: we have one QB in 40 years that really elevated his teammates and he was a 5th year player that unexpectedly developed to play at a high level. He also had a top 15 NFL draft pick at WR. If that's what it takes for Pitt to get production from the QB then we need to rethink our approach.
Meh.. We've had the 1st team all conference QB several times in the past 20 - alone. Rutherford, Palko, Stull, and Pickett. We've also recruited other NFL types that didn't pan out here like Flacco, Getsy, and Dinucci. If we have the best QB in our league, we should be able to push for double digit wins more years then not as long as keeping par on defense.
Big plays are the result of many variables. LSP: I'm not strictly speaking of chunk plays, I'm talking about efficiency and production. We average 5.68 yards per play and we're not in the top 50 most efficient offenses. We average 390 YPG and we're not in the top 50 most productive offenses. We have a lower YPP than Wisconsin, which is mocked for their offensive philosophy and execution and who just fired their coach. We average fewer YPG than Illinois. We need to be more efficient and more productive. We waste too many plays on low-upside plays. This puts us in harder to convert situations, and then we don't and we lose opportunities for more plays.
Efficiency has more to do with talent then it does anything else. We do not have a good QB. We do not have particularly good receivers right now. The OL has shown improvement lately but hasn't been "great" this entire season. The whole "I'd rather run the ball 40x a game" was more tongue in cheek then Duzz making some major proclamation on offensive identity. He was protecting his QB and silently saying this is our best chance to win because we don't throw the ball very well.
LSP: Agree, but this year is shaping up to be disappointing. Coming off a conference championship, pretty talented team, experienced transfer QB who played at a high level. Bad losses and might only win 8 games. Recruiting is bad for what we did last year. Meh.
I don't think we are "pretty" talented. Kenny and Addison covered up a ton of warts. Izzy's pretty good. Other then that - no one we face is really scared of our talent.
Defensively we've got some good players but boy we really scheme stuff to help those kids. So, I'm not so certain we are that talented on that side of the ball either.
Recruiting has to improve regardless of what we run. If we don't start recruiting better on that side of the ball soon, you'll start to a regression there too.
I dislike Diontae more than any player the Steelers ever had besides Chase Claypool lol.
Do you think that recruiting HS talent matters as much these days with the transfer market?
The largest thing that worries me about Pitt’s future is what you touch on below, which is that there do not appear to be real difference makers coming up in the front 7. DeShields looks like he could be a guy, and in extremely limited snaps I think Okunlola and Fitz have shown something, but for all the recruiting stars, these you guys just do not appear to flash much on the DL.
Still, with the transfer market and how well they generally fit pieces into this defense, I am tempted to believe traditional recruiting does not matter as much as long as you scout well on the transfer market.
In my OP I wondered if the Steelers would win 7 games. Now it’s looking like 8.
We can thank the AFC North being paired up against the NFC South this year for these extra wins. If say it was the NFC East, the Steelers might a few more losses.
It’s setting up pretty nicely for them. Two games against the Ravens- at least one will be without Jackson-, one game against Cleveland and rusty Deshaun Watson, and two games against the Raiders and Panthers. I’m not saying they’re going to win out, but…
That’s a great point. Sadly it inflates the steeler record so that many will think they are closer than what they are. The Steelers should be measured by how they stack up to the Bills, Eagles, Bengals, etc. and not measured by how they stack up against the team slightly ahead of them in the playoff race or just below them.
For some reason Too Much Time on My Hands by Styx keeps popping into my head....
Yes. The fact that this team’s offense was able to function against three bad teams (Saints, Colts, Falcons) is no cause for celebration. Only benefit is it gives KP a chance to get his feet under him and start progressing without getting killed. On the other hand, if you listen to Paul Zeise, it may somehow save Matt Canada’s job.
Similar threads
