Peak’s credibility gone

[rmf05]

Anyone that thinks Marino was a better player than Donald is insane. Donald was an impact player as a freshman on a deep D. He was consistently great for his last 3 years after being a merely good depth guy that Freshman year. He didn't play poorly in any stretch and singlehandedly won games. Maybe the QB position is more important so people don't know how to judge such things but Donald was as dominant as any player in history including the other 4 on the list. Donald was Pitt's best player against FSU in his 1st game and nearly every game his last couple seasons. Nobody nationwide even thought of voting for anyone else above him at DT. for AA. Marino was just one of several excellent QB's in his era. He was very rarely Pitts best player in any game of that era. Not even remotely close.

PS: just chatted with an oldtimer. He said Joe Schmidt was so good that the list should be 6 and Schmidt should be on it.

 

[pittmeister]

I'll post Fralic's resume in case there's and questions concerning him:

UPI Lineman of the Year (1984)
2× Unanimous All-American (1983, 1984)
First-team All-American (1982)
3× First-team All-East (1982, 1983, 1984)
Second-team All-East (1981)
College Football Hall of Fame

*Fralic became the first offensive lineman to twice finish in the top 10 of the Heisman Trophy balloting, placing sixth in 1984 and eighth in 1983.

The All-Time All-America team for college football's 150th anniversary

Meet the players who changed the way football was played at their positions over the sport's entire history.

www.espn.com

 

[Chairman Moe]

My memory is that College Danny was better than his receivers or maybe it’s better than the coaching his receivers got.

Here’s what I remember and what I mean by that - Marino would throw to spots where the receivers were supposed to be - threw before the receivers broke - threw with a super quick release. Often (as I remember) the receivers just weren’t at the spot or ready to receive the ball.

I think that’s why Danny looked so much better as a pro - his receivers at Miami were super talented and great route runners.

Anyway, that’s how I remember it. But I’m 70. And well - dammit! - there’s those dang kids on the lawn again! - GET OUTTA THERE YOU YOUNG HEATHENS!

Too funny, @ChazzMo, your last comments! I'm slightly older than you are and know EXACTLY what you mean ... ;^)

 

[RaleighPittFan]

Maybe the issue is that Chris limited the list to 5.

I would argue that a list of 5 would be perfect for basketball, but football should be a list of 22.

Now, maybe everybody's favorite will be on the list of 22.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

And Aaron Donald should not be on the list. Don’t confuse what he did in the pros with what he did at Pitt. If you look at historical records for Pitt, AD shows up one time and that’s for sacks and even there he is fourth.

Recency bias for sure.

True. Donald was great in the NFL, but I don't give a crap what he did there. This is about Pitt football. Donald was pretty good but not top 5 of all time overall.

 

[pittmeister]

True. Donald was great in the NFL, but I don't give a crap what he did there. This is about Pitt football. Donald was pretty good but not top 5 of all time overall.

Huh?

Third most decorated player in Panther history:

Bronko Nagurski Trophy (2013)
Chuck Bednarik Award (2013)
Lombardi Award (2013)
Outland Trophy (2013)
Bill Willis Trophy (2013)
Unanimous All-American (2013)
ACC Defensive Player of the Year (2013)
First-team All-ACC (2013)
First-team All-Big East (2012)
Second-team All-Big East (2011)

 

[President Stache]

Dude you are crazy. Marino was just throwing deep too much. A lot of the time it was on 1st game. The defense was so good in those days that they held the opposition after like 90% of his INTs.

Not sure why you make this statement, because he was getting booed badly for the way he played. You cant throw 24 ints as a senior. You know why Pitt never won a championship with Marino as the QB? Because he played awlful in too many games. Most games the defense came through. But he was so bad in some games where he was throwing 5 or 6 ints. I watched and heard those games. Marino was indeed bad. I think the most TDs he had was like 17. And you do realize Pitt was a very pass happy team. They were one of the few in those days that did.

I disagree completely. In 82 we lost to ups and smu in absolute dismal weather, especially the SMU game, and Marino still led the team. Our RB fumbled at SMUs one yard line, next drive we drove down and our kicker missed a 26 yarder. End of the game our receiver slipped in the end zone on the sleet and SMU intercepted the pass.

You say we had a "very pass happy team", which was rare in those days. Well, no shit, we did because we had the best QB in history. We had receivers that did nothing in the pros. Our leading receiver was the RB.

Anyways, you can die on your hill that Marino sucked

 

[ebonylover40]

Ummm no. The reason he didn’t go higher were the drug rumors. His arm talent as they say today was off the charts.

No, that was the reason the Steelers didnt draft him. He may had arm talent, but he didnt have QB smart talent. Again he had one decent season his freshman year. Pitt one those games because off defense. Marino had one clutch game as a college player, and that was the Sugar Bowl, with the pass to Brown. The man average almost 4 ints a game in college. And he was truly the real reason those teams did not win the big one. Do you not remember games like NC?

 

[upj87]

[


[/QUOTE
.

And Aaron Donald should not be on the list. Don’t confuse what he did in the pros with what he did at Pitt. If you look at historical records for Pitt, AD shows up one time and that’s for sacks and even there he is fourth.

Recency bias for sure.

Ok..I'll buy that. Had he not had the pro career he had we would not be on that list.

 

[King Of All Message Boards]

No, that was the reason the Steelers didnt draft him. He may had arm talent, but he didnt have QB smart talent. Again he had one decent season his freshman year. Pitt one those games because off defense. Marino had one clutch game as a college player, and that was the Sugar Bowl, with the pass to Brown. The man average almost 4 ints a game in college. And he was truly the real reason those teams did not win the big one. Do you not remember games like NC?

Incorrect. The drug rumor was the reason he dropped in the draft. Wasn’t just the Steelers.

 

[BTisinDC]

.

Peak probably never really saw Marino perform. Or Dorsett or Fralic. Or Green. Did he even see Rickey Jackson play? He was every bit the equal of Hugh Green.

No, he really wasn't even close.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

Maybe the issue is that Chris limited the list to 5.

I would argue that a list of 5 would be perfect for basketball, but football should be a list of 22.

Now, maybe everybody's favorite will be on the list of 22.

I'll buy that. Guys like Marshall Goldberg, Joe Schmidt should definitely be on the list and at least the equal of anyone that Peak mentioned.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

I'll but that. Guys like Marshall Goldberg, Joe Schmidt should definitely be on the list and at least the equal of anyone that Peak mentioned.

no they shouldnt.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

[


[/QUOTE
.
Ok..I'll buy that. Had he not had the pro career he had we would not be on that list.

FYI, it wasnt a rumor. The real crime is, a college kid doing coke in the 80's wasnt that big of a deal.

i'd be more concerned if my star college QB in the early 80's wasnt blasting lines every weekend..

 

[CJsE]

i'd be more concerned if my star college QB in the early 80's wasnt blasting lines every weekend..

Reminds me of that horrible movie Draft Day with Kevin Costner where he passes on the consensus top QB because he finds out his teammates didn't show up to his birthday party.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The man average almost 4 ints a game in college.

Marino absolutely threw a lot of interceptions in college, but man are you bad at math. Marino played 44 games for Pitt. Four per game would be 176. In reality he threw 64. Which is not even close to 176.

Now it does rank tied for 5th on the all time list. So like I said, he threw a lot of them. But come on, four per game?

BTW, Mark Hermann of Purdue is the all time leader with 75. And Alex Van Pelt is tied for 10th with 59.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

no they shouldnt.

Your opinion. They were the greats of a great era in Pitt football that everyone forgets. Recency (last 50 years) doesn't mean you eliminate the greats of a previous era. That's the problem with people today. They either forget history or revise it to suit their warped agendas.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

Your opinion. They were the greats of a great era in Pitt football that everyone forgets. Recency (last 50 years) doesn't mean you eliminate the greats of a previous era. That's the problem with people today. They either forget history or revise it to suit their warped agendas.

like i said previously. college football pre ww2 was 20 small white dental students playing football between classes wearing leather helmets and wool turtle necks. zero reason to include that era with modern day football.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

like i said previously. college football pre ww2 was 20 small white dental students playing football between classes wearing leather helmets and wool turtle necks. zero reason to include that era with modern day football.

Maybe you missed the criteria of the Peak list. It was list of ALL TIME Pitt greats. That means prior to WWII also. With your assumption, Pitt should not also list the 8 National Championships that we won prior to WWII. The only one that counts, according to you, is the one in 1976. They better change that to 1 NC in all of their ads and promotions. You know they won't.

As for the comment about dental students in leather helmets and turtle necks, I'll disregard as silly. But at least they were students.

 

[PittPharm2002]

I don’t think it’s recency bias to say Aaron Donald was absolutely amazing in college . And he get better every single year . He is a guy every team had to gameplan for - which as a DT is inpressive.

Larry I think is also top 5 for the same reason .
If you’re going to bump him - then I think it’s Ditka, not Marino to takes the spot .

 

[PittPharm2002]

I like Larry Fitz as much as anyone. But he didn't stick around long enough to justify being top 5 at Pitt. Marino is definitely in the top 5. Larry is a fine person and a great NFL receiver. I don't give a flying rat's a$$ about the NFL. What he did at Pitt in 2 short years is phenomenal. But it was just 2 years and he bolted. That in itself disqualifies him being top 5.

Peak probably never really saw Marino perform. Or Dorsett or Fralic. Or Green. Did he even see Rickey Jackson play? He was every bit the equal of Hugh Green. Peak's list is disputable and is only his opinion, just like mine is. But has Peak been watching Pitt football since the 60's? How about Marshall Goldberg? Why isn't he on the list? Because he wasn't playing "modern" football??? LOL!

I'd knock off Fralic and Fitz and replace them with Goldberg and Marino. But again, just my opinion and not indisputable. Just like Peak's list is not indisputable.

Knocking off Fralic disqualifies your opinion .

Fralic is to OL what Donald is to DL.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

Maybe you missed the criteria of the Peak list. It was list of ALL TIME Pitt greats. That means prior to WWII also. With your assumption, Pitt should not also list the 8 National Championships that we won prior to WWII. The only one that counts, according to you, is the one in 1976. They better change that to 1 NC in all of their ads and promotions. You know they won't.

As for the comment about dental students in leather helmets and turtle necks, I'll disregard as silly. But at least they were students.

yeah, how crazy of me not to recognize our 1918 national championship where we went 4-1 and lost to cleveland naval reserve.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

yeah, how crazy of me not to recognize our 1918 national championship where we went 4-1 and lost to cleveland naval reserve.

Then Pitt needs to quit touting 9 national championships. We had 1, according to your criteria since we didn't play "real" football until after WWII.

My post stands. Your reply is foolish.

 

[HailToPitt1985]

I see the silly, inane posts in this thread are escalating. Knock yourselves out. Not my thing.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

Then Pitt needs to quit touting 9 national championships. We had 1, according to your criteria since we didn't play "real" football

I agree 100%

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

I see the silly, inane posts in this thread are escalating. Knock yourselves out. Not my thing.

I agree. I mean how silly and inane does someone need to be to not understand that college football in 2024 is completely different than college football was in 1924?

 

[Franb]

I agree. I mean how silly and inane does someone need to be to not understand that college football in 2024 is completely different than college football was in 1924?

The best thing about college football in 1924 is that there were no tv timeouts.

 

[ChooChoo Panther]

Danny was 33-3 his first three seasons and a paltry 9-3 his senior season. He is 2nd only behind Hawk.

The absolute best four year record for Pitt ever.

There is no disputing that.

Was Rick Trocano QB some of the first 2 years?

 

[pittmeister]

Was Rick Trocano QB some of the first 2 years?

Yes. Trocano started the first 7 games of 1979 and the last 6 games of 1980. Trocano was 12-1 in those games. Fact.

Again, this not to take away anything from Marino. He is easily in the top 10 (probably 6-7) of all time Pitt greats.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

The best thing about college football in 1924 is that there were no tv timeouts.

I am Joe the Panther Fan, and I approve this message.

 

[Panther Parrothead]

If someone has to come off the list it’s this. Donald was a great player but wasn’t quite on the level of the others. I’d probably go with Marino over Donald as well. And for those who mentioned Jackson, he could be argued over Donald.

Donald won practically every possible collegiate award that he could have won except for the Heisman - and that’s because of the bias against defensive players for that award. (If there was EVER a defensive player who deserved the Heisman, it was Hugh Freakin’ Green.)

 

[DT_PITT]

I am Joe the Panther Fan, and I approve this message.

No political posting!!

 

[Atilla Cosby]

Larry doesnt belong on that list. only there two years and led us to the continental bowl. the other players won games, Dan Marino WON games..

Larry is an all time great college WR. No way he gets left off. He played 2 years because he was that damn good. Pitt wasn't going to take him #3 in the draft.

I can't find data for the best 2 years for a college wide receiver but he has to be up the list somewhere high.

Since Desmond Howard won the Heisman Trophy in 1991, only one receiver has finished in the top three in Heisman voting. That was Fitzgerald, who finished second in 2003.

You can't argue with 92 receptions for 1,672 yards with 22 touchdowns in a true sophomore season.

 

[Joe the Panther Fan]

No political posting!!

Sorry! I for one will be glad in a week and a half when our long national (or at least state) nightmare of political commercials has ended.

 

[BTisinDC]

Larry is an all time great college WR. No way he gets left off. He played 2 years because he was that damn good. Pitt wasn't going to take him #3 in the draft.

I can't find data for the best 2 years for a college wide receiver but he has to be up the list somewhere high.

Since Desmond Howard won the Heisman Trophy in 1991, only one receiver has finished in the top three in Heisman voting. That was Fitzgerald, who finished second in 2003.

You can't argue with 92 receptions for 1,672 yards with 22 touchdowns in a true sophomore season.

Smizik and Cook would argue, dumb@sses.

 

[CrazyPaco]

yeah, how crazy of me not to recognize our 1918 national championship where we went 4-1 and lost to cleveland naval reserve.

You should, because major selectors of national champions, according to the NCAA official records book do, including the National Championship Foundation, Houlgate System, and the Helms Athletic Foundation; in addition to the following other selectors: 1st-N-Goal, Alexander Weyland, Angelo Louisa, BIll Libby, Bob Kirlin, Boby Royce, Century Football Index, College Football USA, George Trevor, Harry Fry, James Whalen, Jim Koger, Loren Maxwell, Nutshell Sports Football Ratings, Patrick Premo, College Football Data Warehouse, and Sports Illustrated's 1970 study on college football national championships, the latter being why the university itself recognizes it.

Why is Pitt recognized as a national champion in a 4-1 season cut short by the Spanish Flu Pandemic with a highly controversal loss to end the shortened season? Because the defacto national championship game was John Heisman's defending national champion Georgia Tech team coming north to play Pop Warner's Pitt in the most anticipated game of the season if not, until then, the century, and Pitt absolutely clobbered them.

It's not anyone else's fault you are ignorant about history or disrespect your grandfathers and great grandfathers. But you can start correcting that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_Pittsburgh_Panthers_football_team

 

[JD1976]

You should, because major selectors of national champions, according to the NCAA official records book do, including the National Championship Foundation, Houlgate System, and the Helms Athletic Foundation; in addition to the following other selectors: 1st-N-Goal, Alexander Weyland, Angelo Louisa, BIll Libby, Bob Kirlin, Boby Royce, Century Football Index, College Football USA, George Trevor, Harry Fry, James Whalen, Jim Koger, Loren Maxwell, Nutshell Sports Football Ratings, Patrick Premo, College Football Data Warehouse, and Sports Illustrated's 1970 study on college football national championships, the latter being why the university itself recognizes it.

Why is Pitt recognized as a national champion in a 4-1 season cut short by the Spanish Flu Pandemic with a highly controversal loss to end the shortened season? Because the defacto national championship game was John Heisman's defending national champion Georgia Tech team coming north to play Pop Warner's Pitt in the most anticipated game of the season if not, until then, the century, and Pitt absolutely clobbered them.

It's not anyone else's fault you are ignorant about history or disrespect your grandfathers and great grandfathers. But you can start correcting that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_Pittsburgh_Panthers_football_team

1976 is the only legit title and most reasonable fans know this.

P.S. I support Pitt promoting “9 National Championships” because, why not?

 

[PittPharm2002]

You should, because major selectors of national champions, according to the NCAA official records book do, including the National Championship Foundation, Houlgate System, and the Helms Athletic Foundation; in addition to the following other selectors: 1st-N-Goal, Alexander Weyland, Angelo Louisa, BIll Libby, Bob Kirlin, Boby Royce, Century Football Index, College Football USA, George Trevor, Harry Fry, James Whalen, Jim Koger, Loren Maxwell, Nutshell Sports Football Ratings, Patrick Premo, College Football Data Warehouse, and Sports Illustrated's 1970 study on college football national championships, the latter being why the university itself recognizes it.

Why is Pitt recognized as a national champion in a 4-1 season cut short by the Spanish Flu Pandemic with a highly controversal loss to end the shortened season? Because the defacto national championship game was John Heisman's defending national champion Georgia Tech team coming north to play Pop Warner's Pitt in the most anticipated game of the season if not, until then, the century, and Pitt absolutely clobbered them.

It's not anyone else's fault you are ignorant about history or disrespect your grandfathers and great grandfathers. But you can start correcting that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_Pittsburgh_Panthers_football_team

Save your lectures.
Nobody actually cares about pre-WW1 titles when 20 schools played

 

[HailToPitt1985]

You should, because major selectors of national champions, according to the NCAA official records book do, including the National Championship Foundation, Houlgate System, and the Helms Athletic Foundation; in addition to the following other selectors: 1st-N-Goal, Alexander Weyland, Angelo Louisa, BIll Libby, Bob Kirlin, Boby Royce, Century Football Index, College Football USA, George Trevor, Harry Fry, James Whalen, Jim Koger, Loren Maxwell, Nutshell Sports Football Ratings, Patrick Premo, College Football Data Warehouse, and Sports Illustrated's 1970 study on college football national championships, the latter being why the university itself recognizes it.

Why is Pitt recognized as a national champion in a 4-1 season cut short by the Spanish Flu Pandemic with a highly controversal loss to end the shortened season? Because the defacto national championship game was John Heisman's defending national champion Georgia Tech team coming north to play Pop Warner's Pitt in the most anticipated game of the season if not, until then, the century, and Pitt absolutely clobbered them.

It's not anyone else's fault you are ignorant about history or disrespect your grandfathers and great grandfathers. But you can start correcting that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_Pittsburgh_Panthers_football_team

History, and the history of Pitt football for Pitt fans, is important and often forgotten. I don't understand why so many people just dismiss history completely. They revise it to suit their narratives. History adds context and reveals the character of the program over the years. Without it, we lose perspective.

 

[PittPharm2002]

History, and the history of Pitt football for Pitt fans, is important and often forgotten. I don't understand why so many people just dismiss history completely. They revise it to suit their narratives. History adds context and reveals the character of the program over the years. Without it, we lose perspective.

You remember Marshall Goldberg playing ?