I'm pretty sure a Doctor should be able to follow what you are stating.
I have said this for years- Pitt consistently over schedules based on their ability to win games. As a result they appear to be a middling program. If they took an approach to scheduling more like Wisconsin or even PedSt it would ultimately provide Pitt with the perception of a more successful program than what they have right now. That's what Wisconsin football is built on - nothing more nothing less.
Syracuse is another football team that was shackle by the scheduling habits of their athletic director. They finally have seen the benefits of scheduling an Incredibly soft schedule so that they become a bowl eligible team again.
I have said this for years- Pitt consistently over schedules based on their ability to win games. As a result they appear to be a middling program. If they took an approach to scheduling more like Wisconsin or even PedSt it would ultimately provide Pitt with the perception of a more successful program than what they have right now. That's what Wisconsin football is built on - nothing more nothing less.
Syracuse is another football team that was shackle by the scheduling habits of their athletic director. They finally have seen the benefits of scheduling an Incredibly soft schedule so that they become a bowl eligible team again.
Once again, "bringing it back to Pitt football," this misframes the issue.
Has Wisconsin been "FAR" more successful against the teams that outrecruit them? That's what would be relevant to Pitt football. Does the Wisconsin model allow you to beat teams the recruiting rankings say you shouldn't beat at a consistent enough level to dominate college football for 3 decades? That is the question for Pitt football. Not whether Wisconsin has been able to have a winning record against Purdue and Ill. for three decades, because Pitt's schedule isn't made up of teams that recruit at that low a level.
Last edited: