Pitt will bring in an experienced QB

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

The difference between 8-4 and 4-8. Think the Jurkovec year.

From the sound of this in this thread, most think the Jurkovec year "unimportant"?

I thought it calamity, a major setback to the program.

8-4 versus 4-8? That is a lot at stake, at least for me.

Okay, you and I have a pretty big difference of opinion on what "too much at stake" means, which is fine.

I don't think whatever random backup QB they can bring in will get us 4 more wins, even in the event of a season ending injury to Eli. I also think it's a poor use of NIL budget to overpay to bring in a backup QB so we can maybe make the QuickCare Bowl if Eli goes down instead of using those resources where they're sorely needed if Eli is healthy (and will probably increase the odds of him staying healthy all year).

Yes, the Jurkovec year was painful to watch. We went 7-5 (in a very disappointing fashion) the year after, so it didn't seem to be the huge setback you felt it was.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

The difference between 8-4 and 4-8. Think the Jurkovec year.

From the sound of this in this thread, most think the Jurkovec year "unimportant"?

I thought it calamity, a major setback to the program.

8-4 versus 4-8? That is a lot at stake, at least for me.

I don't think it had many big-picture implications, to be honest. We lost a few guys in pursuit of money. We paid to keep a few guys we wanted to keep. And recruiting, both before and after that season, was mediocre.

It's pretty much going to be like that most years from here on out, and 3-9 vs 8-4 isn't going to change that much. I think people are mostly resigned to that.

Shoot, you could even predict 7-5, give or take, for us every year even before NIL and when recruiting was a little more volatile and we didn't almost exclusively land low to mid 3-stars. Now, it's even more predictable.

 

[gary2]

I don't think it had many big-picture implications, to be honest. We lost a few guys in pursuit of money. We paid to keep a few guys we wanted to keep. And recruiting, both before and after that season, was mediocre.

It's pretty much going to be like that most years from here on out, and 3-9 vs 8-4 isn't going to change that much. I think people are mostly resigned to that.

Shoot, you could even predict 7-5, give or take, for us every year even before NIL and when recruiting was a little more volatile and we didn't almost exclusively land low to mid 3-stars. Now, it's even more predictable.

I think we had a window of opportunity to advance beyond the limits you present.

The Jurkovec year closed that window and set us back.

I have higher hopes for Pitt next year than most.

Time to start the process of opening another window.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

@ West Virginia
Louisville
@ Florida State
@ Syracuse (games in that dome aren't easy)
NC State
@ Stanford (west coast might not be easy)
Notre Dame
@ Georgia Tech (they're improving and have Haynes King)
Miami

So if I spot you Duquesne, CMU, and Boston College (and spotting them might be a little generous), can you find me five more wins?

I think you're right that 8-4 is nothing to sneeze at; I just don't see it happening. I mean it's possible, but...

Here's my WAG as it stands now:

Duq - W
CMU - W
@ West Virginia - T
Louisville - T
BC - W
@ Florida State - L
@ Syracuse - T
NC State - T
@ Stanford - W
Notre Dame - L
@ Georgia Tech - T
Miami - L

I think we have 3 clear losses, 4 clear wins (as clear they can get for us anyway), and a bunch of tossups (some of them are more likely to be a W or L than not). We'll be outcoached in the GT and Ville games, and possibly the Cuse game. WVU is a wildcard since RichRod seems to have lost whatever he had there the first time. NC State is a game we should win but often lose.

If WVU is struggling to find their footing with a new coach, we don't blow any games, and we win the ACC tossups other than Ville (which I almost marked down as an L), we get to 8-4. Doesn't feel super likely unfortunately.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

I think we had a window of opportunity to advance beyond the limits you present.

The Jurkovec year closed that window and set us back.

I have higher hopes for Pitt next year than most.

Time to start the process of opening another window.

I don't think Narduzzi recruits well enough to consistently maintain the success we saw a few years ago, and we don't employ an offense or defense that gives us a schematic advantage to compensate for the middling talent on the field overall.

The only way to "open another window" is to change at least one of the two issues above.

 

[Pitt2009]

Here's my WAG as it stands now:

Duq - W
CMU - W
@ West Virginia - T
Louisville - T
BC - W
@ Florida State - L
@ Syracuse - T
NC State - T
@ Stanford - W
Notre Dame - L
@ Georgia Tech - T
Miami - L

I think we have 3 clear losses, 4 clear wins (as clear they can get for us anyway), and a bunch of tossups (some of them are more likely to be a W or L than not). We'll be outcoached in the GT and Ville games, and possibly the Cuse game. WVU is a wildcard since RichRod seems to have lost whatever he had there the first time. NC State is a game we should win but often lose.

If WVU is struggling to find their footing with a new coach, we don't blow any games, and we win the ACC tossups other than Ville (which I almost marked down as an L), we get to 8-4. Doesn't feel super likely unfortunately.

I think FSU will be much improved from last year, but I’m curious as to why you have them as a likely loss?

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I think we had a window of opportunity to advance beyond the limits you present.

The Jurkovec year closed that window and set us back.

I have higher hopes for Pitt next year than most.

Time to start the process of opening another window.

NIL killed our window of opportunity more than any season did. It was game over as soon as the numbers got silly. We won the ACC in 2021. The next two classes were ranked #68 and #52 by this website. There were no corners being turned.

And I would argue that hiring Cignetti and finishing 9-4 in 2022 - a year when we had the talent to go 10-2, especially if Addison stayed - was a way bigger blow than the Jurkovec season. Though I still don't think either would have mattered once NIL blew up. There was talk about guys like Kancey and Hill almost leaving before the 2022 season because they received some big offers from other teams (Dennis also said he fielded numerous offers). So if they were that close in 2022, they definitely would have left in 2023. The numbers got out of control.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

There is really no team in the ACC that has elite talent across the field. If you

I think FSU will be much improved from last year, but I’m curious as to why you have them as a likely loss?

It's at FSU, and I think they will be much improved from last year while we are not, giving them a significant advantage in talent (as usual).

I considered putting it as a toss up, but I don't think they'll have the same internal issues they had last year and the team will play in at least the vicinity of the sum of their individual abilities.

 

[gary2]

I don't think Narduzzi recruits well enough to consistently maintain the success we saw a few years ago, and we don't employ an offense or defense that gives us a schematic advantage to compensate for the middling talent on the field overall.

The only way to "open another window" is to change at least one of the two issues above.

I think the Jurk year did one good thing. It forced a change of the offense and brought us Bell.

You are right about the defense. The scheme has killed us.

Hopefully, inside players like Brewu and Whittington and our three starting linebackers overcome scheme.

Safety play needs big improvement. I think McIntyre played out of position last season.

 

[King Of All Message Boards]

Speaking of expensive windows…:this window will cost considerably more than casement. And history doesn’t bode well.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

I think the Jurk year did one good thing. It forced a change of the offense and brought us Bell.

You are right about the defense. The scheme has killed us.

Hopefully, inside players like Brewu and Whittington and our three starting linebackers overcome scheme.

Safety play needs big improvement. I think McIntyre played out of position last season.

You are right that we are trying to change on one side of the ball. Bell seems to have a lot to learn, but I'm ok with giving him a few years to see if he and Narduzzi exit together in a couple years or not.

 

[gary2]

NIL killed our window of opportunity more than any season did. It was game over as soon as the numbers got silly. We won the ACC in 2021. The next two classes were ranked #68 and #52 by this website. There were no corners being turned.

And I would argue that hiring Cignetti and finishing 9-4 in 2022 - a year when we had the talent to go 10-2, especially if Addison stayed - was a way bigger blow than the Jurkovec season. Though I still don't think either would have mattered once NIL blew up. There was talk about guys like Kancey and Hill almost leaving before the 2022 season because they received some big offers from other teams (Dennis also said he fielded numerous offers). So if they were that close in 2022, they definitely would have left in 2023. The numbers got out of control.

Agree about Cignetti. The Jurk year was the cherry on top, but the Cignetti hiring enabled that.

What I don't get is how in the Majors/Sherrill years Pitt bought players against anybody.
Hell, Pitt was pretty good at buying players under Gottfried. In basketball, Evans successfully bought players outside our traditional league footprint.

NIL money from boosters with the proper encouragement should not be a problem.

Disparity in TV revenue is, but we do have the potential alumni and booster base to compensate enough for regular 8-4s and the occasional more.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

Seems a lot of people are all or nothing.

Nothing matters other than all?

When did that get started?

Very important question. From the board experts, I'm told that bowl games are nothing, nit bids are nothing, spring games are nothing, etc. I'm not sure why we're fielding teams at this point, when everything is nothing.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

Very important question. From the board experts, I'm told that bowl games are nothing, nit bids are nothing, spring games are nothing, etc. I'm not sure why we're fielding teams at this point, when everything is nothing.

Would you watch the Steelers, Pirates, or Pens play in a tournament comprised of all the teams that didn't make the playoffs that had no impact on anything related to the next season?

The spring game is a marketing event and a bit of a reward for the players.

I think there's a reason you didn't mention regular season games or post season games with championship implications in your complaint.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

Would you watch the Steelers, Pirates, or Pens play in a tournament comprised of all the teams that didn't make the playoffs that had no impact on anything related to the next season?

The spring game is a marketing event and a bit of a reward for the players.

I think there's a reason you didn't mention regular season games or post season games with championship implications in your complaint.

Well you're creating a professional post season that never existed, right? Not sure how to use that as comparison.

Spring game I don't care either way.

Post season college bball tournaments and bowl games have existed for many, many years, and the rewards are no different than they were before anybody ever said they are exhibition games, or whatever you may call them.

The NIT is literally a tournament with championship implications. It's a tournament with a champion.

I don't really know why we play the regular season either, as the post season will 99% of the time in football be "exhibition." I'd put the % in basketball at 95%. Meaning we'd have a 1% chance in playing for a national championship in football, and a 5% chance in basketball, meaning making the championship game, as that is the new definition of what matters.

It's all very odd to me.

 

[gary2]

What I don't get is how in the Majors/Sherrill years Pitt bought players against anybody.
Hell, Pitt was pretty good at buying players under Gottfried. In basketball, Evans successfully bought players outside our traditional league footprint.

NIL money from boosters with the proper encouragement should not be a problem.

Disparity in TV revenue is, but we do have the potential alumni and booster base to compensate enough for regular 8-4s and the occasional more.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

Well you're creating a professional post season that never existed, right? Not sure how to use that as comparison.

Spring game I don't care either way.

Post season college bball tournaments and bowl games have existed for many, many years, and the rewards are no different than they were before anybody ever said they are exhibition games, or whatever you may call them.

The NIT is literally a tournament with championship implications. It's a tournament with a champion.

I don't really know why we play the regular season either, as the post season will 99% of the time in football be "exhibition." I'd put the % in basketball at 95%. Meaning we'd have a 1% chance in playing for a national championship in football, and a 5% chance in basketball, meaning making the championship game, as that is the new definition of what matters.

It's all very odd to me.

What's odd to me are people clinging to the notion that anyone with any sense cares about the NIT when it's turned into a low major tournament and people who don't understand that about 30 bowl games have been created by ESPN so they can make more money. The cachet that these events once held is long gone.

Do you feel the same way about the CBI? If not, you should ask yourself why that's the case. If you do, you're probably the only person on earth who feels that way, and you should probably ask yourself why that's the case too.

It's not 1970. Times have changed, and the athletic department should change with them.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

What's odd to me are people clinging to the notion that anyone with any sense cares about the NIT when it's turned into a low major tournament and people who don't understand that about 30 bowl games have been created by ESPN so they can make more money. The cachet that these events once held is long gone.

Do you feel the same way about the CBI? If not, you should ask yourself why that's the case. If you do, you're probably the only person on earth who feels that way, and you should probably ask yourself why that's the case too.

It's not 1970. Times have changed, and the athletic department should change with them.

There's no reason to not care about these post season tournaments and games other than to say wait, let's change the rules, you're no longer rewarded with a bonus game or tournament for having a year that isn't horrible. And we want to do this because why? What exactly is the point of messing up what already worked fine? Who exactly cares if they don't have cachet or are played for money? When was it not for money?

The CBI is obviously newer but go ahead and play in it, I'd rather see that than nothing. Nothing is nothing and we're on this board to talk about the something that is them playing games. If they don't play games, we're left to bicker about what part of society collapsed that led to this point.

It doesn't matter to me who plays in the NIT and who doesn't as a reason to not play in it. I know who's playing in it. Go out and do something, don't sulk and quit.

I wasn't alive in 1970. They're changing the athletic department to bring what benefit? Teaching kids to quit? That hard work deserves no payoff besides jumping in the transfer portal? That we were wrong for the last 100 years and suddenly became smarter?

There are plenty of folks who agree with me, so take your hyperbole elsewhere. I find many people's opinions to be odd. I know I think differently and am not afraid to do so.

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

There's no reason to not care about these post season tournaments and games other than to say wait, let's change the rules, you're no longer rewarded with a bonus game or tournament for having a year that isn't horrible. And we want to do this because why? What exactly is the point of messing up what already worked fine? Who exactly cares if they don't have cachet or are played for money? When was it not for money?

The CBI is obviously newer but go ahead and play in it, I'd rather see that than nothing. Nothing is nothing and we're on this board to talk about the something that is them playing games. If they don't play games, we're left to bicker about what part of society collapsed that led to this point.

It doesn't matter to me who plays in the NIT and who doesn't as a reason to not play in it. I know who's playing in it. Go out and do something, don't sulk and quit.

I wasn't alive in 1970. They're changing the athletic department to bring what benefit? Teaching kids to quit? That hard work deserves no payoff besides jumping in the transfer portal? That we were wrong for the last 100 years and suddenly became smarter?

There are plenty of folks who agree with me, so take your hyperbole elsewhere. I find many people's opinions to be odd. I know I think differently and am not afraid to do so.

There are plenty of folks who agree with me too.

You're welcome to your opinion and are free to feel that the players or AD robbed you of watching that eagerly anticipated matchup with CSUN or North Alabama.

What I don't get is the insistence that Pitt should play these games without any justification other than "that's the way it's always been" and refusing to contemplate that playing a tournament against mostly low major opponents with a team that many people want to see blown up doesn't make much sense.

Why should the staff spend time getting players you want to jettison ready to play when they could be spending time recruiting their replacements? Why do you place so much value on a tournament that takes place right on top of the portal window opening and is full of teams who need to improve their rosters for next year, which indicates that the NCAA doesn't care much about it?

If you can answer those questions without resorting to a lecture about moral failings, let me know. If that's the entire reason you think they should play, that's fine, but don't ask me to pretend it's a good idea objectively.

 

[PittPharm2002]

In a stunning change from most of recent Pitt FB history (aside from the latter KP years), QB is probably the position of least concern heading into next season.

Because we have a very mediocre returning qb ?

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Because we have a very mediocre returning qb ?

Yeah, pencil me in for very much concerned. Didn't he finish with the highest adjusted turnover rate in college football, or something close to it? The fact that defenses didn't always catch 'em doesn't mean they weren't there to be had. Add in the injury concerns and I think it's more than fair to be hopeful but skeptical.

 

[PittPharm2002]

Yeah, pencil me in for very much concerned. Didn't he finish with the highest adjusted turnover rate in college football, or something close to it? The fact that defenses didn't always catch 'em doesn't mean they weren't there to be had. Add in the injury concerns and I think it's more than fair to be hopeful but skeptical.

I do not understand this confidence in him.
He had a couple good comebacks , and then was very average

 

[ebonylover40]

I do not understand this confidence in him.
He had a couple good comebacks , and then was very average

Because he was damn redshirt freshman! You guys are pathetic.

 

[cashisking884]

This was PFF’s write up going into the SMU game, and things didn’t exactly get better from there:

Holstein’s 56.0 passing grade is the fourth-worst in the Power Four and 133rd among FBS signal-callers. His 14 turnover-worthy plays are also tied for the third most in the Power Four, despite throwing just six interceptions.

PFF isn’t the alpha and omega of stats, but you aren’t being graded one of the worst QBs in college football by PFF, and are actually “good.” The disparity between reality and their grades isn’t that significant.

But there is some reason for optimism:

While the Panthers are 23rd in the nation in EPA per pass, a good amount of luck goes into that figure.

So the passing offense was still pretty good.

And:

Pittsburgh’s offensive line has also had issues protecting Holstein, allowing a pressure on 32.9% of dropbacks (90th in FBS). Holstein has struggled when under pressure as well, posting a 42.8 passing grade in such situations.

So Holstein’s struggles weren’t all him. The OL was really bad.


There is a 2025 timeline where the game really slows down for Holstein and the OL improves a decent amount. It’s not going to take a miracle for those two things to happen.

 

[cashisking884]

Because he was damn redshirt freshman! You guys are pathetic.

That’s more of a reason to not throw him away.

It’s one thing to argue it’s too early to say he’s trash.
It’s another to argue that based on last year he’s a treasure.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

Because he was damn redshirt freshman! You guys are pathetic.

meh, i am somewhere in the midde between you guys and souf.


I dont think he's entirely wrong with the exaggeration on Eli. with that said, there are definitely some things i've seen from him to be excited for. i believe the arm, size and athletic ability are there. With that said, minus a fluke home run (hail mary-esque) at wvu and a ridiculously soft pass defense in the 4th quarter with Cincy, he was quite pedestrian..


so both sides are right, and wrong.

 

[PittPharm2002]

Because he was damn redshirt freshman! You guys are pathetic.

So - the expectation is he will be better than mediocre ?

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

So - the expectation is he will be better than mediocre ?

you really didnt see anything from him last year to be excited about? Im not debating with you, im seriously asking you a question..

i agree, he's FAR from a finished product but you really didnt see anything at all? im going to respectfully disagree with you on that..

 

[PittPharm2002]

you really didnt see anything from him last year to be excited about? Im not debating with you, im seriously asking you a question..

i agree, he's FAR from a finished product but you really didnt see anything at all? im going to respectfully disagree with you on that..

I saw him play pretty bad for a coulee games - and then really good for a couple 4th quarters -
And then be essentially neutralized since the cal game .
What I’m saying is folks who pretend he’s some great qb are ODing on Hopium

 

[AllegeneeGenacGenac]

Pittsburgh’s offensive line has also had issues protecting Holstein, allowing a pressure on 32.9% of dropbacks (90th in FBS). Holstein has struggled when under pressure as well, posting a 42.8 passing grade in such situations.

So Holstein’s struggles weren’t all him. The OL was really bad.

This is why we shouldn't be paying to bring in a top backup QB. They're also going to be hampered by a below average OL, since the resources that should have been spent shoring up the OL were used to bring in an insurance policy.

Holstein won games, not a small part due to luck when his poor throws weren't intercepted. He has the physical attributes of a good QB, and we aren't bringing in someone clearly better, so we should roll with him this year and see if he improves IMO.

 

[12162022]

Well you're creating a professional post season that never existed, right? Not sure how to use that as comparison.

Spring game I don't care either way.

Post season college bball tournaments and bowl games have existed for many, many years, and the rewards are no different than they were before anybody ever said they are exhibition games, or whatever you may call them.

The NIT is literally a tournament with championship implications. It's a tournament with a champion.

I don't really know why we play the regular season either, as the post season will 99% of the time in football be "exhibition." I'd put the % in basketball at 95%. Meaning we'd have a 1% chance in playing for a national championship in football, and a 5% chance in basketball, meaning making the championship game, as that is the new definition of what matters.

It's all very odd to me.

The CBI was won by Pitt in the early 'teens. Ain't new.

 

[cashisking884]

This is why we shouldn't be paying to bring in a top backup QB. They're also going to be hampered by a below average OL, since the resources that should have been spent shoring up the OL were used to bring in an insurance policy.

Holstein won games, not a small part due to luck when his poor throws weren't intercepted. He has the physical attributes of a good QB, and we aren't bringing in someone clearly better, so we should roll with him this year and see if he improves IMO.

I’d be interested in seeing how the OL run push metrics looked?

The PFF stat only indicates the pressure rate, not necessarily who should be blamed for the pressure rate.

If the OL run push metrics are good, I wouldn’t expect the pass blocking to be that bad, even if not as good.

Which might indicate that Holstein was responsible for a lot of the pressure due to not reading the field fast enough, scrambling into pressure, etc.

 

[Richard A]

I’d be interested in seeing how the OL run push metrics looked?

The PFF stat only indicates the pressure rate, not necessarily who should be blamed for the pressure rate.

If the OL run push metrics are good, I wouldn’t expect the pass blocking to be that bad, even if not as good.

Which might indicate that Holstein was responsible for a lot of the pressure due to not reading the field fast enough, scrambling into pressure, etc.

In regards to your last paragraph, a lot of that could be attributed to the fact that he was a redshirt freshman playing for the first time in a new offense. Hopefully, in his second year he’ll be better in reading defenses and coverages and getting the ball out quicker. Also, the receivers must run the correct routes and get opened.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

There are plenty of folks who agree with me too.

You're welcome to your opinion and are free to feel that the players or AD robbed you of watching that eagerly anticipated matchup with CSUN or North Alabama.

What I don't get is the insistence that Pitt should play these games without any justification other than "that's the way it's always been" and refusing to contemplate that playing a tournament against mostly low major opponents with a team that many people want to see blown up doesn't make much sense.

Why should the staff spend time getting players you want to jettison ready to play when they could be spending time recruiting their replacements? Why do you place so much value on a tournament that takes place right on top of the portal window opening and is full of teams who need to improve their rosters for next year, which indicates that the NCAA doesn't care much about it?

If you can answer those questions without resorting to a lecture about moral failings, let me know. If that's the entire reason you think they should play, that's fine, but don't ask me to pretend it's a good idea objectively.

Good points.

It devalues the regular season a ton to say OK, who cares, no end of season tournament matters unless we win it all in the big tournament, or the big playoff game, which will basically never happen for us. That's the obvious #1 answer.

Which brings me back to why are we even playing the games then? If the reward is now a punishment or something by having no post season, why why are we playing? To raise money to do it again next year with no reward?

That's the way it has been is usually a good enough reason for me. The state of the world, had that advice been followed more, would be better, when looking at all the horrible things in our society we didn't have in 1970, or whenever time you choose. That does not mean stop innovation, it means stop degeneracy which is obviously worse than the way things always were. You can call that moral, but it's also purely factual.

The discussion about why the portal is sitting on top of tournament time point to the need to fix the portal. To say no is to say OK, I prefer no postseason to a postseason. It doesn't make sense to me. Unless you have a better postseason idea. Taking away games from the postseason schedule doesn't make sense.

Anyway, I place value on those tournaments because I want to see my team keep playing! That's what we're all here for. If the new normal is we're gonna play a regular season but if we don't hit it big time it was a waste of time, I am not a fan.

Why are we worried about jettisoning players in a hurry when the next season won't matter anyway unless we make a final 4 or whatever is actually considered meaningful anymore? If you can't get a player to wait to leave until after a few tournament games, or get a new player to wait to sign until a few games are over, they're a bad player to begin with. But with no postseason payoff for getting better players and having a decent season, I'm not finding rationale to keep playing at all, unless it's only to win a regular season championship. The big east regular season championships basketball won a few times are way higher achieving than getting lucky and winning 4-6 games in a row in a tournament. The regular season crown actually means you were the best over the course of an entire season. Is that now the new goal? It's just way harder to do than play in whatever post season tournament.

Maybe the post regular season needs adjusted with this portal stuff to make more sense. Otherwise I see it as sillyness. I would not submit to the portal and ncaa, I would fix the problem. I'm open to other ideas to accomplish this, but to say skip the postseason takes away games, which messes up our fun in talking about them and cheering them on.

 

[Atilla Cosby]

The CBI was won by Pitt in the early 'teens. Ain't new.

I hope we all knew pitt won the CBI.

"New" in this context means not around for 79% of the time since the NIT started in 1938. Which is the percentage of time the NIT existed with no CBI. Hence the CBI is new.

 

[LeftCoastPanther]

What I don't get is how in the Majors/Sherrill years Pitt bought players against anybody.
Hell, Pitt was pretty good at buying players under Gottfried. In basketball, Evans successfully bought players outside our traditional league footprint.

NIL money from boosters with the proper encouragement should not be a problem.

Disparity in TV revenue is, but we do have the potential alumni and booster base to compensate enough for regular 8-4s and the occasional more.

Pitt lost a lot potential boosters by killing football in the 1990s. Who is willing to give big money when you can’t trust the university? Since three coaches in three years in football and cutting hoops’ budget around the same time, the results have been average in football and pretty poor in hoops.

I’m hoping Greene and the Gabel can turn this around. It feels dicey with Capel as the coach and football in the middle of the conference in NIL. I’ll add Narduzzi’s pathetic handling of the bowl game by playing for overtime to not have confidence in either coach at the moment.

 

[ebonylover40]

meh, i am somewhere in the midde between you guys and souf.


I dont think he's entirely wrong with the exaggeration on Eli. with that said, there are definitely some things i've seen from him to be excited for. i believe the arm, size and athletic ability are there. With that said, minus a fluke home run (hail mary-esque) at wvu and a ridiculously soft pass defense in the 4th quarter with Cincy, he was quite pedestrian..


so both sides are right, and wrong.

The problem with saying minus this or that to show he may have been lucky. You say the same thing for dropped passes, penalties, etc. Those things are simply part of the games. Every QB gets lucky in a game. He still had the great TD to int ratio regardless of luck. And again, he was a redshirt freshman who never even got on the field til last year. When you you look at the different things he did prior to the injuries, how in the world can you not be excited about what he can do with a year under has belt.

I just dont understand how saying that he should be better than last year, a expecting him to be a decent QB, can be over dramatic. Who cares what PFF says? You can make your own judgement by what you saw on the field from. I dont think anyone has said he was all world. Its just going on the premise that he should be better than he was as a freshman. Isnt that what's suppose to happen when you start a freshman QB? I can see if he was actually terrible. But when you have to pick apart a few instances in some games he played, that just shows he did more than we could have exspected. I mean what is the problem if people think he is going to be good?

Its like some posters, not saying you, just hate to see fans have hope for Pitt. Its kind of petty.

 

[Zeldas Open Roof]

The problem with saying minus this or that to show he may have been lucky. You say the same thing for dropped passes, penalties, etc. Those things are simply part of the games. Every QB gets lucky in a game. He still had the great TD to int ratio regardless of luck. And again, he was a redshirt freshman who never even got on the field til last year. When you you look at the different things he did prior to the injuries, how in the world can you not be excited about what he can do with a year under has belt.

I just dont understand how saying that he should be better than last year, a expecting him to be a decent QB, can be over dramatic. Who cares what PFF says? You can make your own judgement by what you saw on the field from. I dont think anyone has said he was all world. Its just going on the premise that he should be better than he was as a freshman. Isnt that what's suppose to happen when you start a freshman QB? I can see if he was actually terrible. But when you have to pick apart a few instances in some games he played, that just shows he did more than we could have exspected. I mean what is the problem if people think he is going to be good?

Its like some posters, not saying you, just hate to see fans have hope for Pitt. Its kind of petty.

No one is arguing about him improving or being a decent qb.

I’ll go as far as saying if neither of this happens, the bell extension was a terrible move.

 

[cashisking884]

The problem with saying minus this or that to show he may have been lucky. You say the same thing for dropped passes, penalties, etc. Those things are simply part of the games. Every QB gets lucky in a game.

But luck doesn’t necessarily balance out over a small sample size.

There’s a reason why baseball analytics track hard hit contact vs current batting average.

Or why Phil Steele has had an entire write up dedicated to turnover margin from the previous year, when previewing teams for the upcoming season. Because even over the course of an entire season, the luck might not balance out.

It’s not really accurate to say “everybody gets unlucky and lucky over the course of an entire season, so that’s all baked into the stats.” It’s not baked into the stats.

I just dont understand how saying that he should be better than last year, a expecting him to be a decent QB, can be over dramatic. Who cares what PFF says?

Go back to summer of ‘22 season and summer of ‘23 season on this board.

When discussing Slovis and PJ, I would cite PFF’s analysis of them. And how there were a lot of red flags because PFF had them ranking horrible in stuff like turnover worthy passes, average depth of throw, QB rating within the structure of the play, etc.

A lot of people said “hahaha. Who cares what PFF thinks?”
But they absolutely nailed both of them.

 

[cashisking884]

No one is arguing about him improving or being a decent qb.

I’ll go as far as saying if neither of this happens, the bell extension was a terrible move.

Yeah, these people are tilting at windmills.

Everybody is acknowledging there are reasons to think he can improve, and reasons for optimism.

There are also reasons to think he wasn’t that good last year, and needs to get a lot better this year.

The two things aren’t mutually exclusive. To argue the latter isn’t to deny the former.