i just wanted to start the stupid thread, because you know there's a bunch of Pitt fans thinking it....i'm not one of them 
Pitt would have beat Bama
- Thread starter PhPanther1
- Start date
No.....i just wanted to start the stupid thread, because you know there's a bunch of Pitt fans thinking it....i'm not one of them
But we DO play in the best conference in America.... in both sports. Now it is time to up our game to meet the challenge.
I'm pretty sure that was valid this year even if Alabama would have won. SEC has been trending down for a few years and ACC trending up.
This post is weird and the poster weirder.
Speaks more of the poster than those the poster is apparently posting about.
Speaks more of the poster than those the poster is apparently posting about.
Not unimaginable. Pitt had the ability to keep the "ears pinned back" defense of Bama off balance. Bama is best leaning forward. I think we had the offense to keep them off balance. Stopping their run game may have posed a different kind of problem, however.
Sorry I told my Clemson friends that they would win because we could beat Alabama. You know this is why they play the game.i just wanted to start the stupid thread, because you know there's a bunch of Pitt fans thinking it....i'm not one of them
Okay, it's a wild thought, but...Pitt's losses came to teams that had good passing quarterbacks. Alabama doesn't have one of those.
As I said in another thread, Hurts is a tailback masquerading as a quarterback. If you corral him, you've got a shot -- as Clemson (for the most part) demonstrated.
As I said in another thread, Hurts is a tailback masquerading as a quarterback. If you corral him, you've got a shot -- as Clemson (for the most part) demonstrated.
If we played Bama 10 times, we would win zero.
Coming from you, I'd expect nothing better.
Do you need further proof that Pitt did beat Clemson and the Nits, too?
Last edited:
Similar threads
