Well-coached teams don’t have tons of MAs and unforced errors. You may not want to admit this, or maybe you just don’t understand it, but chronic poor execution is a byproduct of poor coaching. Well-coached teams execute consistently and make very few unforced errors.
Pro-style vs spread
- Thread starter steelcurtain55.
- Start date
Pitt does run some spread out of the shotgun, and it's fairly obvious by the play calling early in the year they would like to throw vertical. That's pretty much been something they have scaled back on because it's proven to be futile.
Pitt doesn't run hardly any RPO or tempo.
Saban refers to his offense as pro-style with spread and RPO sprinkled in. Call it what you want, it's multiple.
Pitt does run some spread out of the shotgun, and it's fairly obvious by the play calling early in the year they would like to throw vertical. That's pretty much been something they have scaled back on because it's proven to be futile.
Pitt doesn't run hardly any RPO or tempo.
Saban refers to his offense as pro-style with spread and RPO sprinkled in. Call it what you want, it's multiple.
You're way off base here. We're talking about college football, not the NFL. Unforced errors and sloppy execution are a staple of the game.
Just watch Alabama, Clemson, Tennessee and USC. You will see sloppy play in abundance.
The difference between really good programs and also-rans is talent. Talent is damn near everything.
I think people have trouble explaining the spread but they're sort of right about it's advantages. What the spread does is a few things:
1) put as many WR on the field as possible and space them out, which forces the defense to declare whether they're zone/man and whether they're blitzing. The defense just has a hard time disguising what they want to do and also covering 4-5 WR.
2) this not only makes the pre-snap read easier for the QB, but it makes the post-snap read easier as well. The extra spacing reduces visual clutter on the field and makes routes - especially your one on one routes - easier to read.
3) the extra spacing helps the risk/reward for ball placement. Better chance for YAC and less chance of a pick since there are fewer defenders.
4) since you're in space, a successful completion has a higher chance to go for an explosive play. There are just fewer other defenders around to help.
5) if the defense is really sitting back and selling out to defend the pass it's easy for the QB to read and hand off for a productive rush underneath, e.g., the RPO or just letting the QB audible into a run with 5 OL on 4 DL and 1 LB.
I dislike Pitt's current offense for a lot of reasons. But schematically my problem with it is that we waste a lot of downs on unproductive runs out of condensed formations or the non-shotgun where the upside of a passing play is pretty capped and we generally fail to space the field.
An offensive play is currency. It shouldn't be wasted on dives over and over. In college football, you need to score 30+ week to win consistently and Pitt's offense just schematically makes it very hard to do that.
Last edited:
As someone who played for disciplinarian-type coaches at the HS and D1 college level who stressed proper execution by imposing physical and mental consequences for the entire team when certain mistakes were repeatedly made in practice, I'm pretty sure I'm not way off base. My college coach is in the NCAA HOF for a reason.
Practice repetition of something to the point where you can do it in your sleep has always worked, no matter what the sport or undertaking.
Was the difference between Pitt and WMU, Pitt and Louisville, Pitt and GT talent?
On the balance, Narduzzi runs a sloppy, inconsistent program. The team can look like world beaters one week and come out the next looking like they've never played together before. Or play a game where one unit, the defense or offense, plays great, but the other, and/or special teams, looks terrible. These are the hallmarks of a coach who really doesnt know what he's doing. Narduzzi has gone throught 5 OCs in 7 years. Hard to develop any kind of identity or consistency that way.
I agree with some of your points but not this point. Most coaches, even early adopter spread coaches, are using tight ends and/or h-backs now. 11 personnel is probably the most common in college football and the NFL? Just guessing but I bet that's true. I especially don't think Pitt should do a lot of 4 or 5 WR sets when we have a running back as good as Izzy. A good tight end can be a huge advantage regardless of scheme, with the flexibility as a blocker and big receiver.
I'm not defending our offensive production this year by any means though. The loss of Pickett was even bigger than I thought it would be (I was too optimistic on Slovis based on previous play) and Addison just as bad as I was worried about.
IDK what adjustments we should make, but again I'd be interested to see if it'd help Slovis to do some more RPO.
I also am not as anti bunch formation as some on here. Mostly we're using it because our WRs are not as good this year, so it allows then to run little pick/rub plays to try to get open; I haven't found that to be any problem for Izzy's ability to run.
Yeah 11 is a great formation because like you said it really gives you play flexibility with both the run and the pass. You can still spread things out pretty good in 11, at least enough to force the defense to declare almost all of their rushers. Then you just have to read 1 guy.
I agree with you that there's not a magic formation. You can win in a lot of ways, that's why football is so great. But you need a synthesis of personnel, thought, and action. And we just don't have that right now. That's the problem way more than not running enough X formation or Y formation, not doing motion, etc.
^I've always been a "mostly it's personnel" guy. Of course the word "mostly" will do more or less work in different games and winning close games can indeed often come down to coaching, not just talent.
Yeah, read your first paragraph again. It's a very thin tightrope in this day and age with the "physical and mental consequences" It's a different age. That shit doesn't fly as much today. From hitting in practice to consequences to,,,. well, just about everything. Players today are free to take their talents elsewhere almost anytime they want without any deterence. How much do you think guys hit today in practice today compared to when you played? Most of the disciplinarian types have either died off, left the game, or left struggling to adapt to change in their old age.
College football will always be, first and foremost about talent. No program wins at a high level consistently without superior talent than their competition. The key to having a consistently good program is to consistently produce a roster full of special players.
And to answer your question, Pitt certainly had more talent WMU. They had slight talent advantage over GT. I would say Louisville & Pitt are similar. Pitt has an advantage on D, Cards on O.
How does NDSU, an FCS school with less scholarships based out Fargo, ND have a 9-3 record vs. FBS teams basing out of an under I formation, A gap power?
I don't watch all of football. But, I did watch Michigan vs. PSU and I saw quite a bit of under center football from Michigan and it was pretty dominating. Did they live under center - no. But, even in the pistol they had the same personnel and the same formations matched with the same run scheme. It was dominating.
I watch some Wisconsin. That tailback puts up some big #'s and from what I see it's a ton of under center work. -
If we're talking just purely under center, how come the academies rarely ever get shutdown in the run game vs. FBS opponents?
The answer isn't going under center or being in gun or pistol. All of these things work and will continue to work. I've seen the cat skinned many ways.
There absolutely are lots of ways to do this.
Some of them happen to be better than others. The best coach in the country realized a few years ago that how he was doing it was sub-optimal, and he can and does recruit well enough to make just about any system ever devised work.
Are you on the staff payroll? You are going out of your way to defend a terrible scheme and coordinator
Mike Locksley said the main reason Nick made the transition to basing out of the gun was Nick didn't think they recruited well enough at QB and wanted to add the dimension of a running threat. Now I know Mac won a natty for them but Nick's motivation was the reducing the box by having a running threat whether through design or the ability to extend plays.
The reason you still see under center play where parity is 10 fold compared to even the SEC is the same reason you saw it run 30-40-50 years ago. There are aspects of the game when you're under center which make both running and throwing down field easier. There are aspects of the game that make it harder as well.
The reason I asked how does NDSU do it in dominating fashion vs FSC opponents as well as FBS opponents is if it can work there, it can work anywhere. #1. NDSU is committed to the system. #2. they recruit for the system. #3. they recruit guys with the expectation of keeping them for 4-5 years - tons of development is taking place and they will often reach on guys who have the athleticism but not necessarily the size especially up front. They will take a 6'5-6'6 235lb TE and turn him into a 315lb OT in 3-4 years. I believe too many FBS schools aren't willing to bet on their ability to develop. I know this for a fact. #4. NDSU has elite coaches.
you just don't understand the game you get frustrated because of it. I understand, I'm the same way watching hockey, doubles tennis, bocce ball, etc.
I've been reading steelcurtain's posts going back like 15 years from TOS. Agree or disagree, hes always been consistent that fans who want a quick schematic fix are being irrational. Lots of our fans loved "the spread" when we had Wanny then hated it with Graham. Its like how fans always love the back up QB
You seemed surprised by the results this year. You actually thought this team had playoff potential.
There is nothing to defend. Pitt simply doesn't have very much offensive talent except at RB & TE. That's hard to scheme around.
Some national pundits called it. Mike Huguenin was all over it. I listened to him on a Basilio podcast coming up for the Tennessee game. He talked about how he predicted Pitt would win the Coastal if Slovis was in 2019 form & be very pedestrian if he was in 2021 form. He went on to say he thought it would be a case of the latter because he thought Pitt's receivers were "awful" and that Slovis was overrated. ...Pretty much on the money, except I would say Slovis has probably regressed from his 2021 form.
And yet it doesn't.
So are you saying that the fact that everyone doesn't do what NDS does is proof of the idea that some people have that your average football coach isn't very smart? Because if they were smart, surely they would do something that would work anywhere.
We almost beat Tennessee, who is the number three team. If we were running a modern scheme we would be 6-1 or 7-0 especially with our defense
I disagree. Talent is not damn near anything. Coaching is at least 50%. The single most overrated coach in college football is Jimbo Fisher. He certainly has the talent, at least to do better than he has. Miami has the best talent in the Coastal, and likely has 80% of the years they have been in the ACC, but they have yet to win the Coastal. Tennessee had alot of talent over the past 15 years, they made a good coaching hire, got a good QB transfer and voila. Penn State certainly has more talent that consecutive 5 loss seasons. USC out West was a clusterbleep for the last few years until Riley stepped in. Then there is Texas. Coaching matters.
Yeah, coaching matters, but your list of coaches who win without talent is going to be small. In fact, I'm pretty sure the list of mediocre coaches who win with talent is going to be much longer. Heck, there are a bunch who have won national championships, including Jimbo Fisher.
Then there is Pitt, who always seems to be somewhere in the middle. But we have these psycho fans who expect them to win 10 games after losing the most talented QB we've had since Marino and a a 1st round WR.
Was Whipple running a "modern scheme"? Canada? Chaney? Idk what this even means.
Under center is antiquated in today’s college football landscape.
Ultimately it’s results based
we don’t generate mismatches or chunk plays -
So our offense stinks
Most teams run some sort of the same offense. There’s only so many sets you can use on a football field the only thing that changes is personnel groupings and the route trees mixing them with different formations to mask what you’re trying to do. Alabama does run a lot of the same concepts that Pitt runs It’s just that they use different personnel groupings to do it and they execute it a lot better because much like how Kenny Pickett could pick and choose his matchups last year that is what Bryce young is able to do. Alabama‘s biggest problem which is actually a football wide problem is that it is hard to develop consistent offensive lineman who can run block at the same level of players even as early as 10 years ago. Because teams don’t practice has much in pads and lineman don’t get as much time to work on technique they want to minimize the effect that inconsistent line play gives. There is a reason why air raid offenses don’t work long-term in the NFL. Because when you install a gimmick offense eventually people know how to take the gimmick away. So what Alabama did is Nick Saban one of them to be able to attack different matchups if stuff wasn’t working. The offense that he had before Only attacked defenses in one way where if you could figure out has a team how to neutralize it they didn’t have a plan B, C or D. The biggest mistake that Cignetti has made is he threw out all of last year‘s route trees and he should’ve kept some of those concepts and just install some extra runs. You would think that with as much money has these guys make they wouldn’t do stupid stuff like that but sadly we see that isn’t true. It actually has more than enough weapons to have only lost one game at this point but the way that they’re deploying those weapons minimizes their skill set
I couldn't find new college stats but according to Football Outsiders, the NFL is 63% shotgun, 37% under center; the last season I could find for college was 56% shotgun and the rest either under center or pistol. Most "multiple" teams will use a mix. If Pitt is under center more, it's probably because it makes it easier for Izzy to run certain base plays (Pistol is somewhat similar for some of those.)
Ultimately I agree with the other poster who said it's results based. I am fine with negatively judging Cignetti this year for a lack of results! I have no skin in the game except as a fan. If we go through another OC, so be it...it's the nature of the beast. I hope for all the sake of all of our sanity, Pitt beats UNC and suddenly is in the mix for this bad Coastal division again.
I'm sorry but I don't think there is a coach out there that, with this personnel, could scheme up the Xs and Os to have this team 7-0.
I think with a better passing scheme that got Izzy out in space -
It would certainly have beaten GT and UL
We hung with Tennessee because our defense was good and we scored enough
We lost the other two because our offense stunk
pittdan77
Athletic Director
I think what some are missing is that Duzz is enamored with running a pro style offense and press man defense is because the recruiting pitch is that he's prepping kids for the pros. Come to Pitt and practice in a pro facility and play a style the NFL likes. It makes sense when you're always swimming upstream.
The problem with the offense is that guys aren't always making the correct read. Slovis and the WR's more so than anyone else. Pitt has nine turnovers in the three losses and that explains the situation as much as anything else.
Talent is the most important thing. Always has been, always will. Jimbo Fisher is 120-41 overall, with a Natty & 3 ACC Championships. Would you credit coaching or talent? The QB he won a Natty with is a lot more talented than the 2 guys he's trotted out there this year. His roster was also more talented from top to bottom.
Miami hasn't really had this huge talent advantage in the Coastal. That is a myth probably based on recruiting rankings. (btw, they actually won the Coastal in 2017) Their WR situation is almost as bad as Pitt's this year. The reason Miami hasn't been winning is mostly talent related. They don't stock NFL rosters like they once did. The Canes have few household names at the next level. The list of starting QBs for the Canes since they joined the ACC has been absolutely pathetic by their standards, and bad by almost any standard.
You're using a 2 year window for PSU, but Franklin is 73-35 over 8.5 years with one Big 10 title & 5 years when they finished in the Top 3 in their division, which is about where they stack up.
You're also using a VERY NARROW window to judge Tennessee. Had Pitt or Alabama either one been able to kick a FG, the Vols would be looking at 2 losses. And if you watched Tennessee play Bama or Pitt, you definitely know the Vols had playmakers that overcame a lot of mistakes and sloppy play. Defensively, Tennessee is still a dumpster fire. The Vols happen to be stocked full of WRs & a QB tailor made to their system, and the craziest thing is that nearly all of them were recruited by the previous staff. (Tillman, Hyatt, Keyton) Even Hooker fell into Huepel's lap as he contacted Tennessee and committed 10 days before the Pruitt staff was fired. (Chris Weinke convinced him to remain at UT) Huepel didn't really like Hooker and tried to recruit over him with Joe Milton, and that bombed fairly quickly. Let's see how the season plays out and where they go from here. It will also be interesting to see how the Joe Milton reclamation project works out next year, assuming he stays at Tennessee.
Sometimes just one unit can make the difference between a good season and a disappointing one. In the case of Pitt, this team just doesn't have talent at QB or WR. It's impossible to scheme around that. They have tried. Special teams blow too. Pitt pretty much rode the talent of Izzy to a win over Tech. Take Izzy out of the equation and the VaTech game is probably a loss.
Do we line up with Izzy in the backfield or split out when we want to throw?
If he's in the backfield, do we go 20 personnel or are you thinking 10/11 personnel?
If we go 10 personnel and we're throwing the ball to him, that puts a ton of stress on the OL. 5 man protection, unless we're going quick game and they don't have to hold blocks too long.
20 personnel and 11 personnel give the ability to get a 6 man protection but now the defense is +1 in coverage with a 6 man protection.
The more 5 man protection plays we have the more "hot" routes we need built in as well. I'm not sure this QB is the best at playing fast from a mental perspective.
Maybe once cignetti is gone next season - since he never lasts a year
Your jv head coach can step in
If my JV coach gets the job, you interested in coaching some JV special teams?
FCJ not having enough talent would make sense, if he has any offensive success in the past.
I posted his offensive analytic rankings in his “hired” thread, and they aren’t good.
His entire career is one good year at Pitt a long time ago (in football years), which I think biases some fans, and then absolutely nothing.
I posted his offensive analytic rankings in his “hired” thread, and they aren’t good.
His entire career is one good year at Pitt a long time ago (in football years), which I think biases some fans, and then absolutely nothing.
