ESPN.com has it’s Bowl Challenge game up and running. I’ve set up a group for the blog titled, strangely enough, “Pitt Sports Blather.” (If the direct link doesn’t take you there, here’s the front page and you can look it up.)

Participation is open to anyone. It’s a chance to show how much more you know about picking games than me. It is also a chance to see just how much confidence some have in their “other” teams, since you also pick the point value in each bowl from 1-28. So we can see how much faith JFC has in his Sun Devils or Lee in his Buckeyes.

If you are having trouble evaluating or picking games, EDSBS has their rooting interest in every bowl game. And really, though they hardly need the plug, if you aren’t reading them every day you are missing out on some of the funniest shit on the net. I will point out some recent gems: “Tim Tebow — bust,” their two-parter on “things to do in Tampa,” parts 1 and 2 (yes, it includes critiquing strip clubs), and their ongoing reviews of University promo ads. I really do advise against reading the stuff while drinking anything. Spit takes are an actual risk.

UPDATE: The direct link to the group doesn’t seem to work. It would appear the Mouse company doesn’t like direct links to things, unless you are already signed-up. You can go to the frontpage, sign-up (or in if you already have a previous sign-in name) and then join the group. Sorry for the inconvenience

Unlike the name basketball schools — UNC, Arizona, Kansas or UCLA — or schools with name coaches — Michigan State, Syracuse, UConn or Louisville — Pitt is not allowed to have a disappointing/below expectations year and expect to be re-embraced the following season. So Pitt’s 7-0 start is not going to get Pitt that much love yet.

In fact, it will be looked at critically to explain why it is so misleading. So when Grant Wahl of SI.com says Pitt’s schedule is so weak that it is second only to Texas A&M in the country (hat tip, Dave), this shouldn’t be surprising.

As I have written several times, going into the season Pitt’s non-con was weak but it appeared better than it had been. I also don’t mind as much in a rebuilding year that is also key to the program and coach’s future. Honestly, though, through the first 2/3 of the non-con, it has been even weaker than expected.

Team ——- Record
St. Peter’s —– 4-4
Robert Morris — 3-4
Maine ———- 3-6
St. Francis (NY) — 2-5
Auburn ——– 4-2
Duquesne —— 1-5
Penn State —– 4-3
———————–
Combined Record — 21 – 29

Those names and records alone would make most scoff at what a team has done to this point. Now add in the RPI of the teams played to this point (flawed I know to use RPI with such a small sample set, but bear with me): 90, 242, 304, 274, 25, 307, 98. That averages out to 191.43 per team.

Now, if this wasn’t Pitt I wouldn’t even have them on a top-25 ballot.

If you want to feel good about Pitt, take a look at Pitt being ranked #11 right now in the Pomeroy rankings (explanation for it here).

[Editor note: For those of you who weren’t reading this blog last basketball season, Ken Pomeroy does some amazing work with stats and information regarding college basketball. I’m a big fan of what he does, and will cite it with some frequency because it is so interesting to me.]

But even then, you see Pitt has a horrible non-con strength of schedule to this point — #267.

Now for comparison’s sake, let’s talk about this year’s version of last year’s Pitt. (Meaning a team that is a bit more overrated based on the previous year’s accomplishment and media affection for players and/or coach.) That would be Boston College.

BC started the season ranked in the top 15 and got as high as #6 before losing consecutive road games to top-20 teams (including an early conference game). They are still ranked despite, in my opinion, not yet doing anything. They have a few things going for them: 1) they started the season ranked and it is harder to fall out of the rankings then crack the rankings (Pitt enjoyed that last season); 2) they have played a name, ranked team on the road in the non-con — sure they lost to Michigan St., but they played them — and they got to play in a tournament, i.e., a neutral site; and 3) the likeability factor — a head coach, Al Skinner, who gets fawning treatment and players, Craig Smith and Jared Dudley, with name recognition — making it easier to keep voting for them (again, Pitt benefited with this regarding Troutman, Taft and Krauser).

It just comes down to Pitt winning it’s full non-con. That means going down to South Carolina and taking care of business, then doing the same at home against Wisconsin. And even if that happens, you can be sure someone will take a shot at Pitt’s record and say they only beat one team.

My advice, save the outrage and hope the non-cons we beat, play well the rest of the year (excepting Penn State).

In something of a bright spot, for the past season, OG C.J. Davis made the Scout.com All-Freshman 2nd team squad.

All the talk about freshmen this season focused on the backs — Stephens-Howling, Collins and Jennings. Unfortunately, their impact was limited by a weak O-line. Davis was one of the few encouraging things by the end of the season.