There’s only so much rehashing and teeth gnashing that I can do over one game. At least as far as discussing how many versions of excrement that game was and the performance from the coaches to the players.
The excuses/revisionist history from Coach Wannstedt has had me ready to kill.
- — Bill Stull goes from being a guy in the system who knows it and has been everything they wanted from the position to being inexperienced and only playing his first full game.
- — The line was coming along and the talent and depth was improved to still being a work in progress that isn’t there.
- — Pitt was playing for field position, because the defense was doing well. In the first quarter? Afterall, nothing could possibly change from there. Adjustments never happen.
- — The players weren’t tired in the second half. Which means they had to have been poorly prepared and coached to be that out of position so often. (P.S., it’s not a good sign when Coach Wannstedt is feeling defensive about what Lou Holtz is saying on TV.)
Those were just a few off the top of my head. I’m sure there are more I’m forgetting where the storyline from the coaching staff suddenly shifted.
There is no doubt that what deflated Pitt and encouraged BGSU was completely on Coach Wannstedt.
Rather than take a shot at the end zone on third down, Pitt opted to let 25 valuable seconds tick away before calling time out with three seconds left. Conor Lee’s 37-yard field goal put Pitt ahead, 17-14.
It’s a decision that cost Pitt the game, its preseason ranking and possibly its season.
Brandon, a progressive offensive mind but not one to be confused for former Bowling Green head coach Urban Meyer, certainly wondered what Pitt was thinking.
“Our guys at halftime said, ‘Coach, they ran the clock down. Why did they do that?’ The kids said (Pitt) should have gone for it,” Brandon said. “Our guys at halftime felt confident.”
Brandon also hinted that offering constant motion and gimmicks confuses Pitt’s defense, whether the opponent is Bowling Green or South Florida.
Read between the lines, and it’s not difficult to deduce that Bowling Green thinks it’s not to difficult to out-coach Pitt.
The staffs at Ohio, Connecticut, Navy and Rutgers probably think the same thing.
“It would have been nice to get a touchdown but, you know, we follow the leader (Wannstedt),” McCoy said.
While what Pitt did only gave BGSU encouragement.
Following Saturday’s game, Brandon and his players fielded myriad questions from Pittsburgh beat writers looking for fodder to lampoon Wannstedt. Brandon said the Falcons were energized by the Panthers’ cautious play calling at the end of the first half. Linebacker John Haneline said he relishes opportunities like Saturday, when he lined up against Pitt’s no frills I-formation, which is outdated in today’s college game.
“It’s my favorite thing to play [against],” Haneline said. “They’re going to knock you in the mouth. You have to knock back.”
Again, what goes back to the coaching concerns the personnel. As many have pointed out, despite Dom DeCicco struggling at safety. Joe Thomas looking like a human revolving door. The offense stagnanted and predictable. Potential playmakers and young talent were no where to be seen on the field.
As for changes to the starting lineup, Wannstedt said he is not ready to panic after one game, but he said Lucas Nix and Baldwin need to be on the field more because they are two of the most talented players on the team.
Nix has been pushing starting right tackle Joe Thomas for playing time since training camp and was supposed to play against Bowling Green, but he didn’t mostly because the Panthers were locked in a tight game with few opportunities for making changes. But the coaches believe Thomas has underachieved since training camp began and Saturday apparently wasn’t his finest hour, either. Wannstedt said game situations won’t dictate Nix’s playing time this week.
“We need to get Lucas Nix into the game and get him some playing time,” Wannstedt said. “We’re just going to have to put him in and let him play. Whether we are winning or losing or it is a close game, we need to get him in there. And the same thing with Baldwin; he needs to be in there and play a little more.
“Those are the two players who need to get more playing time, but nothing else will change because we just made a few mental mistakes, and they can be corrected.
Uh, what? So are we getting, “The system is fine. All is well. If the players just do what we tell them it will work. The coaching was sound.“?
The Panthers were criticized for punting twice inside the Falcons’ 35 and played for a field goal instead of a touchdown at the end of the first half.
Wannstedt took exception to the criticism and said that the Panthers were — and always are — obviously trying to score a lot of points — they just weren’t very successful at it. He said that was due to lack of execution and a lack of protecting the football.
“I’m not sure what you mean, full throttle?” Wannstedt asked rhetorically. “I mean, you’d like to think with our backs we’d be able to make a few big plays running the ball. We have to be able to generate some big plays, but, if you look at it, our longest play from scrimmage was only 17 yards.
“You are not going to score a lot of points doing that. Our offensive line is a new group, and we are taking that into account [in play-calling] and our quarterback was playing his first full game of his career, but we know that we are going to have to score more points to beat anybody, especially against some of these spread teams.
“Scoring has gone up significantly the past few years, we know that, but we also didn’t help ourselves by creating short fields for our offense. We got one turnover and we turned it over four times, which is eliminating four possessions. We can’t turn the ball over; it is the difference between winning and losing.”
I’m sorry. This is pathetic. No responsibility or accountability from Coach Wannstedt. He simply says they need to get some players more game time.
He doesn’t explain why they didn’t see the field in this game when needed. Except for Greg Cross which he excuses as saying that in the second half when Pitt was trailing, they needed to pass not run. Because, you know, they were trailing by all of 3 points for a significant portion.
Elijah Fields, one of the teams most athletic and high ceiling players never saw any action against a spread. The kind of offense, I would say Fields would thrive against.
I admit, right now I don’t think there is much Wannstedt could say to make me feel positive. That said, he’s given me no reason to believe he sees any problems other than the players not executing well enough.
Apparently because they were at fault. No issues with the coaching, preparation, game plan or motivation.
The one constant of Wannstedt at Pitt has been his slavish devotion to experience over talent. He continually bemoans positional weakness wherever there isn’t a senior or upperclassman.
This is college. Every team has issues of inexperience. Pitt is actually one of the most experienced teams in the country in terms of returning starters. Yet, it still doesn’t have enough experience. It is up to the coaches to get the players ready and to take advantage of what they can do. If you can’t adapt your system even a little to the players you have, then this will be the continual outcome.
Disappointment and excuses that the players are making mistakes.
One more note-
I think all Pitt coaches should watch the UCLA-Tennessee game from last night before they put the headsets on again. Here is what happened at the Rose Bowl on Monday night:
UCLA’s QB, starting his first game, throws FOUR interceptions in the first half. Do they bench him? Do they do nothing but run the rest of the night? NO- they give him the reins, throw 28 times in the second half (DOWNFIELD!!) and win the game. If that was Pitt, they would never have even given the team a chance to get it done.
FORTUNE FAVORS THE BOLD, GENTLEMEN.
Face it the man uses the same excuses year after year. It is time for a change, he sucks as a coach!!
Apparently Bostick is more fit than last year, but still has that hitch in his delivery. Smith has the strongest arm but can’t hit the proverbial side of a barn. I wonder if he lost his the “deer-in-the-headlights” look yet. He has more experience in the system than Bostick, yet can’t seem to beat him out. I think that Bostick should redshirt along with Sunseri this year so that they can remove his hitch and prepare him for next year; however he is probably the best option if some thing happens to Stull.
Granted, we’ll be lucky to break .500 if we continue to play like we did Saturday. But I’m interested to see how this team responds. Michigan lost to App. St. last year and then went on to beat a defending National Champion with the Heisman Trophy winner in the Capital One Bowl. All is not lost.
I think it’s good that the staff and administration are getting a little pressure because they’re more likely to take some chances and make some changes — that in my opinion — need to be happen. But let’s not forget that we haven’t had a .500 season since 2004 and BGSU was a bowl team last year (yes — they were hammered 63-7 by Tulsa).
I think the extended media coverage that we received after the WVU upset and leading up to Saturday’s game went to everybody’s head — players, coaches, media and fans alike.
I just want a bowl game… papa johns would be nice !!
A winning season rather. My apologies!
Players: Turnovers, drops, tackling(missed 2 tackles at WVU…missed 53??? vs. BGSU), “lost in the sun” punts, missed field goal, blocking assignments, someone who was at the game told me, “poor route running”…the previous examples lie squarely on the players who participated and certainly had an impact on the outcome of the game. I am sure someone would argue but I am positive that the coaching staff was not coaching the players all summer to execute the things mentioned above. Unbelievable but truly unacceptable
Coaches: Conservative decision making, conservative play calling, no adjustments, no use of offensive talents brought in for the very need, resorting to the NFL mentality of the field position game, mentally lazy in understanding the trend in college football and I feel the staff was mentally lazy in understanding the occassion (all out marketing effort by your AD and the department, coming off a great win over a heated rival, bringing back greater experience, greater expectations and supposed talent etc…). The previous items are unacceptable issues that either must be changed now (don’t know if they can be?) or they must changed through addition and subtraction. Unbelievable, but truly unacceptable.
My frustration grew as I watched almost every CFB game I could possibly watch this weekend. Overall, not one team’s offensive/coaching philosophy is/was similar to Pitt’s. None as conservative, none with the mindset of field position management (especially in the 1st half), none with the thinking to just put on the brakes up 14-0 and cross some fingers, none that decided to utilize the local CYO league playbook, none as boring or the oft used term “vanilla.” Again, unbelievable, but truly unacceptable.
In my opinion from observing, BGSU countered Pitt’s offensive & defensive attack rendering both relatively manageable with just two simple elements: 1.) Running a Gimmick set for a series. 2.) Routinely, running an athlete in and out of the game who is a danger to either run or pass the ball (Greg Cross, anyone?). Those two things totally created havoc on Pitt’s play, sideline and in their offensive/defensive decision making. The whole mood of the game changed. Just two very simple things “puckered” or undermined the whole entire game plan and Pitt, as a whole played it safe. It made the defense become passive (Rhoadsian) and it made the OC go away from employing the kind of plays that got Pitt to 14-0. The BGSU strategy made Pitt not even want to attempt anything else but run a up the middle or throw a 6 yard pass in the flat. Pitt was banking on the game clock moving faster. That plan does not control or exert control over your opposition. BGSU made a couple of adjustments and Pitt was OK with just trying to hang on for dear life. I am not sure if all can be corrected or changed with the current situtation in place, but we will soon see if things differ come Saturday.
faintly: “Hail to Pitt”
My point about the UCLA game was simply that UCLA’s QB (even with his 5-star rating) threw FOUR interceptions in the first half but in the second half UCLA moved forward with an aggressive offensive attack and won the game- something the Pitt coaches never would have done.
I’m not sure what the deal is with defending the coaches in light of what happened. Fact is, players are going to fumble, throw interceptions, make stupid penalties, and get sacked. A head coach needs to be able to lead the team through the inevitable mistakes that even the best of the best teams make every week. Mostly, that involves having faith in your players and the will to fight.
The message the Pitt coaches are sending the guys is essentially- “you guys are probably going to F it all up, so we’re just going to do what we can to minimize your stupid mistakes, and hopefully win that way”. It’s demoralizing. At this point, I’m legitimately concerned that the coaches truly refuse to trust the guys they have out there- and if that’s the case, we may see a full-blown mutiny before long.
Sporting News named Cavanaugh the top offensive coordinator in the Big East. “Cavanaugh is a well-versed offensive mind,” experienced on both the pro and college levels. Wasn’t the 1976 national champions a “high output offense.”
The goal remains the same – let’s get to the postseason and build off that.
The turn overs in the UCLA game were about even and their D came up big. The four interceptions didn’t result in four scores otherwise they would have lost instead of a close win.
I agree that the coaches are a little timid and fearful of mistakes and the offense is old school, but certainly not enough to “fire them all.” After a disaster like that, no one is blameless. I still maintain that it simply doesn’t matter if you run the spread or not, if players execute what they are coached that poorly, losing is guaranteed. The coachs can only do so much, then it is up to the players.
The UCLA pass protection was not as good as you might think it was. If you watched the entire game, you would of seen Craft getting lit up on several plays.
The main point is this. Norm Chow did several things to rectify this. He had Craft roll out several times to one side of the field. He ran misdirection plays (get that defensive line going the wrong way = more time for QB to throw the ball). And finally, he utilized the tight end extensively over the middle. Just look at Ryan Moya’s Stats and you will see.
It was so nice watching an O-Coordinator last night who actually knew what he was doing. He didn’t insist on handing the ball off on 1st and 2nd down after his QB threw 4 interceptions. He made the necessary play calling to help nullify UT’s pass rush.
I see where you are coming from regarding how the turnovers affected UCLA in their game, vice how ours affected our game. However, the point that Dan is making is that our coaches will not let our players learn by doing. Our coaches lower their expectations for players based on their practice play, when they should be raising their expectations for players based on the demands of the game. If they are young or inexperienced, then let them make mistakes. Players have to learn to play through adversity. Our coaches try to “protect” them by dumbing down the plays. For my money, that is the opposite of what shold be done. We need to set the bar high, and make the players get to it. If Stull had thrown four INT’s in the first half, we would have run the ball 90% of the time in the second half to “protect” Stull’s confidence. Just crap!
Wannstedt gets a vote of confidence…ugh
“I agree that the coaches are a little timid and fearful of mistakes and the offense is old school, but certainly not enough to “fire them all.—
punting TWICE on BG’s 35 yd line. a little timid??
not taking a shot at the end zone at the end of the first half. a little fearful of mistakes?? dan35 is right on. you can’t inspire kids to perform at a high level when you coach scared, ‘not to lose’.
if you enjoyed watching that offense(not one pass attempt longer than 15 yds until the 4th quarter), you must squeeze pitt football games in between your schedule of watching paint dry and grass grow.
wanny and cav must go…NOW!
Stull seems to be a drop back passer, you’re assuming that he is good at throwing on the run. I’m not sure that he is. Although, it’s hard to roll out with defense 5 yards in your backfield.
Ryan Moya 7-65, Nate Byham 5-52, Dorin Dickerson 2-23 and Dickerson should have caught some more. Who says we don’t throw to our tight ends.
We’d throw more to them if they would only make the catches.
51 passes, who says all we do is run up the middle?
Norm Chow is the best OC in the country maybe best ever according to some. It is hard for anyone to measure up to him. Neuheisel’s got a five-year contract that pays him $1.25 million per season and includes incentives that could add $500,000 a year. Do you think we have that kind of money? Maybe we could hire Norm Chow also.
I think if Stull threw 4 ints in the 1st half, he probably would have been yanked. Coaching is tough, if you lose every is picked apart. If you don’t protect them, then you threw them to the wolves. If you win it doesn’t matter.
That may have been the most sickening and disappointing Pitt game, including Ohio U, I’ve ever watched and I’ve seen alot of pathetic games. I think I remember home game against Oklahoma, 77-10 or something like that.
I said I can’t defend the lack of a throw into the end zone. But that wasn’t what lost the game. It was turn overs, dropped passes, missed tackles, missed blocks, punts not fielded, etc.
I don’t believe that more aggressive play calling would have made them block any better.
Here goes…
I didn’t think that Bill Stull was that bad. I felt that he was handcuffed by the playcalling early on in the game, plus the receivers dropped a few big passes that were on the money. They never let him throw downfield early, and by the time they did it was too late. His int was on a late-game desperation heave (although he did throw another ball that should have been picked but was dropped), and he was absolutely let down by his O-line and mugged on the fumble and still almost got rid of it.
Look, he wasn’t Matt Leinart circa 2004 out there, we know that. But Bill Stull was FAR from the reason why we lost on Saturday.
What sucks most about this is that we lost despite the large gap in talent. Look, at the beginning of the bame before adjustments, going on nothing but each coach’s original gameplan and player execution, we dominated. And we watched the whole thing literally crumble before our eyes because Wanny can’t make in-game adjustments!!!
But at the same time, it was like Cavanaugh & Wannstedt were watching an entirely different game than everyone else. There was no attempt made to spread out BGSU on some plays. There was no play action. There were no shots down the field just to keep the defense honest. There were no “trick plays”. There was no wholesale substitution of a different offensive package.
Honestly, Pitt failed to adapt. The coaches refused to make changes. If you don’t adapt to your environment, you will lose – and that is what happened on Saturday. Bowling Green took away the inside run and the Pitt offensive staff didn’t make any attempt to out-think that. That to me is what is most frustrating & disappointing about that game and the scariest thing for the rest of the season.
This statement suggests that the reason Pitt fans want Wanny fired is the Bowling Green loss. In actuality, the Bowling Green loss was just the evidence that our disappointment at him being hired and concerns/calls for his firing over the last three years were right. People want him fired because of his cumulative sucktitude since becoming Pitt’s head coach. He has only won one game that he was supposed to lose and that was WVU last year. He has lost several games he was supposed to win, most recently, but by no means the only time, against Bowling Green this past week.
So the criticism isn’t, “Fire Wanny because he played too conservatively against BG!!” It is, “Fire Wanny because he has run out of chances to prove he can coach.”
Please answer this for me. Who else is running an offense similar to what we saw on Saturday and being successful with it? Please don’t refer back to the 76 team as this is 2008.
The wishbone was a big deal back then as well but there aren’t to many teams running that offense today.
Prowler,
Let face it, had we beat BG even by one point we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Tony,
Yeah the defense has figured out the wishbone.
Most of the big ten. Except DickRod at Michigan. He’s trying to implement a zone blocking scheme where the linemen have to run to the line. They’re in the process of weeding out the fatties. It will take sometime, they didn’t look good against Utah. Don’t forget Conredge Collins is the best, maybe only, blocker on the offense, he needs to be in the game.
After we go up 14-0, here are the play calls on first down….
1st and 10 at PITT 20 LeSean McCoy rush for 4 yards
1st and 10 at PITT 35 LeSean McCoy rush for a loss of 5 yards
1st and 10 at BGSU 48 LeSean McCoy rush for no gain, fumbled
Then the 2 minute drill….
Second half….
1st and 10 at PITT 9 Bill Stull pass complete to Nate Byham for 12 yards
1st and 10 at PITT 21 LeSean McCoy rush for 7 yards
1st and 10 at PITT 22 LeSean McCoy rush for 2 yards
1st and 10 at PITT 25 LeSean McCoy rush for 5 yards
NOW ITS THE FOURTH QUARTER, WE’RE LOSING….
1st and 10 at PITT 42 Bill Stull pass complete to Nate Byham for 4 yards
1st and 10 at PITT 25 LaRod Stephens-Howling rush for 3 yards
NOW WE’RE DOWN 10….12 MIN LEFT…START THROWING THE BALL ALL OVER THE PLACE…
Ok, shadyforvp, tell us how that was good play calling…
Does anyone think Pitt would hang with either Tenn. or UCLA for even a quarter?
Oh yeah…those were sloppy big lineman on both teams not the terrifically lean quick agile lineman Pitt has…they would have destroyed Pitt.
Enough…this week is over…anyone else terrified of Buffalo this week?
Sorry, don’t drink Koolaid, but I’m on my 2nd fifth of JD since saturday.
You listed 9 plays. 4 yrds on first down is win in most coaches eyes, so 5 out of 9 play you listed were sucessful. 3 of 9 were more than sucessfull. I’d say a success rate of more than 50% is good.
Monday/tuesday quaterbacking is great, you know all the answers.
…oh, i forgot, you measure wins and losses in yards, not points.
In that case, Pitt and Nova are 1-0, WVU and BG are 0-2.
I’m done. You obviously watched a different game from 90% of everyone else. All us monday quarterbacks are stupid compared to our coach who has lost 13 of the last 20 games against inferior opponents. Obviously we have no reason to question him.
Coming into the season, even with the hype, most fans and media outlets, including me, have been saying that this is the year that DW has to prove he can coach. Beating BG by 1 would have been significantly better than losing by 10, and may have shown a coach that can respond to adversity. But it certainly would have had DW critics extremely concerned.
That said, we didn’t beat BG by 1, we lost by 10. And that is the cap on a cumulatively crapulous coaching tenure for DW.
HAIL TO PITT.. BEAT BUFFALO
I’m interested to see ND play on Saturday, since they didn’t play last weekend (why?). For some reason it slipped my mind that we play them (Nov. 1).
