Do you think the game today had any effect on local recruits? I was thinking

[fairfaxlion2]

It's not a bad thing that the press is writing that Franklin is on the hot seat. Although there's probably about zero chance he'd actually get fired this year, the bad press might make him feel like he has something to prove, and that could lead to an upset later in the season. Coaches often have their best runs when they feel like they have something to prove.

 

[McNit2]

I think you could make the case that both teams looked good today. Pitt looked all world in the first half, but then PSU came storming back at the end. If I'm a recruit, I can see positives on both sides. That said, if your decision is about this game and not where you feel comfortable for four years you need to step back and reevaluate.

If that is your definition of PSU looking good, I shudder to think what it will look like when we look bad. We were absolutely manhandled in the game. Amazing that we had a chance to win. We better not try that recipe too many times. Because against well-coached teams with talent and game breakers, we will be on the wrong end of some 55+ - teens type blowouts.

With the history at Clairton, I expect Wade to be looking.

 

[InfoManiac]

A number of those kids were walk-ons during the sanctions and have seen little to no playing time. Some of them I have never even heard of before I took a look at the roster. Penn State has like THREE seniors that are starters. Eight Of the seniors I had never heard of and I don't think ever saw meaningful, if any, playing time. One is a kicker/punter, one is a JUCO O-lineman (b/c we're desperate on the line), one is a legacy kid and has seen limited action. Pitt is playong how many seniors on the two deep with significant playing time?

Comparing 2 deeps, I used the 2 deep roster for both teams from the Ourlads website. They actually show more than 2 players for some positions so to be consistent I only recorded the class for the top 2 players and I didn't include special teams since that didn't seem to be the question. So here's the comparison of the 2 deeps.

Penn St
SR - 11
JR - 14
SO - 10
FR - 7

Pitt
SR - 17
JR -,9
SO - 14
FR - 4

So once again Pitt had more seniors on the 2 deep (17 to 11), but the amount of upperclassmen was nearly the same with a 26 to 25 edge to Pitt.

Obviously Penn St had the edge in SO/FR in the 2 deep (19-18), but that was buoyed by 8 Lion freshman that made the 2 deep to Pitt's 4. Penn St lists 2 Redshirt Freshman as starters (one each OL/DL). Pitt listed none.

Digging a little deeper into team experience, consider how many starters (not 2 deep but players listed as the starter) have been in a D1 program for 3 or more years (JR, RS JR, SR, RS SR)? Penn St starts 17 players and Pitt starts 16 with JR eligibility or higher. Pitt is also a little more top heavy as more of those players are seniors. Conversely, Pitt starts 6 underclassmen (SO/FR) while Penn St starts 5.

There are some points of disparity but it is a little more balanced than I would have expected.

 

[MilesBarkley]

Outside of WPIAL kids...not a chance. Eastern PA, Maryland, New Jersey, etc. kids could care less about PSU vs Pitt. They were about 1 years old last time they played also.

2017 WPIAL kids:
Jeter is already going to Pitt and I have said this for the last year. I would be ultimately shocked if he went anywhere, but Pitt

Wade is a tossup. Definitely do not think one matchup will choose where Lamont wants to attend college. He is a very smart kid and seems to take everything about the university from athletics, academics, 40 years down the road, etc into affect when valuing the right pick for him.

2018 WPIAL kids:
Penn State will get their chance next year in Happy Valley prior to their signing date. I think next year is a whole different game with Pitt losing 14 starters to graduation.

 

[Nittanyplayer#12]

I think the game hardly had an effect on recruits, let alone any game. Kids will go where they want. Some like city while some like rural. Some go to a team were they know they'll shine and be a freshmen stater while others will go where the coaches are. The whole recruiting thing basically consists of what the university can offer the student. So Nardo can think this win is a flap in the face of Penn State recruiting but in all reality, recruits that flipped from Pitt to other teams is a reflection on him and his attitude.

 

[dbsteel]

A 3 point loss on the road should have no effect unless they have blinders on and don't look at the big picture- the education, the facilities, the future, the fanbase, etc.

 

[dbsteel]

I went through the rosters that both schools have on their respective football websites. Here is the class breakdown based on eligibility year.

Penn State
SR - 12
JR - 28
SO - 26
FR - 51

Pitt
SR - 19
JR - 21
SO - 26
FR - 44

Pitt has more Seniors (19 to 12), but if you look at upperclassmen both teams have exactly 40 Jr/Sr.

Somehow Penn St has 7 more freshmen which means the Lions have 7 more total players than Pitt (117 to 110). That's a head scratcher?

I think the problem here is Pitt's Juniors and Seniors are decent (and lots of them play), and Penn States are the guys that we were recruiting when we went on Probation. So our true talent is in the FR-SOPHOMORE range.

 

[Lion84]

Comparing 2 deeps, I used the 2 deep roster for both teams from the Ourlads website. They actually show more than 2 players for some positions so to be consistent I only recorded the class for the top 2 players and I didn't include special teams since that didn't seem to be the question. So here's the comparison of the 2 deeps.

Penn St
SR - 11
JR - 14
SO - 10
FR - 7

Pitt
SR - 17
JR -,9
SO - 14
FR - 4

So once again Pitt had more seniors on the 2 deep (17 to 11), but the amount of upperclassmen was nearly the same with a 26 to 25 edge to Pitt.

Obviously Penn St had the edge in SO/FR in the 2 deep (19-18), but that was buoyed by 8 Lion freshman that made the 2 deep to Pitt's 4. Penn St lists 2 Redshirt Freshman as starters (one each OL/DL). Pitt listed none.

Digging a little deeper into team experience, consider how many starters (not 2 deep but players listed as the starter) have been in a D1 program for 3 or more years (JR, RS JR, SR, RS SR)? Penn St starts 17 players and Pitt starts 16 with JR eligibility or higher. Pitt is also a little more top heavy as more of those players are seniors. Conversely, Pitt starts 6 underclassmen (SO/FR) while Penn St starts 5.

There are some points of disparity but it is a little more balanced than I would have expected.

I think you are kind of missing the point of what other have stated - many of our Seniors while starters are not the typical players we normally would have out there. We had to reach during those years due to sanctions. It will improve with better classes coming in. Pitt had the most experience where we we weakest. OL versus LB's and new DL. Next year it should be the reverse so we will see. As mistake filled as it was it was amazing we had a chance to win at the end. Vegas was pretty much on the money with this one. Of course many here think we should have won by 50 and since we didn't Franklin should be fired and of course they have no idea who should replace him except people who would never come here.

 

[CaptainMurphy]

I don't think the loss really tips the scale on recruiting. Sure, maybe we land an extra kid or two against Penn St but I never expect Pitt to start outright beating Penn State in recruiting. I do expect Pitt to win more battles in Western Pa and start to fortify our stronghold here. But I still expect PSU to have better class rankings.

One thing to note is that Pitt has been hampered by the constant coaching turnaround. It has obviously not been as damaging as your sanctions but it has definitely hurt.
Remember, Narduzzi has a ways to go before he is filling out the starting roster with HIS players. Our secondary was fairly suspect but I expect it to be much better when the likes of Ford and Hamlin are starting next year. Our run game will definitely take a hit with Conner moving on but we appear to have a solid stable of backs waiting for their turn. I'm most concerned at QB and WR...hopefully some of the young guys develop quickly. Peterman is solid but not dynamic in the way that your QB is.

I expect next year's game to be another battle. Good luck the rest of the way this year. I root for both of our teams to return to national prominence and for the rivalry to be extended permanently someday.

 

[Rip_E_2_Joe_PA]

Only if you are a recruit that works for Penn Dead....or named Smizik, Ron Cook or David Jones....

But that has been that way forever.

PS who wants these recruits anyway...

 

[Rip_E_2_Joe_PA]

I think you are kind of missing the point of what other have stated - many of our Seniors while starters are not the typical players we normally would have out there. We had to reach during those years due to sanctions. It will improve with better classes coming in. Pitt had the most experience where we we weakest. OL versus LB's and new DL. Next year it should be the reverse so we will see. As mistake filled as it was it was amazing we had a chance to win at the end. Vegas was pretty much on the money with this one. Of course many here think we should have won by 50 and since we didn't Franklin should be fired and of course they have no idea who should replace him except people who would never come here.

They are the same jackasses that wanted Paterno fired after every loss. Who cares.

 

[TheGLOV]

Seriously, "Hot Seat" articles could be written by any no talent hack looking for clicks. Normally their insight is about as deep as a bird bath.

The ultimate irony here is most of these same writers voted O'Brien as coach of the year with an 8-4 record that was significantly more talented and experienced in the upper class than any team Franklin has led to this point. So O'Brien the genius goes from 8-4 to 7-5 and leaves. Franklin takes over the bare bones of that 7-5 teams, keeps it bowl eligible while mostly being under the shadow of scholarship reductions and he's somehow an idiot? The whole argument is a joke.

As for signature wins, if you're head coach at PSU, you're unfortunately slim on the schools that count as "signature wins". That list of schools usually starts with Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State....and ends right there. I do get a kick out of people slamming his record against those schools. Franklin took over a team with 65 scholarships and a schedule has seen those 3 teams ranked in the top 10 on 5 of the 6 occasions where games were played. Anyone with half a brain would see those being losses even if coached by Lombardi.

Well said sir.

 

[CaptainMurphy]

I think you are kind of missing the point of what other have stated - many of our Seniors while starters are not the typical players we normally would have out there. We had to reach during those years due to sanctions. It will improve with better classes coming in. Pitt had the most experience where we we weakest. OL versus LB's and new DL. Next year it should be the reverse so we will see. As mistake filled as it was it was amazing we had a chance to win at the end. Vegas was pretty much on the money with this one. Of course many here think we should have won by 50 and since we didn't Franklin should be fired and of course they have no idea who should replace him except people who would never come here.

I also think you have to take into account that Narduzzi isn't playing most of his guys yet and won't have rosters filled with his recruits until next year or the year after. He's not really able to run the D he wants with how weak our secondary is. We have Whitehead and a few guys who will be starting soon (Ford and Hamlin) but Chryst left the cupboard bare in many areas. Luckily he ran a similar offense so we are set in the OLine and RB department. I'm not saying at all that our turnover = your sanctions, but I do think Pitt has a ways to rise before we are playing the ball Narduzzi wants to play.

I'm glad we are playing again and that both teams seem to be heading in the right direction. I'm a lone Pitt alum in a family of PSUers and I want to see both of our teams competing for championships again.

 

[BBrown]

about Wade especially, but there are some other local kids too. Obviously this is nothing but speculation but at least it will change the topic from "Fire Franklin "etc.

I don't think so. I think most of the kids know or understand what our problems are more so than some of our "Fans".
Also they should have been impressed with the heart of the team and the way they came back. They should also have been impressed
with the way our fan base showed up.
Besides if they watched the game and they are as good as they think they are then they saw a team that has some "holes" in it and they could help right away.
JMO.

 

[BBrown]

I don't think this game will have much impact on recruiting since it was close in the end. But I am concerned about the impact of blow-outs down the road, or finishing with less than 8 wins. Whether fair or not, a 7-5 season or worse does not demonstrate progress.

If the tackling on defense doesn't get better (and quickly) then we might have some recruits questioning the ability of our coaching staff. At times in both of our games it looked like a free-for-all. I can understand and accept possible reasons for this (a lack of depth and fear of injuries during practice), but we need to do much better. I thought Pitt got away from what they did offensively to great success in the first half. This game could have been more lopsided.

On offense we need to show a lot more variety and get the ball to our play-makers in space. I thought we called a run-game that played right into Pitt's defensive strategy (of run-blitzing). I was under the impression that Moorehead's system would take advantage of what the defensive alignment gives you. I saw no evidence of this. In fact we seemed rather inflexible -- most plays starting with the same run-fake.

Bottom line ... we need to show that we can win one or two games that we are expected, on paper, to lose. To a recruit this demonstrates the ability of the coaching staff. Barbecues and swim parties won't be enough in the long run.

Thats very fair.

 

[flat_cap]

Comparing 2 deeps, I used the 2 deep roster for both teams from the Ourlads website. They actually show more than 2 players for some positions so to be consistent I only recorded the class for the top 2 players and I didn't include special teams since that didn't seem to be the question. So here's the comparison of the 2 deeps.

Penn St
SR - 11
JR - 14
SO - 10
FR - 7

Pitt
SR - 17
JR -,9
SO - 14
FR - 4

So once again Pitt had more seniors on the 2 deep (17 to 11), but the amount of upperclassmen was nearly the same with a 26 to 25 edge to Pitt.

Obviously Penn St had the edge in SO/FR in the 2 deep (19-18), but that was buoyed by 8 Lion freshman that made the 2 deep to Pitt's 4. Penn St lists 2 Redshirt Freshman as starters (one each OL/DL). Pitt listed none.

Digging a little deeper into team experience, consider how many starters (not 2 deep but players listed as the starter) have been in a D1 program for 3 or more years (JR, RS JR, SR, RS SR)? Penn St starts 17 players and Pitt starts 16 with JR eligibility or higher. Pitt is also a little more top heavy as more of those players are seniors. Conversely, Pitt starts 6 underclassmen (SO/FR) while Penn St starts 5.

There are some points of disparity but it is a little more balanced than I would have expected.

Please remember these kids were recruited during the height of the sanctions - so it is what it is. The quality of players isn't representative of what Penn State usually gets - obviously.

Using a PennLive breakdown of the team by Greg Pickle dated 08/30, there are 10 seniors on offense and 8 of defense. On offense 4 see significant playing time. Three are on the offensive line and one is a skill player. One is the JUCO lineman that doesn't see time anymore - or sees very little time, and the other is a graduate senior who is backing up at center. So he can't crack a starting spot as a graduate senior. So Penn State has four seniors starting on O.

There are eight on defense, six that play. Three are on the D-line and three are linebackers. (And one of those linebackers was injured for Pitt.) One is a linebacker that sees little playing time and the other is a corner back that I don't think has ever played. And you've seen the drop off in the quality of play with three D-linemen departing from last year's team for the NFL.

So there are 10 seniors contributing regularly between the offense and defense. And some of the starters probably wouldn't be starting, and may not even be playing, had recruiting not been so negatively impacted by the sanctions. You can't compare the depth and quality of recruits of any team to a team that for the first time in four years just now has a full complement of scholarship players.

 

[pandaczar12]

I think you could make the case that both teams looked good today. Pitt looked all world in the first half, but then PSU came storming back at the end. If I'm a recruit, I can see positives on both sides. That said, if your decision is about this game and not where you feel comfortable for four years you need to step back and reevaluate.

Agreed. The actual outcome is not really important. I see that PSU was the stronger second half team and should have won the game. Their coaches put them in a position to win, but they just barely didn't pull it out. Add in to that the half the freaking stadium was PSU fans... this should push any local recruit on the fence to PSU.

Narduzzi leaving in the near future will not help Pitt either.

 

[PSU_Chicago]

Publicly, Franklin's seat went from warm to hot in the press with the loss (see the Fox Sports article that came out about an hour after the game.) You know how announcers like to have their stories for each game, and if one of their key stories announcers focus on for the rest of the games this year is how Franklin has no signature wins and may be on the hot seat, well, that won't be good for recruiting. A win yesterday would've kept that story line from developing.

The landof10.com [B1G publication] had an article out on CJF too expensive to get rid of by what seemed like the end of the first Qtr Saturday. Followed up by a glowing Pitt article. I thought Pitt was the B1G school ...

 

[Obliviax]

One of the things that bugs me is watching Malik Hooker play at tOSU. Kid is going to be a two year all american for them at S. He's from the WPIAL and didn't want to play for Pitt or PSU.

 

[broey1]

I realize "journalism" today isn't really much more than opinion pieces, but Land of 10 is pretty much a bunch of homers who got together and started a blog. They have a vested interest (as fans of their teams) to keep PSU down. Don't forget that's where the rumor of a parent calling out CJF for negative recruiting started, which ultimately was debunked and the guy admitted as much that he made it up, but since he's not a "real" journalist making things up was ok in his book.

 

[flat_cap]

For anyone one that forgot, I'm also Lion Lineage (have to get that sorted - depends upon device I am using), so I'm the one having the convo. with Infomatic (can't quite remember the name). My point is that the strength of any team starts with the lines, for obvious reasons. And the lines are generally made up of upperclassmen, and this is the area for Penn State that is the weakest and was recruited during the height of the sanctions, hence the lack of depth and quality on the lines. Hence Penn State's struggles this season. It's not skill players. We're set there in many respects. It's the lines that take time to develop players that will feel the effects of the sanctions the longest.