Should the Lions play the Panthers?

[pandaczar12]

It's hard to beat solid evidence like that -- a magazine's projection of the best players for next season?

Isn't it amazing the lengths they will go to spin EVERYTHING? Yes, the ACC is a better conference because they have, according to one services projections, a whopping 3 more players in the top 50. Yes you heard that correctly, 3 players, spread amongst 15 teams, surrounded by god knows what else other talent... makes the ACC a clearly better conference. That my friend is Pitt Logic.

If anything, Pitt fans more than anyone should realize that having one decent player doesn't make a good team.

Not sure how long you'll be around here, but here is one ranking of the conferences for the recently concluded season.

http://realtimerpi.com/college_football/ncaaf_conf_Men.html

B1G #1
ACC #6

Why on earth would you use games that have already been played to form an opinion when you could make a piss poor attempt at spinning someone's opinion of games that have yet to be played?

 

[goatman]

Nah. The only Penn State fans that care about the Pitt-PSU rivalry are older fans or people who live near Pittsburgh. No one on the eastern side of the state cares about Pitt.

The unfortunate part of this equation is that over the past decade, no one nationally has given two craps about either program. The only relevant attention either has received or deserved is the Sandusky incident at penn state and the coaching carousel at Pitt since the Wanny firing. The true facts are that neither of our programs have been relevant, challenged for conference championships nor played meaningful football during the final 2-3 games of the season.

The entire premise of conference superiority, strength of schedule, draft picks, all pros etc... means nothing if you aren't playing meaningful games and challenging for a championship.

The bottom line is both universities have been very mediocre for a long time.

 

[pandaczar12]

The unfortunate part of this equation is that over the past decade, no one nationally has given two craps about either program. The only relevant attention either has received or deserved is the Sandusky incident at penn state and the coaching carousel at Pitt since the Wanny firing. The true facts are that neither of our programs have been relevant, challenged for conference championships nor played meaningful football during the final 2-3 games of the season.

The entire premise of conference superiority, strength of schedule, draft picks, all pros etc... means nothing if you aren't playing meaningful games and challenging for a championship.

The bottom line is both universities have been very mediocre for a long time.

Certainly PSU didn't deserve the negative attention for the crimes of an ex-employee. Thankfully the NCAA caught up to the rest of the world and removed all penalties. Not sure why you would think Pitt deserved attention for their coaching changes. What they really received a lot of attention for was that most embarrassing bowl loss ever.

PSU was very relevant before they were unjustly sanctioned, and many seasons going back your arbitrary decade to the 2005 season. The real question is, why is every Pitt fan trying to make this ridiculous comparison, yet they do not recognize the very real effects of the unjust sanctions? PSU has played a tougher schedule, had unjust sanctions, and still has more wins than Pitt since the sanctions landed.

 

[Marshall30]

The unfortunate part of this equation is that over the past decade, no one nationally has given two craps about either program. The only relevant attention either has received or deserved is the Sandusky incident at penn state and the coaching carousel at Pitt since the Wanny firing. The true facts are that neither of our programs have been relevant, challenged for conference championships nor played meaningful football during the final 2-3 games of the season.

The entire premise of conference superiority, strength of schedule, draft picks, all pros etc... means nothing if you aren't playing meaningful games and challenging for a championship.

The bottom line is both universities have been very mediocre for a long time.

Yawn. Another pile from Pitt.

 

[pandaczar12]

Yawn. Another pile from Pitt.

I'm just playing along to draw out the Minnesota/Alabama fan base. I REALLY want to know their opinion on all matters Penn State.

 

[Marshall30]

I'm just playing along to draw out the Minnesota/Alabama fan base. I REALLY want to know their opinion on all matters Penn State.

But you aren't goatman.

 

[hilltoppanther]

Why?

Let's not kid ourselves, our relationship with Pitt was destined to fail back in 1981 when THEY chose to go elsewhere for a conference affiliation.

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/11/19/sports/pitt-to-join-big-east-shuns-new-league.html

So, Ask them how well that's working for them?

Pitt and Syracuse chose to go to the Big East and not Paterno's fantasy land Eastern League for good reason. Paterno wanted to share basketball revenue. Of course he did, because PSU was awful at that time and still is. Paterno didn't want to share football revenue. Of course he didn't, because they were good then. Those are the facts of why Paterno's Eastern League never came to fruition.

 

[hilltoppanther]

Yeah and how many years were you under unjust sanctions besides your self imposed ones - we can all play the wins over x timeframe straw man - meaningless.

Unjust sanctions? That's a good one.

 

[m48tank]

Unjust sanctions? That's a good one.

I think McKees Rocks is calling you go crawl under it.

 

[ping724]

Pitt and Syracuse chose to go to the Big East and not Paterno's fantasy land Eastern League for good reason. Paterno wanted to share basketball revenue. Of course he did, because PSU was awful at that time and still is. Paterno didn't want to share football revenue. Of course he didn't, because they were good then. Those are the facts of why Paterno's Eastern League never came to fruition.[/Q

Pitt and Syracuse chose to go to the Big East and not Paterno's fantasy land Eastern League for good reason. Paterno wanted to share basketball revenue. Of course he did, because PSU was awful at that time and still is. Paterno didn't want to share football revenue. Of course he didn't, because they were good then. Those are the facts of why Paterno's Eastern League never came to fruition.

Reading the article, there is no mention about sharing or not sharing revenues. Back then just like today you folks at Oakland U have your little brother complex going on again. To the question which was originally asked; NO, there is no need to play Pitt. My analogy is no one likes to take a pay cut, so why should we have to take one to play Pitt every year. We have moved on, do the same!!

 

[pandaczar12]

Unjust sanctions? That's a good one.

Do you want to enlighten us as to why your opinion differs from the masses? Including the NCAA, PA attorney general, and the lead prosecutor?

 

[YorkCoLion]

PSU hasn't been relevant in a "long time?" They played UW for a trip to the BIG championship in 2011 and was in the Rose Bowl in 2009. That's not too long ago. When was the last time Pitt played for a conference championship, let alone won one like PSU has? Did Pitt ever win the Big East?

 

[pandaczar12]

PSU hasn't been relevant in a "long time?" They played UW for a trip to the BIG championship in 2011 and was in the Rose Bowl in 2009. That's not too long ago. When was the last time Pitt played for a conference championship, let alone won one like PSU has? Did Pitt ever win the Big East?

Due to some really bad officiating, they were part of a 4 way tie for the big least. They were promptly crushed in the bowl by a non-BCS team.

 

[anon_is9z1n0h3zblb]

Due to some really bad officiating, they were part of a 4 way tie for the big least. They were promptly crushed in the bowl by a non-BCS team.

Crushed by Utah? Come on. We all know that Pitt has has much worse bowl losses than that. Why since then they've lost to Oregon St 3-0 in the Sun Bowl, Southern Methodist 28-6 in the Compass Bowl, the historic loss to Houston in the 2014 Armed Forces Bowl and having their pants pulled down by Navy in the Military Bowl. The only respectable loss they has was to Ole Miss in the Compass Bowl in Chryst's first year and that was still by 3 touchdowns. That loss to Utah was actually a good bowl game for them. National title 27 followed the Utah game I believe.

 

[pandaczar12]

Crushed by Utah? Come on. We all know that Pitt has has much worse bowl losses than that. Why since then they've lost to Oregon St 3-0 in the Sun Bowl, Southern Methodist 28-6 in the Compass Bowl, the historic loss to Houston in the 2014 Armed Forces Bowl and having their pants pulled down by Navy in the Military Bowl. The only respectable loss they has was to Ole Miss in the Compass Bowl in Chryst's first year and that was still by 3 touchdowns. That loss to Utah was actually a good bowl game for them. National title 27 followed the Utah game I believe.

The year they lost to Oregon state, both their best players, the Rodgers brothers were injured for the bowl game. PSU played Oregon state that year when they were healthy, and crushed them.

 

[PSUSignore]

PSU is not going to play the teams you throw out there, so yes, let's play Pitt. Every year.

Then get used to being left out of every tiebreaker scenario imaginable, because our peers like OSU, MSU are playing those schools. Pitt brings nothing to the table in terms of moving the needle on a national scale. I don't care if we never play them again, the "rivalry" hasn't meant anything since Dan Marino played there.

 

[PSUSignore]

When will this myth stop getting repeated?

Miami/florida
Texas/aTm
aTm/Baylor
Etc....

Not to mention that examples like Florida - FSU are a strawman. Those are both nationally recognized programs with a recent history of elite competitiveness. Pitt is not.