What is the Pitt game telling us...

#201
#201
VolsSportsFan said:
I think it will be a great game and we will win in a shootout.

Pitt's stadium usually isn't a very loud atmosphere but it was pretty rocking last night and my bet is it's rocking again next week. I do think we hit them at a great time, winning after a big rivalry game.
Click to expand...
I agree. I would not have wanted to face them after a heartbreaking loss.
 
#204
#204
Allvols1996 said:
Extremely concerned about our defense. Gave up over 5 yards a play. Scoreboard doesn’t reflect how bad their pass defense looked on BSU’s last drive of the first half. Bailed out by a fluke play.

Oline seemed looked good in pass protection, but run blocking was, meh.

Overall, they looked MUCH better in this opener than they did in the opener last year. This weeks opponent should intensify the focus.

Pitt atmosphere last night was best I’ve ever seen them have.
Click to expand...
It was the highest attendance record for any sporting event in Pittsburgh. I live up here now and my in laws are all pro people and discount college a lot, but Pitt has put bigger crowds into the stadium than the Steelers have. Should be a crazy game, I hope to see a lot of Orange there with me.
 
#205
#205
VolsSportsFan said:
Do what? Those uniforms are some of the best in NCAA. It's classic. What sucked is when they tried to "go modern" around 1997 and they changed to the most boring, generic looking uniforms ever.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The design is similar to the Dan Marino era. Some of the best in college football imo.ED972D4B-5DB5-4D82-BFE6-FE549942F6FE.jpeg
 
#206
#206
Hooker article about Pitt on his Off the Hook site said that Pitt D has led the nation in sacks the last 3 yrs. They are very physical and will be a touch match up for us. Vols will have to play well to win. You know the coaches were just playing vanilla because we could. We should see a lot more wide open O and D Sat. I expect a lot more blitzing next Sat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I4Vols
#208
#208
dduncan4163 said:
It amazes me that so many fans are being chicken little tonight. We played as vanilla as you can. Our D got takeaways and our offense executed almost perfectly. We could have hung 80 tonight and it's hard to pass rush when the QB gets the ball out as fast as their QB did. We are going to be fine. No our defense isn't elite but so what. They don't have to be. Our bread and butter is scoring fast and often. Our D just has to do what they did tonight. Get a few takeaways and bow our necks in the red zone.
Click to expand...
It’s VBS…it’s a real thing.
 
#212
#212
Doberman said:
They are night and day more physical than us.

That is worrisome.
Click to expand...
They played a team they had to be physical with we ran all over Ball State. We have issues I don’t think we’re going to be physically bullied though.
 
#213
#213
sechamp2012 said:
I agree the game was gifted to Pitt BUT that seems to be their personality they keep it close and play disciplined and they won about 5 close games last year that could of been L’s. Is that luck or just keeping yourself in it to win it. I feel we need to get going and pour it to them early. If they keep it close they’ll find a way to Win just their personality they did that a bunch last year and 1 was us at our place.
Click to expand...
They are definitely a gritty team and have won plenty of close games with Narduzzi. They did stay in the game but they don’t get credit for WVU choosing not to go for it on 4th and 1, after they had run the ball at will throughout the game. They also don’t get credit for an uncontested receiver allowing a perfectly thrown ball, go through his hands, hitting his face mask, and popping it into the air for a pick 6. They do make the best of opponents unforced mistakes and that makes them a good and competitive team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: walkenvol
#214
#214
HoopCreekVol said:
At this writing, the game is at 3:00 minutes left in the 4th quarter. How do we sum up this game for our battle with them?
Click to expand...
As much as you can tell about the beauty of a woman with long flowing hair and a nice backside if you only see her from that angle. You need more than one point of reference to use game performance as a predictor.

That said, we have other points of reference. I am not the devotee to recruiting rankings that some are. That said, they have some value in giving a relative comparison of the talent of two teams. According to the 247 roster composite, WVU has the 43rd most talented team while Pitt is 45th. That game played out about how 247 would have predicted.

UT is 19th. UT should have a talent advantage and an objective look at the two teams... would tend to confirm that in terms of size, speed, athleticism, etc.

The unknowns may weight heavier than the knowns... but based on the knowns....

Pitt

Pitt did surprise me. They couldn't run. Hammond looked good at times but the rest avg'd less than 3 ypc. Slovis and their passing O was more effective than I thought they would be. They had no offensive balance. Their 38 rushing attempts yielded 76 yds while their 24 passing attempts yielded 308 yds. I thought they would be one dimensional... the other way. Their OL was thought to be a pretty big plus coming in. They gave up 5 sacks and couldn't get push/lanes vs WVU's small 3-3-5 (their front 3 avg's 283 lbs).

They were a HUGE surprise on the other side of the ball. Their defensive front was supposed to be the strength of their team. They flat out couldn't stop the run when WVU committed to it. They were a top sack team last year but only managed 3 against WVU in spite of Daniel's relative lack of mobility. They were better but not amazing vs the pass when you consider WVU's relative lack of talent at WR. WVU has one "dude"... and he made the play that lost the game for them. Pitt's secondary is vulnerable. They scheme well... I just don't think they're very talented.

UT

UT obviously played a lesser opponent. Still, UT had offensive balance before they began to start trying to shorten the game. In the end, UT had 24 passing attempts for 351 yds and 51 rushing attempts for 218 yds. I don't know how much UT held back on O other than going heavy run after getting a big lead... and even before. Pretty obviously they didn't let Hooker run much to avoid injury. UT ran effectively even after Ball State began to load up against it. So as much as you can tell by playing an outclassed opponent... UT's O is going to be very, very good. They OL was pretty effective in spite of BSU putting extra help in the box for much of the game.

UT's pass pro looked much improved. Yeah it was Ball State but I believe Neu felt pretty good about his DL going in. IIRC, the OL struggled in pass pro last year vs BGSU. To me, UT seemed to be "working on some things" in the pass game. They didn't take the top off though you have to believe they could have at any time. UT definitely has more WR's that can help. IMO, they have to draw it down to 5-6 to get ready for each game. They played almost everyone it seemed.

On D... they played hard. The guys look to have skills and talent- development. I may be in the minority but I am increasingly convinced that it isn't a matter of talent and skill but rather scheme/playcalling. Maybe they were holding back or working on fundamentals or making sure they played lots of guys? But they have to be more aggressive or else it will be worse than last year.

UT's edge rushers got off well a few times. But the CB's consistently gave up hitches, quick outs, and slants because they were playing 10 yards off. How can you expect to ever get to the QB when the opponent can pick up 5-8 yds on an "automatic" short pass? IMO, the Vols left 4 or 5 sacks minimum on the field because they didn't play tight and jam the WR's off the line. Again IMO... #4 is a liability. I was hopeful he could get better and don't know what it is but he just gets beat over and over. I think BSU's QB was even focused on throwing his way when he got pressured. Whatever the deal is with Turnage... they need him. He got in late. He plays noticeably more physical than the others.

Other than a handful of runs, the D did what it should have done vs the run. Two INT's is good. But the passive, bend don't break feel of the scheme is troubling.

This game

Bottom line: Based on those two games and other tidbits... UT is much more talented and better than WVU on O. The fact that Pitt couldn't stop WVU's run game is encouraging. Plus Pitt still can't cover good WR's. UT's improved OL play plus Pitt's lack luster performance vs WVU is also encouraging. UT may have 5 guys or more as good or better than Ford-Wheaton. JT Daniel isn't a runner. So when you combine Hooker/Milton with Small and company... it looks like a big plus for UT in the run game or when the pocket breaks down. The question remains on D.

I think UT will open up more. Based on WVU, UT should be able to take advantage of Pitt's aggressive front and break off some big runs. UT will score points. UT's WR's should have no trouble getting open short or deep. If the pass pro holds up... they'll score LOTS of points.

Pitt's inability to run the ball is encouraging. Their passing success is not. UT has to tighten up. They have to play physical off the line. Then they have to use that to get pressure on Slovis. Fortunately, he's not a big run threat. If UT plays aggressive, pressure D then Pitt will score but will be limited. UT will shorten Pitt drives and get the ball back to the O. If they continue to give 10 yd cushions then they'll be on the field all day plus give up a lot of points. Again, I don't think this is a player problem outside of a guy or two. I think it is scheme and playcalling... which can change as part of this week's game plan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ViperVol86
#215
#215
JCHateSteve said:
Ball State wasn't playing its starters at that point either. WVU wasn't playing its 2nd string vs Pitt. Pitt got 1st string against a much better team than Ball State, and the numbers are similar. If Pitt got steam rolled so did we.
Click to expand...
Oh stop this.
 
#216
#216
Lol. Some of our fans….. We ran for over 200 yards, had nearly six hundred yards of offense yet our offensive line wasn’t physical enough? Pitt gave up nearly 200 on the ground but they’re some imposing defensive force?

We could lose but everything looked to me that their defense is worse than last year, offense also not as good and we’re a much deeper and better team than last year. Jmho
 
#217
#217
Keep in mind, WVU was a couple inches away from tying that game against Pitt even after one of the dumbest pick-6s you'll ever see. The WR had a chance to complete the catch and very well might have scored if he caught it.

Their offensive line just isn't good, 5 sacks and 2.8 ypc not even including their sack yardage lost. That's really bad. Plus their rush defense was getting absolutely gashed to the tune of 7.1 ypc not including the sack yardage.

Their pass rush is good, so Hooker will need to be elusive in this game. It was hard to know much about our offensive line, as Ball State mostly only rushed 3 people all night. There was only one sack, and to be honest Hooker had plenty of time to get it off, he just didn't find anyone open (which makes sense when you drop 8). Their secondary is pretty decent, but certainly not elite. Without those two massive drops, WVU throws for about 260 with 3 TDs and no ints. And Hooker is far better than JT Daniels.
 
#218
#218
BluetickVol01 said:
We are gonna get beat
Click to expand...
I have said it for a while I think this is possibly a 7-5 team. Possibly 6-6, but based on all the hype possibly 9,10 wins.

I came up to potentially 8-4 once they approved McCoy. I knew losing Jackson, Butler and Taylor and Evans was going to hurt us in each of their respective positions and it was clear that their absence is missed.

I'm not sure what that says about much. I just think it's depth and recruiting which we are doing very well at in the secondary. That bunch is poised to make a huge turnaround by the looks of our recruiting classes.

We need some blue chip LBs and DLs in recruiting though. I have felt this year would show us how long we have for this staff, before they are there.

No one can question Garner, Martinez. Our Linebackers look really good. Beasley being tied for lead in tackles over Banks is a good sign. Surprised Banks didn't get more. Still, clearly decent coaching there. We didn't see any drop off in the receiving unit, which was a ? for me after losing their coach to the NFL. I am also concerned about the run game, but I don't think that is for a lack of holes or that is has anything due to poor coaching. We are missing Evans' big playmaking ability. Why did he leave again?

Anyways, basically 59-17 against Ball St. Satisfactory outcome, but it looked uglier than that. This staff preaches improvement and apparently 3 or 4 guys were not even playing in the game including Mitchell (although I thought I saw him). Outcomes have everything to do with coaching, so if the O was vanilla, we may be surprised in our run game. Seems like it took a few games last year for that to get going. Still, not so sure we disguised much on D. The comments about the guy having all day long to me seemed inaccurate. My thought was that when we rushed, the guy got rid of the ball fast. Hence few sacks. Still, it's Ball St. We were hoping to have a line that could create pressure without relying on the rush, and that didn't happen against a team that will be nothing compared to the OLs we are soon to face.

We will see how it goes from here. I don't expect to beat Pitt, but will be delighted if we do!

One other thing. Who am I to read a guy from a TV, but something made me wonder whether or not Milton is just focusing on having fun or not, but his body language seems to indicate he needs to get a little less out of his head. Kind of like the body language you see in a person who likes attention. Hard to explain, but it's as if his body language is reactive, vs Hooker's I don't give a F if cameras are on me or not sort of focus. In essence, I wonder if the spotlight has always been too distracting for him. It happens.

I could be way off, and I'm not trying to knock him. I'd prefer to be wrong, but I want to see that guy succeed. I would be ecstatic to see him develop mentally into a pro QB via Tennessee. He's got one year to become a General of this team. Regardless, still a nice turnout. Averaged more yards per pass than Hooker. I'm proud of him.

Let's see what these guys can turn out next week. We have a long week, but so does Pitt!
 
#219
#219
SpaceCoastVol said:
Oh stop this.
Click to expand...
I'm not the one claiming Pitt got steam rolled in a game where they gave up 50 more yards than we did, in a rivalry game, to a much better team than we played in. We both won. Either we both got steam rolled or neither of us did. Saying we played our 2s and they didn't is a really lame justification for that claim.
 
#220
#220
JCHateSteve said:
Ball State wasn't playing its starters at that point either. WVU wasn't playing its 2nd string vs Pitt. Pitt got 1st string against a much better team than Ball State, and the numbers are similar. If Pitt got steam rolled so did we.
Click to expand...
You might want to rethink this post. UT played mostly base and at no point lost control. I can't explain why Banks gave BSU so much cushion outside. If he keeps doing it... then this will be a really bad year. But there is no way you can term what BSU did against UT's D as being "steam rolled".

You only have to watch a few of WVU's runs by Donaldson or Mathis to justify the claim that they were "steam rolled".

WVU ran effectively and only allowed Pitt 3 sacks in spite of having a statue at QB and limited talent at WR.

This was a surprisingly bad performance by a D that was expected to be very good.
 
#221
#221
JCHateSteve said:
I'm not the one claiming Pitt got steam rolled in a game where they gave up 50 more yards than we did, in a rivalry game, to a much better team than we played in. We both won. Either we both got steam rolled or neither of us did. Saying we played our 2s and they didn't is a really lame justification for that claim.
Click to expand...

Just say you didn't watch the game, BSU played their starting QB the entire game and most other starters on offense. UT took their foot off the gas three minutes into the third quarter and played reserve players the majority of the second half. I mean Gaston Moore and Navy Shuler got snaps
 
#222
#222
sjt18 said:
You might want to rethink this post. UT played mostly base and at no point lost control. I can't explain why Banks gave BSU so much cushion outside. If he keeps doing it... then this will be a really bad year. But there is no way you can term what BSU did against UT's D as being "steam rolled".

You only have to watch a few of WVU's runs by Donaldson or Mathis to justify the claim that they were "steam rolled".

WVU ran effectively and only allowed Pitt 3 sacks in spite of having a statue at QB and limited talent at WR.

This was a surprisingly bad performance by a D that was expected to be very good.
Click to expand...
My point was never that UT got "steam rolled". Just that Pitt didn't, comparatively, when you consider they played better competition in a renewal of a rivalry game. I think the Pitt game will be close. Sue me.
 
#223
#223
JCHateSteve said:
My point was never that UT got "steam rolled". Just that Pitt didn't, comparatively, when you consider they played better competition in a renewal of a rivalry game. I think the Pitt game will be close. Sue me.
Click to expand...

The game will be close but not because you provided some indepth insight. It will be close because we run a system that exposes our defense more than necessary.
 
#225
#225
Forever151 said:
This is disagree with . WVU has a really good defense , and JT Daniels . I fully expect them to end the season ranked . The question I have for them is can there o line keep daniels healthy and is their halfway as good as Pitt made him look .
Click to expand...

They had an average defense last year and only returned 3 starters from that team. Their leading tackler transferred to Colorado and their best DL transferred to Miami. 3 of their 4 starters in the secondary were gone.

They let a guy making his first start on a team whose best by far WR transferred, that had no running threat, throw all over the field on them. They gave up something like 12 yards per pass attempt last night. People on here are saying Ball State somehow carved us up last night and they only averaged 6 yards per attempt.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top