The 3-2-1 Column: A good season, missed chances, NIL, spring camp and more

MORE COVERAGE FROM PANTHER-LAIR.COM - Video: Capel on scheduling, bouncing back and more | In the film room: Likes and dislikes from the loss at Clemson | The ties that brought Bell, Darveau and Lamar together | The Morning Pitt Mailbag: NIL priorities, recruiting territories and more | Texas OL plans June official visit to Pitt

In this week's 3-2-1 Column, we're thinking about Pitt's season, the missed opportunities, some big storylines for spring camp, how to use NIL and a lot more.

THREE THINGS WE KNOW

This has been a good season
Well, this is a tough sell after another disappointing loss on the road that sure does feel like it put Pitt’s NCAA Tournament chances on ice, but I’m going to do it anyway.

The Panthers have had a good season.

Or, perhaps I should say, they still have a chance for a good season. If they lose out and go 18-13, that’s not a very good season. But if they win the final three regular-season games, they’ll be 21-10, and I would say yes, that is a good season.

Even if it means they miss the NCAA Tournament.

That’s very much hanging in the balance right now. I mean, it has been hanging in the balance for awhile, but it’s especially so after Pitt blew a chance at a good road win at Clemson on Tuesday night.

Making the Tournament would guarantee a good season. But missing it doesn’t guarantee a bad one.

If Pitt can get to 21 wins in the regular season - maybe even 20, although let’s not test that theory - I think it has to count as a good season. The win total can grow from there with some success in the ACC Tournament, which seems like a possibility. The Panthers are currently slated as the No. 7 seed in the conference tourney, which would mean a Day One bye and a Day Two matchup with the winner of Virginia Tech-Louisville.

They probably won't climb into the top four, given that three teams ahead of them - Clemson, Wake Forest and Syracuse - all play each other, which probably means at least one and possibly two emerge with 12 conference wins and a likely tiebreaker advantage over Pitt.

But that’s not the worst thing. Staying in that next group that has a bye and plays on Day Two means a game that should be winnable. And if that happens, 22 wins, regardless of Pitt’s postseason selection or lack thereof, would be a good season.

Beyond the numbers, though, I think there’s a lot to like about this season. Sure, the team blew some opportunities (we’ll talk about the biggest misses in a minute), but who doesn’t? Everybody has a game or two they’d like to get back.

And in the meantime, this team won in two of the ACC’s toughest road environments, including one of the high holy chapels of college basketball. This team was resilient on the road and gave people something to be fired up about at home.

This team featured one of the most unique players in Pitt history - the kind of guy that fans will tell their grandkids about (“I swear, his feet weren’t just touching the logo; he was standing on the logo”). This team featured two of the most exciting freshmen to play for the Panthers in the last 30 years. This team featured a transfer guard who played the style of basketball that fans in Pittsburgh love: tough, passionate and fighting for everything he got.

This team could get hot like no other, and while they ran cold with too much regularity, when they were hot, they were as dangerous a team as you’ll find in the country.

Perhaps most of all, this team got better. This team, individually and collectively, improved by leaps and bounds from where it was to start the season.

Well, maybe not the start of the season, because they were kind of ridiculous in the early goings. But compare where they were in their first game against “real” competition (the Legends Classic loss to Florida) and where they are now.

Leaps and bounds.

And that’s fun to watch. It’s fun to see a team learn how to win and how to do it together. It was fun to watch last year’s team make those realizations, and I think it’s been even more exciting to watch this year’s team figure it out. Every loss provided a lesson, and for the last month-plus, we’ve seen those lessons play out on the court.

We’ve watched a lot of Pitt teams fade in January and February - so much so that it became an expectation. But in the last two seasons, that narrative has changed. Last year’s team went 11-4 in January and February; this year’s team went 9-6.

I think that’s pretty good, particularly when you look at the January/February splits this year:

4-4 in January. 5-2 in February.

They’ve been competitive. They’ve improved. And they’ve been fun to watch.

Will it be disappointing if they miss the Tournament? Of course, it will. But I think it’s okay to couple that disappointment with an understanding that Pitt has still put itself on course for a pretty good season.

Three that got away
Tournament or no, when we look back on this season, I think we’ll point to three games that got away - games Pitt should have won but didn’t.

Everyone probably has their own ideas about this, but these are the three that stand out to me. They were winnable games, games that Pitt had a legitimate chance of pulling off if not for some run-of-the-mill bad basketball. Winning these three would have improved the Panthers’ resume for quality wins and overall victories, and it likely would have Pitt firmly off the bubble - and in the Tournament.

Missouri 71, Pitt 64 (Nov. 28; Petersen Events Center)

This was a stinker at home. The Panthers had bounced back from their loss to Florida by beating Oregon State, but they came home for the ACC-SEC Challenge and laid an egg against a bad Missouri team. Blake Hinson shot 5-of-8 from three, but Bub Carrington and Ishmael Leggett combined to shoot 5-of-22 and committed nine turnovers, Federiko Federiko was a non-factor with just one defensive rebound while Missouri cashed in 11 offensive boards and Jaland Lowe hadn’t yet emerged as a playmaker. The only thing Pitt did well was get to the free throw line, but even there, the Panther missed six of their 31 attempts, which looms kind of large in a seven-point game.

Syracuse 81, Pitt 73 (Dec. 30; Syracuse, NY)

This one stung. Pitt finished the first half on a 14-4 run and took an 11-point lead shortly into the second half, but the momentum faded as Syracuse posted its own 14-2 run, and while the Panthers battled, they fell in a flurry of turnovers and missed free throws. All told, Pitt committed 15 turnovers, which led to 16 Syracuse points, and missed 13 free throws. Three of those misses, including two in the final four minutes, were the front ends of one-and-one opportunities, meaning Pitt left a potential 16 points at the free throw line. Basic stuff - turnovers and free throws - cost the Panthers what would have been a Quad 2 win on the road.

Clemson 69, Pitt 62 (Feb. 27; Clemson, SC)

It seems little harsh to call Tuesday night’s loss a comedy of errors, but there were certainly some head-scratching moments. Like why Blake Hinson only had four three-point attempts in the game and didn’t attempt a shot in the final 13 minutes.

Read that again. Blake Hinson, one of the top scorers in the nation and Pitt’s primary source of offense, didn’t attempt a single field goal in the final 13 minutes of a crucial game on the road. Even when he went to the free throw line, it was a one-and-one from a foul on the floor, not a shooting foul (and he missed the front end of that one).

Also curious was the decision to sit Jaland Lowe at the end of the game. Lowe subbed out with 4:30 left to play and didn’t return until the final 21 seconds. When Lowe left the court, Pitt was down two, 58-56. When he came back in, Clemson’s lead was six and the game was out of reach.

Mostly, though, this was one that got away because Pitt simply didn’t take what was there. The Panthers shot 5-of-15 on layups and 0-of-2 on dunks, according to the official box score. Layups aren’t always guaranteed, but you have to do better than 30%. It was especially bad in the first half, when the Panthers built a 10-point lead that could have been more if they connected on layups and dunks. The crowd’s enthusiasm was waning in the face of that double-digit deficit, and if it had been a 15 or 20-point lead, that might have pushed the fans out altogether.

Instead, Pitt let Clemson get back in the game and the Tigers had the momentum throughout the second half.

Put those three games in the win column, and Pitt is sitting here on March 1 with a 21-7 overall record and an 11-6 mark in the ACC that would have them third in the conference and firmly in the NCAA Tournament field.

They were all games Pitt should have won but didn’t. As the great message board poster 17-15 said, it happens (if you haven’t read his postmortem on the Clemson game, you really should). It happens, but it’s still disappointing, and those will be the three games that stand out to me this offseason.

The giving that is needed
I made a joke on Twitter the other day.

I know it’s called X now, but I don’t care. I recently turned 45, which puts me a solid five and maybe even 10 years past the point of changing what I call things just because those things changed what they want to be called.

Forbes Quad, Heinz Field and the Carnegie Science Center - love you guys.

Anyway, I made a joke on Twitter the other day, and it was one of those jokes that are funny ha-ha but also funny ah-ah, as in, “Ah, that’s funny but it’s also true and kind of stings.”

It was Tuesday. Pitt’s official Day of Giving, as opposed to the other 364 days - 365 this year - that are unofficial days of giving, because if there’s a day when a University doesn’t want you to give, well, you might want to check on that University’s property deed, because the land might have gotten sold.

Anyway, all of the various wings of Pitt were soliciting gifts on the Day of Giving, as one is wont to do. Pitt Football was asking for gifts to its Pitt Football Championship Fund, which must be a tangible thing since all of the words are capitalized.

But right now, in early 2024, you know where that money needs to go?

It’s not for a new weight room. It’s not replacing the carpet in Tim Salem’s old office (spilled Mountain Dew is tough to get out). It’s not for producing nameplates for the offices of the six new coaching staff additions.

In college football right now - and all college sports - the money needs to go to the players.

It would be great if there was some formal, official way to get the money from the University to the student-athletes but, you know, we’re still probably a couple years away from that. So in the meantime, it’s NIL. It’s collectives. It’s funneling money from fans to players through third-party entities that have taken up the challenge of navigating a system with no safeguards for either party and no structure to stabilize it - a completely unregulated system that is nonetheless necessary.

It’s a mess, but it’s our mess, right?

You play the hand you’re dealt, even if half the cards keep changing numbers and the other half keep getting yeeted by another player at the table.

Like it or not, that’s what the world of college athletics is right now, and while a resolution into salaries and contracts can’t be much more than a couple years away, there’s still the matter of getting from Here to There.

You can’t fall too far behind while you’re waiting for the regulated salary system to be put in place. And that means you have to compete in the current environment.

I know some people still don’t like the idea of extorting the fans to play the players. Part of it bugs me, too; it shouldn’t be the fans’ responsibility to get the players fair compensation for what they provide.

But until the time comes when the organizations that benefit from the players - the schools and the conferences - actually pay the players, this is what you have to do. You might have to hold your nose while you do it, but it’s what has to happen, and if I was Pitt’s Athletic Department, I would be doing everything I could to drive people to Alliance 412 right now.

And if they run into some pushback, they can always remind people that the moral high ground probably has a great view of the ACC Championship Game.

TWO QUESTIONS WE HAVE

Where was the big addition on offense?
Spring camp starts on Monday, and as we think about the makeup of the football roster, the conversation inevitably involves transfers.

Pitt brought in 12 of them this offseason, and while I think there are some good additions in there, I can’t shake the feeling that something is missing.

And it’s missing in the place where the Panthers needed something the most.

It’s on offense.

Where was the big addition on offense?

There’s no question that Pitt needed a big addition on that side of the ball. The Panthers’ biggest problem last season was at quarterback, but that shouldn’t completely overshadow the lack of true game-changers at the other offensive skill positions. Bub Means was the closest thing Pitt had to a game-changer in 2023, and I certainly have - and will continue to - beat that drum.

But maybe he is viewed as such because he was the only one who really showed game-changing ability. Either way, Means is gone, and I’m not really sure who they have to replace him.

Konata Mumpfield and Daejon Reynolds are nice players, but I’m not sure they are No. 1 wide receivers. Kenny Johnson showed a lot of promise, but I think his ceiling is somewhere short of the space that true No. 1’s like Jordan Addison and Tyler Boyd inhabited. There’s potential in the rest of the 2023 freshman group, too, but again, I’m not sure how high those ceilings are.

It’s good to have all of those guys back. Johnson certainly earned his share of attention during transfer portal season, and getting him to return was a win on the NIL front. But retention is only half the battle; adding quality players is the other part, and if Pitt’s intention this offseason was to find a No. 1 wide receiver, I’m not sure the coaches accomplished that goal.

There’s no question that Censere Lee and Raphael Williams were productive at Western Carolina, but I think there are plenty of questions bout how that productivity will translate to the ACC. Maybe I’m completely off-base here, but I think the Panthers needed a proven playmaker from the Power Five ranks - or at least from another FBS school.

Last year, Pitt added two quarterbacks, one running back, one receiver and one tight end. They all came from Power Five schools, and while the performances of those five players don’t exactly sound a ringing endorsement for the process, it’s a contrast with this offseason.

This offseason, Pitt added one quarterback from a Power Five school, one tight end from a Power Five school and three players - two receivers and a running back - from the FCS level.

I’m not going to pretend like FCS players can’t excel at the Power Five level, but it feels like more of a long shot.

I’m intrigued by the new offense. I really am. And I’m not quite as put-off by the staff makeup as some are. But you need the players. You need the guys to make plays. The transfer portal gives you a chance to get good in a hurry, and when I look at Pitt’s haul this offseason, I just can’t help but feel like the Panthers didn’t get what they needed.

What’s the biggest question in spring camp?
There are plenty of questions to ask about Pitt football this spring. From the bevy of new coaches to the dozen transfers and nine early-enrolling freshmen to unsettled positions like quarterback and cornerback, not to mention the unavoidable matter of bouncing back from the program’s worst season in 25 years, there’s no shortage of things to discuss.

But there’s one that I think is the biggest, or perhaps the most uncertain, at least on the micro level.

It’s the defensive line.

I simply don’t know what to expect from how that group is going to shake out.

From a numbers perspective, the line was hit pretty hard this offseason, and that’s especially true at tackle. Pitt lost three defensive tackles who finished their eligibility and one more - a locked-in starter for 2024 - who transferred. The Panthers also saw their top young end transfer.

And those departures all came from a defensive line unit that wasn’t all that productive or effective in 2023. So there were plenty of questions around the group heading into 2024.

Oh, and then the defensive line coach left for the NFL in the first week of February. You know, just in case there weren’t enough questions.

Look, I assume Dayon Hayes will be a starter. I think you can probably write that one in pen. Beyond him, though, I’m not sure there are any sure things.

Returning seniors Nate Temple and Bam Brima would seem like prime candidates for the other starting spot at defensive end. Kansas State senior transfer Nate Matlack, too; I could see him in the mix for the starting job opposite Hayes, and I assume those four guys - Hayes, Temple, Brima and Matlack - are the most likely to fill out the two-deep. I assume.

At tackle, it’s even more up in the air. I don’t think there’s a clear and obvious option among the tackles like there is with Hayes at end. Elliot Donald is a redshirt junior, so he’s got some age, if not a lot of playing experience. Sean FitzSimmons is a redshirt sophomore; he’s younger than Donald but has averaged just about the same number of snaps per active season.

We’ve heard that Nahki Johnson moved from end to tackle this offseason, and there were some early indications that the move was working out well. But we’ll have to see what actually comes of it.

Beyond that, there’s redshirt freshman Isaiah Neal, redshirt sophomore transfer Nick James and true freshman Francis Brewu, who enrolled in January.

That’s it. That’s the list. And if you can pare that down to a workable two-deep, let me know, because I’m struggling to make sense of it.

It’s not that I don’t think there are good players in there. There certainly are. It’s just completely up in the air as to how they’re going to be ordered. If I had to guess - and this is completely a guess - the first-team defensive line on the first day of spring camp will be Hayes, Donald, FitzSimmons and Temple.

But that’s a total and utter shot in the dark. Outside of Hayes, I have no idea what they’re going to do.

Or how they’re going to play.

I have some idea of just about every other position group. But the defensive line, to me, is a total mystery.

ONE PREDICTION

Yarnell will stay at No. 1
We’ll make a spring camp prediction here, and we’ll center it on the quarterback.

Nate Yarnell will enter spring camp as the No. 1 quarterback, and he’ll finish camp in that spot, too.

Pat Narduzzi and Kade Bell have both declared the first part, so there are no limbs I’m going out on with that one. But my prediction is that he’ll stay there, and I have a few reasons for that.

For starters, I think he earned it with his play last season. He sat back and watched as the offense floundered with Phil Jurkovec and then still couldn’t get off the ground with Christian Veilleux. Yarnell was finally called into action for some garbage time in the blowout loss at Notre Dame and had a 386.7 passer rating (he was 2-of-3 for 75 yards and a touchdown). He didn’t quite hit that number when he came in against Syracuse, but he also didn’t turn the ball over, which was pretty important in that game.

Then he moved into the starting job for the final two games of the season. Pitt went 1-1 in those two, but Yarnell played well: 36-of-54 (66.7%) for 472 yards, three touchdowns and one interception.

That’s about as good a two-game stretch as any Pitt quarterback had last season, and I think it accomplished two things.

One, it called into question the decision to not go to Yarnell earlier in the season (like, maybe at the beginning of the season). And two, it made a clear case for him entering the spring as the No. 1.

Which he has.

My prediction isn’t just about what he did at the end of last season, though. I actually think Yarnell is a pretty solid quarterback. He has attempted 76 passes in his career at Pitt and has thrown five touchdowns and one interception. And while he has often had a pretty conservative playbook, he does have a career average of 10.4 yards per attempt, so he has made some productive throws.

It remains to be seen if Yarnell can carry the team to victory, but in the meantime, I’ll take a quarterback who can operate the offense. I think that’s going to be huge this season: with a tempo system, the quarterback has to be able to get the calls and communicate them clearly and quickly.

As long as Yarnell can learn and process this new offensive system, I think he’ll be the favorite for the starting job, at least coming out of spring camp.

Maybe one of the other guys - Veilleux or Eli Holstein or Ty Dieffenbach or Julian Dugger - can win the job away from him in the summer or August training camp, but I think this spring will be Yarnell’s. The job is his to lose, and I don’t think he’ll lose it between now and April 13.