5/13/2022 football Edit

The 3-2-1 Column: ACC odds, local recruits, QB targets and more

Chris Peak • Panther-lair

Publisher

In this week's 3-2-1 Column, we're thinking about ACC divisions, local recruiting, a surge with quarterbacks and a lot more.

THREE THINGS WE KNOW

The odds are good
BetOnline.ag released its early odds for the ACC this week.

Not a bad spot for Pitt to be third in the conference and second in the Coastal Division, and to be honest, I don’t have too many issues with it. Clemson gets the Clemson Vote since it’s going to take more than one down year to bump the Tigers out of the “Of course they’ll win it, they’re Clemson” realm.

And Miami makes sense, too. Despite what you or I might think about the Hurricanes, the fact remains that they have one of the top returning quarterbacks in the conference. I’m not quite ready to say that Tyler Van Dyke is the top returning quarterback in the conference, but he’s pretty high on the list, and in most cases, lists like this reflect the quality of the quarterbacks.

Actually, that’s one of the things I find to be most interesting about these May odds for the ACC: they don’t seem to reflect the quarterbacks as much as I would expect them to. Of the teams who I would consider to have the surest things returning at quarterback, only Miami seems to be getting respect for it.

Sam Hartman threw for 4,200 yards and 39 touchdowns and rushed for another 11 scores, and yet reigning Atlantic champ Wake Forest is sixth on that list and third in the division.

Brennan Armstrong threw for 4,400 yards and 31 touchdowns and made the surprise move to return to Virginia, and the Cavaliers have the eighth-best odds to win the ACC and fourth-best in the Coastal.

Malik Cunningham might be the biggest sleeper among the ACC quarterbacks despite throwing for 2,900 yards and accounting for 39 touchdowns last year (19 passing, 20 rushing), but Louisville has worse odds to win the conference than Florida State (who even is the Seminoles’ quarterback and does it matter?) and Boston College (somehow the Eagles are behind FSU despite having Phil Jurkovec back for another year).

Ultimately, we all understand these are very early odds. I don’t know if I think Pitt at 9/1 to win the conference is a good bet, but I might put a little bit on Louisville at 66/1; that seems like good value for a team that could surprise.

Still, I can see why Pitt is where it is. Despite the losses of Kenny Pickett and Jordan Addison, the Panthers still bring a whole lot back from last season, and I think that the oddsmakers are banking on Kedon Slovis being a suitable replacement at quarterback (or maybe they’re just banking on you banking on Slovis being a suitable replacement).

In a way, it’s actually a pretty strong show of respect for Pitt to give the team the third-best odds in the conference. Most teams that lose a Heisman finalist and a Biletnikoff Award winner wouldn’t get that kind of credit.

In case you’re wondering, last May BetOnline released its early odds for the ACC. Clemson was, not surprisingly, the favorite, ahead of North Carolina, Miami, Florida State, Louisville and Virginia Tech.

And there, right around the midpoint of the conference, in spots 7 and 8, were Wake forest (33/1 to win the ACC) and Pitt (40/1). They were both fourth-best in their respective divisions.

So yeah, it’s early.

It comes down to one thing
Football has a lot of cliches, and most of them have at least some basis in truth.

Chief among those is that quarterback is the most important position on the field, and I’d say that holds true about as well as any cliché in sports.

I don’t think anyone requires additional proof of that, but if there is a doubter among us, he or she need look no further than last season, where Pitt put together its best performance in 40 years largely on - and almost entirely because of - the play of the quarterback.

Kenny Pickett played at an elite level and the Panthers won the ACC.

I believe that would count as a causal relationship.

And as we move toward the 2022 season, Pitt is going to be relying on that kind of relationship once again - this time with Kedon Slovis at the helm.

I mentioned that I thought those odds to win the ACC showed a lot of respect for what the Panthers are bringing back, and that follows something I’ve been thinking a lot lately:

That this roster is pretty good.

For a team that lost a Heisman finalist and a Biletnikoff Award winner, there’s still a wealth of talent and experience coming back at the skill positions and - crucially - along the offensive line, not to mention pretty much everywhere on defense other than the two outside linebacker positions.

All of that is returning to a team that won the ACC last season. A successful team returns most of its players - that seems like a formula for repeat success.

It just comes down to the quarterback.

There’s no reason to be clever about it or act as if anything else rates as high as that. It’s the quarterback: that’s what will make or break this season.

Pitt should have a roster that can win nine games coming off the bus. Getting to No. 10 or beyond is going to take something extra - the same something extra that got the Panthers there last season.

The quarterback.

If Slovis (assuming he’s the starter) is really good, Pitt’s going to be really good. The quarterback will be the X-factor, for good or ill, and as he goes, so too will the Panthers.

Getting a head start
Do you want to see something weird?

Go look at Pitt’s 2025 offer sheet.

Yes, 2025. Those are kids who are finishing their freshman years of high school. Freshmen, and Pitt has offered more than 60 of them.

That sounds like a lot, although it’s not really that crazy. Penn State’s 2025 offer sheet is similarly long. So is West Virginia’s. Virginia Tech and Georgia Tech, too.

It’s amazing, isn’t it? It’s amazing that college coaches could have seen enough of a player who is 14 or 15 years old to offer him. Some of these guys have barely played any varsity football, and yet here they are, getting multiple Power Five scholarships before they get a driver’s license.

Of course, this is recruiting we’re talking about, and there’s more to the story. Because this point on the recruiting calendar is the evaluation period, when assistant coaches spend their days and weeks on the road, going from high school to high school and watching prospects work out. It’s one of the few times in a year where college coaches can be in the high schools and watch recruits in-person, up close and personal.

It’s also what I like to call, “Database-clogging season.” Inevitably this time of year brings a deluge of new offers - many of which are little more than a school putting itself on a young player’s radar. 24 months from now, it’s likely that a decent number of the freshmen who got offers this spring won’t be hearing from those schools anymore.

This has always been the way coaches operate in the spring, but since Twitter provides an outlet for players to publicize all of their “offers,” the database on sites like Rivals gets bloated rather quickly.

(This is especially the case when a new coach comes in and starts sending far-flung offers all over the country - even to areas where Pitt never recruits. But I digress.)

The most interesting part of Pitt’s 2025 offer sheet isn’t the overall size, though. What’s most interesting is that, of the 60-plus freshmen we list as having offers from the Panthers, 19 are quarterbacks.

No other position group has more than nine offered players. Most - like offensive tackle, offensive guard, defensive tackle, defensive end, linebacker, cornerback and safety - have four or less.

But 19 quarterbacks have had a conversation with a Pitt coach who said, ‘We want you to come to Pitt” (or their coaches have had that conversation; whatever the case may be). That’s a wild number, and it’s reflective of a broader strategy that new offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti has been following:

Along with assistant quarterback coach Jonathan DiBiaso, Cignetti has been scouring the country for not just sophomore quarterbacks (the 2024 class) but also targets among the freshmen. If there’s a quarterback in the 2025 class who had a productive freshman season or whose workout tape got to the Pitt coaches through a high school coach or trainer and Cignetti and DiBiaso liked what they saw, then the kid got an offer.

Florida, Kentucky, Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Ohio, Pennsylvania, California, Michigan - all of these states are represented on Pitt’s 2025 quarterback offer sheet. It’s a wide net that Cignetti and DiBiaso are casting, and while I don’t doubt that they are interested in all of those players, I also have to believe that most of these offers are about establishing first contact and getting Pitt on the player’s radar.

But maybe the biggest takeaway here is the actual active interest in quarterback recruiting. We all know that hasn’t necessarily been a priority in recent years, and the numbers back it up:

In the 2019 class, Pitt offered 13 quarterbacks. Total.

In 2020, Pitt offered 12.

In 2021, Pitt offered 11.

And in 2022, Pitt offered 12.

Again, the 2025 offer list already counts 19 quarterbacks. That’s quite a contrast.

And if you look at the 2023 class, there are 20 listed offers - 13 of which have come since Cignetti arrived. Ditto for the 2024 class: 16 offers and 10 of them have come from Cignetti.

Shoot, simply having a quarterback committed for the 2023 class at this point - Kenny Minchey, who was a Cignetti offer - feels like a big step in terms of quarterback recruiting activity.

We all talked about how Mark Whipple seemed less than interested in recruiting, even at the crucial position of quarterback. Well, we’re seeing the polar opposite right now.

TWO QUESTIONS WE HAVE

What’s up with the locals?
Continuing with the topic of recruiting…

There was a way I expected things to go, and it looked a little something like this:

Pitt wins. Pitt gets recruits. Step 1 and Step 2.

Step 1 came last season, with an 11-3 record, an ACC championship, a New Year’s Six bowl, a top-15 ranking and all the hullaballoo that comes with those accomplishments.

Step 2 is in the works, and I think it’s going to pay off with a pretty good 2023 recruiting class that should be in the top 25 nationally and potentially push into the top 20.

Sounds good, right?

And yet, there’s a nagging issue, a little scratch on the roof of your mouth that just won’t seem to heal.

The locals.

Western Pa. has some talented prospects in the next few classes, and the success of the 2021 season seemed to leave Pitt poised to strike. The iron, after all, is hot right now, and that should be positioning the Panthers to get some of the top-rated guys locally.

And yet, things don’t seem to be headed in that direction.

The top two prospects in the WPIAL for 2023 are Rodney Gallagher and Ta’Mere Robinson. Gallagher has four official visits scheduled for June before he makes his commitment on July 4, and Pitt is not one of the schools currently slated to host him. Robinson only has one visit scheduled - he’s going to Penn State in mid-June (he canceled a previously-scheduled visit to West Virginia) - but there doesn’t seem to be any indication he plans to add a visit to Pitt.

This is a considerable disappointment, given Pitt’s success last season. And what’s even stranger is, a year ago at this time, I thought the Panthers were in great shape with both Gallagher and Robinson. If you had asked me last June, I would have said - and did say - that the Panthers were the favorites for both Robinson and Gallagher. Now, one year and one ACC championship later, the tide seems to have shifted, and it has done so in a way that does’t appear to be pointing toward the hometown team.

Why is this? Why does Pitt seem to struggle to get consistent traction with local recruits?

It’s not always the case. Pitt has won some good recruiting battles for guys like Nahki Johnson, Elliot Donald, Dorien Ford, Dayon Hayes and Paris Ford, not to mention the strong performance in the 2016 recruiting class.

But a bunch of guys have gotten away. You can’t expect the Panthers to land every prospect from the WPIAL - even Dave Wannstedt had his misses - but it seems like something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

I don’t have an answer for this. I think there are still perception issues around Pitt in the local area. I think the stench of those four consecutive 6-6 seasons lingers, and those four years just so happened to overlap with a broader widening of opportunities for recruits. As social media expanded the possibility of contact with colleges across the country, high school players didn’t need to stay close to home anymore; in fact, it seemed to become much easier for them to go far, far away if that’s what they felt was best for them and their exposure.

And a great many people were all too willing to tell those recruits that, yes, it would be better to leave the area.

Why go to Pitt, the thinking seemed to be, if you can go further away and make a name for yourself there?

That way of thinking is still pervasive, and while Pitt has been on a more or less consistently positive trajectory the last six years, I think those old habits die hard. And if today’s recruits maybe weren’t directly exposed to hits such as “Youngstown State 2012” or “Navy 2013” or “Akron 2014” or “Todd Graham,” people around them were, and those memories die hard (especially when you get the occasional “Western Michigan 2021” refresh button).

For whatever reason, there is a contingent that seems to believe local prospects can do better. It’s an uphill battle for Pitt, but it’s not one that Pat Narduzzi or any of his eventual successors will ever stop fighting. Every school has to go all out for the top local talent; it would be silly not to. But Narduzzi is also well aware of the challenges, so while he’ll keep showing as much love as possible to the WPIAL, he’s also going to make sure that he and his assistants are working on talent in Florida, Georgia, Virginia, Maryland, D.C., New Jersey, Ohio and beyond.

After all, Pitt’s Heisman Trophy finalist, Biletnikoff Award winner, leading rusher and leaders in tackles, sacks and tackles for loss all hailed from outside the 412.

It takes more than the locals to build a roster. We all know that. But at some point, ideally, Pitt’s continued success will make it a bit more appealing to stay local, though.

Are we done with divisions?
The ACC’s spring meetings were held this week, and it seems there is movement afoot once again to change the structure of the ACC, doing away with divisions and going to a system where all the teams are in one big group and the top two teams meet in the ACC Championship Game.

That was the deal in 2020, if you recall. With the whole world changing every day - or every hour - the ACC’s solution was to scrap the regularly-scheduled, um, schedule, give everyone a 10-game slate and play a year without divisions.

The end result was, the cream rose to the top. One-year special member Notre Dame went 9-0 against conference opponents and perennial favorite Clemson went 8-1 (not everybody got all 10 games in) and those two went on to meet in the conference title game - a lackluster affair that saw Clemson win 34-10 in front of 5,000 people.

But I digress.

Some of the elements from the 2020 season are not aligned with what has been reported as the ACC’s potential approach to a future adjustment of scheduling and divisions. There’s no Covid and there’s no Notre Dame, for instance. But the main structure is the same:

No divisions. One big 14-team ACC, with everybody playing a bunch of different teams to establish the top two, who then go to the conference title game.

It’s not an idea without merit. Fans of Atlantic Division teams have long pined for this kind of setup because, while they acknowledged that none of them could beat Clemson, they also believed that their No. 2 team was certainly better than whatever the Coastal Division could produce.

That’s what they claim, at least. The reality is, the two-division model has more or less gotten the top teams into the championship game more often than not. Like last year, when Pitt and Wake Forest both won their divisions with the beset records in the ACC. That happened with Clemson and Virginia in 2019, too.

In fact, since the conference expanded in 2013, there have only been two instances when a single-division model would have produced a different matchup in the ACC Championship Game. In 2016, Clemson and Louisville were both 7-1 at the top of the Atlantic Division, but the Tigers faced - and beat - Virginia Tech, who won the Coastal at 6-2.

And in 2013, Duke won the Coastal at 6-2 and faced Atlantic champ Florida State (8-0), despite Clemson going 7-1.

Otherwise, the two division winners have had the best records in the conference, either straight-up or through tiebreakers, so the results wouldn’t have changed.

But that’s not the only component at play here, right? Because along with eliminating the divisions, the ACC would also look to change the scheduling model. The main format being considered would give each team three annual opponents and a rotation through the other 10 teams in the league that would operate on a two-year cycle.

That format would give every team a chance to face every other team at least twice every four years, with at least one home game against every team in the conference over a four-year span.

I could get on board with that. I like the variety it would bring to the schedule. While I appreciate the consistency of facing the same division opponents every year, I also think that this is a 14-team conference, and it would be good to see some of those other teams a little more often than the current setup allows for.

The bigger question, though, is whether a change like this would help or hurt Pitt’s chances to get to the ACC Championship Game.

On first blush, I think it would hurt. I am one who believes the Coastal has been at least a little better than people give it credit for, but we all know it has not had the high-end teams that the Atlantic has had since 2013.

That’s a lot of words to say the Coastal is an easier path to Charlotte.

It’s impossible to say how much more difficult Pitt’s path would be if there were no divisions. The Panthers have had a regular-season game against Clemson three times in the last five years - including one of their Coastal-winning seasons - so it’s not like they have completely dodged the Tigers. But being guaranteed to face the presumptive best in the conference twice every four years is more daunting than, you know, not seeing them that often.

It’s not like the Atlantic doesn’t have its bottom teams, though. Pitt would have to cycle through Clemson and Florida State (assuming FSU gets good again) twice every four years, but the Panthers would also see Syracuse (who they get every year), Boston College (who they have lost to twice in the last three years) and Wake Forest (who might come back down to Earth).

So my guess is it will be a bit a disadvantage, but only if a team like Florida State makes a big push to being a national powerhouse. As long as no clear "second power" emerges behind Clemson, teams like Pitt will have a chance.

ONE PREDICTION

Here’s what the divisions will look like
The ACC hasn’t even announced that it will go to a division-less format yet, but I’m going to make a prediction that, if the conference does change the scheduling cycle, here’s what each team’s three annual opponents will be. In putting this together, I maintained each team’s current annual crossover - which I think the ACC will do - and then add two more opponents.

Pitt: Syracuse, Virginia Tech, N.C. State The Panthers get to keep their longest-running rivalry and their strongest ACC rivalry with Syracuse and Virginia Tech, respectively, and they get the Wolfpack as the conference looks to put at least one non-former Big East team on the annual schedule.

Clemson: Georgia Tech, Boston College, Syracuse The Tigers keep their current annual opponent in Georgia Tech, and they add the Eagles, who will likely provide little resistance for the conference’s best shot at the playoffs, plus Syracuse, so Dabo Swinney can annually exact revenge for that one game in 2017.

Wake Forest: Duke, Louisville, Miami Everyone’s first reaction to this scheduling model was that the ACC will just put all four North Carolina teams against each other, but I don’t think they’ll be that blatant. I think they’ll mix it up a bit. So I say Wake keeps its annual game with Duke and then adds Louisville and Miami because the Deacons have to play someone, and there’s no real strong attachment to any other program.

Boston College: Virginia Tech, Clemson, Syracuse VT is the current annual crossover and Syracuse is a nice geographic rival for the Eagles to add. And Clemson…well, somebody has to play them, and Boston College feels like it is used to drawing the short straw.

N.C. State: North Carolina, Miami, Pitt Like Wake, N.C. State only gets one old-guard ACC team, and it’s the Wolfpack’s biggest rival. Miami and Pitt fill out the schedule as the conference decision-makers bet on these three teams being in the top half of the league over the next decade.

Louisville: Virginia, Wake Forest, Florida State Nobody knows what to do with Louisville, so the Cardinals keep Virginia and then hold onto a pair of current Atlantic opponents.

Syracuse: Pitt, Boston College, Clemson Syracuse-Pitt and Syracuse-Boston College are two of the easiest schedule-making decisions here, and Syracuse gets Clemson every year to make everyone’s eyes bleed from all the orange.

Florida State: Miami, Duke, Louisville The ACC keeps FSU-Miami in a continued hope for the annual heavyweight bouts the conference leaders dreamed of back in 2004, and then the Seminoles get a should-be win in Duke and a possibly competitive game in Louisville because, again, Louisville has to play somebody.

Miami: Florida State, N.C. State, Wake Forest See above re: Miami-FSU and Miami-N.C. State. And then the conference gives Miami an annual game with Wake in the hopes of finally getting the Hurricanes on track.

Georgia Tech: Clemson, North Carolina, Duke Georgia Tech gets all the old guard here. The Clemson game is a carryover, and then the Yellow Jackets get the heart-of-the-conference daily double with UNC and Duke.

Virginia: Virginia Tech, North Carolina, Louisville Virginia-Virginia Tech is a permanent, and there’s a lot of history in Virginia-UNC. Top it off with the current annual game against Louisville and the Cavaliers’ schedule is easy to put together.

Virginia Tech: Virginia, Boston College, Pitt Ditto Virginia-Virginia Tech, and Boston College is the Hokies’ current crossover opponent. Add in Pitt for one of the better Coastal Division rivalries and let that carry over to the new-look ACC.

Duke: Wake Forest, Florida State, Georgia Tech I imagine the ACC will ask Duke for input on scheduling, to which Duke leadership will respond, “What does it matter? We already play 20 conference games now.” And with that, the league will throw something together and move on.

North Carolina: N.C. State, Virginia, Georgia Tech Maintaining UNC-N.C. State and UNC-Virginia will be priorities, and the ACC will keep some long-time members together by matching UNC and Georgia Tech. No former Big East squads here.