MORE HEADLINES - Ranking the crossovers: Looking back at Pitt's 10 games against the Atlantic Division | What does the film show about Pitt LB commit Brandon George? | Jason Collier's coach gives insight on the Pitt TE commit | OL target Malone has regular contact with Pitt | What to expect from the tight end position at Pitt this season | FREE ARTICLE: FSU's Bell named Pitt head coach

It’s the Panther-Lair.com 3-2-1 Column, with three things we know, two questions we have and one prediction we’ll make about Pitt sports.

This week we’re talking about Pitt’s spot in the ACC, Heather Lyke’s Athletic Department, offensive line recruiting and more.

THREE THINGS WE KNOW

Pitt has done pretty well against the Atlantic Division
Earlier this week it occurred to me that Pitt’s five years in the ACC mean the Panthers have played exactly 10 games against the Atlantic Division. And since 10 is a nice round number, it seemed like as good a time as any to rank those 10 games.

Rank them on what? I can’t say there were specific qualifications. The games Pitt lost were ranked below the games the Panthers won, of course. Beyond that, the games were ranked on excitement, significance and what just ended up being the “best games.” Naturally, the win over Clemson was No. 1; there couldn’t be any other option. Beyond that, there were some subjective decisions based on what I thought mattered most. That’s why the Syracuse game in 2015, with a nine-minute drive and a ballsy fake punt to win at the Carrier Dome, came in at No. 2 - that was a key early moment in the Pat Narduzzi era and while the passage of time has faded the memory a little bit, it’s still pretty significant.

Anyway, as I looked at those 10 games, I realized that Pitt is 7-3 against teams from the Atlantic Division. That’s a pretty impressive record, albeit one built largely on a 4-1 record against Syracuse, which helps. But still, going 3-2 against the other five Atlantic teams - wins over Clemson, Louisville and Boston College; losses to Florida State and N.C. State - is pretty solid, especially considering one loss came against Jameis Winston and the other was in the middle of a tumultuous 5-7 season.

No matter how the record was built, Pitt’s 7-3 mark in crossover games is one of the best in the ACC over the last five seasons. Not surprisingly, Clemson is 8-2 against the Coastal since then, but Pitt, Florida State and Duke are all right behind the Tigers at 7-3.

(And Pitt could be tied with Clemson at 8-2 if the Panthers hadn’t stumbled at the Carrier Dome this past season.)

Now, the schedule and quality of opponents will always be a factor to consider. Pitt has faced Syracuse five times in the last five years, just like Duke has faced Wake Forest each year and Louisville has gotten to see Virginia each of the last four seasons. But that hasn’t worked out for everyone. Boston College has managed just 14 total ACC wins over the last five years, but Virginia Tech - who faces the Eagles in annual crossover play - is 4-6 against the Atlantic. N.C. State is 15-25 in conference games the last five seasons, but the Wolfpack’s annual opponent, North Carolina, is only 5-5 in crossover games.

So subpar opponents can explain some of it, but not all. You still have to beat the teams on your schedule, and Pitt has done a pretty decent job of that, at least in the crossover games. The problem, of course, has been in the Coastal, where Pitt is 14-16 over the last five years, a record that falls behind Miami (21-9), Virginia Tech (19-11) and North Carolina (17-13).

Georgia matches Pitt’s 14-16 Coastal record since 2013, while Duke is 12-18 and Virginia is 8-22. That puts the Panthers right in the middle of the division; they’re not as far out of it as a team like Virginia over a five-year period, but they’re also not as consistently successful as Miami, Virginia Tech and Carolina.

It’s worth noting that Narduzzi does have a winning record in the Coastal at 10-8, despite last year’s 3-5 record, so things seem to be trending up. But the arrow has to start heading on an upward trajectory that’s a bit sharper.

Heather Lyke continues to remake the athletic department
There was news outside the football/basketball bubble this week, as one Pitt coaching search came to a close and another got started.

Things happened in the reverse of that order, starting on Sunday when Pitt announced that softball coach Holly Aprile had resigned to take the head coaching job at Louisville. That’s a pretty interesting move on a few levels.

For starters, Aprile was fresh off a season that saw her lead Pitt softball to a 16-6 record in the ACC while being named the coach of the year in the conference. That likely made her a hot commodity, but I don’t get the impression that Pitt viewed her as such. It’s been pretty clear that Lyke and company pushed for staff changes last offseason, which probably set a certain kind of tone for the relationship. Then, coming off a pretty strong season, I don’t get the impression that Aprile felt like she had a ton of support in the Athletic Department.

So while she wasn’t fired, per se, there probably wasn’t a lot of effort put toward retaining her long-term when she started looking at other opportunities. It’s interesting that the opportunity Aprile found is in the ACC, meaning Pitt will still see her on a regular basis, but on the whole, I think Lyke is probably looking forward to making a new hire for the softball program.

If you’re keeping score at home, that will be Lyke’s eighth head coach hire in roughly 16 months (it’s fun to say that she has hired a new head coach every two months, but it didn’t exactly work out that way). Not all of those eight openings were due to her decisions; wrestling was open when she arrived, and two other coaches retired. But the openings in men’s basketball, women’s basketball, women’s soccer and baseball came from her, and we can give her half-credit on softball.

Of course, Lyke has done pretty well with the hires she’s made. Randy Waldrum won two national championships with the women’s soccer program at Notre Dame. Jeff Capel was the top assistant under Mike Krzyzewksi at Duke. Lance White was a No. 1 assistant in the ACC. And Mike Bell, who was hired this week to coach the baseball team, has a strong reputation as a pitching coach and as a recruiter on top of his experience in the ACC.

But still, as we talk about turnover and attrition and change, is there anything to read into all of the moves from the last 16 months? Is that an unexpected confluence of events, an intentional “purging” of the department (there have been plenty of changes at the administrative level, too) or simply the natural course of college athletics?

Whatever it is and whatever conclusions you draw about this situation, there’s no question that Pitt’s Athletic Department, from coaching changes to administrative personnel to facilities projects, will be very much built in Heather Lyke’s image over the next five years.

This has been a relatively quiet offseason
In some respects, that’s a funny statement to make. After all, Narduzzi hired four new coaches for his staff, including a coordinator - the fourth consecutive offseason he has had to hire at least one new coordinator - in addition to seeing 13 players with eligibility remaining leave the program.

That’s a lot of transition and turnover, and yet, it doesn’t seem like this has been that chaotic of an offseason for Pitt. No, that’s not a joke on the turmoil we’ve seen here in the past; rather, it’s probably more of a reflection on who left the program this offseason. The three players who went to the NFL - Jordan Whitehead, Quadree Henderson and Brian O’Neil - were all starters and represent significant losses.

But the other 10 who transferred out weren’t exactly prominent players. Ben DiNucci was the only one of the 10 who had started a game in his Pitt career, and he wasn’t going to enter 2018 with any real prospects of starting again, barring injury to Kenny Pickett. So the attrition doesn’t seem quite as impactful as the number might indicate.

Consider, for instance, Virginia Tech. The Hokies lost eight key players from their defense this offseason, only three of which had finished their eligibility. Three guys went to the NFL and two others were kicked off the team. Plus, a JUCO cornerback who was expected to be a key player tore his ACL.

Oh, and the co-defensive coordinator resigned after some unsavory actions became public.

Pitt knows a thing or two about offseason chaos, but Virginia Tech is operating in rarified air this year. And despite the personnel changes at Pitt, the Panthers are - mercifully - not experiencing the most upheaval of any team in the Coastal Division.

That’s not to say that things are settling down at Pitt. One of these years, Narduzzi would do well to keep a staff intact for two consecutive seasons. And while 10 transfers represent a pretty significant purging of the roster that may have been needed, you’d like to get to the point where those kinds of numbers are unheard of.

In my unofficial and off-the-cuff estimation, a truly quiet offseason would be one with one or zero coaching changes and three or fewer transfers/dismissals/attrition. Early entrants in the NFL are good things - because it’s good to have good players, right? - so we won’t count those. But getting through an offseason with most of the roster staying together and nobody getting kicked out…it seems like that would be good. At least for a year or two.

TWO QUESTIONS WE HAVE

What can Pitt get from tight ends this season?
If I asked you about the production from Pitt’s tight ends in 2017, you probably wouldn’t need to look up the stats.

Simply from memory, you could probably recall that the position didn’t do a whole lot.

But in case you wanted to see the numbers, here they are: Matt Flanagan, Chris Clark and Tyler Sear combined to catch 34 passes for 292 yards. One of the 34 receptions went for a touchdown; 10 of the other 33 gained a first down. So 11 out of 34 catches gained a first down or a touchdown.

For comparison, in 2016 Scott Orndoff caught 35 passes; he scored five touchdowns and gained 20 first downs. So 25 touchdowns/first downs on 35 receptions - quite a bit more than the 11 Flanagan/Clark/Sear had.

Of course, there was more than just tight end talent separating Orndoff in 2016 and Flanagan/Clark/Sear in 2017. Orndoff also had something that last year’s trio didn’t: solid, consistent quarterback play. Nate Peterman was as solid as they come in 2016. By contrast, Flanagan, Clark and Sear worked with Max Browne, Ben DiNucci and Kenny Pickett - not exactly the modicum of stability that Peterman was.

And not only were those quarterbacks inconsistent, but they also didn’t target the tight ends much. DiNucci targeted the tight ends on 13.3% of his passes, which is well below Browne, who went to Flanagan, Clark and Sear on 18.5% of his throws (a percentage that’s close to Peterman’s target rate with Orndoff).

Kenny Pickett didn’t throw to the tight ends much in his limited snaps - just six of his 66 passes - but some of that can be chalked up to being new on the field. With a full offseason of practice reps and film study and general growth, though, he should have a better command of his options and weapons in the passing game.

So will it improve this season? That’s anyone’s guess. Flanagan and Clark were the most experienced tight ends on the roster, and they’re gone. To replace them, Pitt has Sear and Arkansas grad transfer Will Gragg; put them together and you’ll actually need two hands to count all the career catches. Still, there’s talent in the group. Gragg is a former four-star prospect, Sear is a versatile player who can line up at a number of spots and Reeves is a big pass-catcher.

The key, in my view, is the quarterback position. Flanagan and Clark weren’t as good as Orndoff, but they could have put up similar numbers to what Orndoff had with better and more consistent quarterback play. If Pickett is really as good as everyone expects him to be, then the tight ends will have better production this season.

Is it time to be concerned about the offensive line recruiting?
Defensive ends? Looks good.

Linebackers? Shaping up nicely.

Tight ends? Rolling in.

Offensive line? Not quite. As in, not at all.

We’ve probably talked about this topic in this space before - I know we’ve discussed it at length on the message board - but it’s worth mentioning again, because Pitt still has zero offensive linemen among its 14 commitments in the class of 2019.

That’s not good, especially when the coaches are looking at getting a big haul of linemen in this class. They’ve talked about taking four or even five tackles alone, plus a guard; if that’s really the goal (and it should be, considering the roster), then it would be ideal and quite beneficial to have two or three or even just, you know, one offensive line commit on board by this point.

At the same time, the plane hasn’t crashed into the mountain just yet. Yes, some top targets are off the board, but Pitt still has plenty of options to fill its desire for quantity and quality in the 2019 class. The two targets who might be most important to the class are Ja’quay Hubbard and Kaleb Boateng; both are high-end tackles with various connections to Pitt - Hubbard is a western Pa. native, Boateng took an official visit last month - and both are key pieces for the staff.

In an ideal world, Pitt would land both Hubbard and Boateng. While that scenario is not out of the realm of possibility, it seems more likely that the Panthers will get one of those two. That’s acceptable - and also necessary. You don’t want to put too much on one recruit (or, in this case, two) but Pitt really needs to get Hubbard or Boateng or both and then fill out the class with a handful of the other prospects who are still on the board.

Guys like Christian Mahogany and Liam Dick and Nick Malone and Austin Williams and Matthew Goncalves and maybe a few others. There are probably eight or 10 options at offensive tackle outside of Hubbard and Boateng; get one of those two and three of the other 8-10 who currently have offers, and it will be a solid offensive line class (and we probably shouldn’t count out the possibility of a December/January surprise - you know, a recruit we’ve counted out in the summer who turns out to be serious about Pitt; we’ve seen that happen a few times).

As long as those top targets are still on the board, the concern shouldn’t be too severe. I think it’s okay to be a little nervous at this point due to the lack of any current commits, but it’s not the end of the world yet. Not quite.

ONE PREDICTION

Pitt will finish better than 11th in the ACC
Bovada released its odds for the favorites to win each conference in college football. Not surprisingly, Pitt was not the favorite in the ACC; Clemson was, followed by Miami, Florida State, Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Louisville, N.C. State, Duke, Wake Forest, Boston College and then a three-way tie between Pitt, North Carolina and Syracuse at 100-1 (and they were all ahead of Virginia at 300-1).

So if that’s a rough approximation of the expected finish order in the ACC this season, Pitt is checking in somewhere around No. 11, No. 12 or No. 13.

I’m here to say I don’t think that happens.

Last season, Pitt was 3-5 in the ACC, tying the Panthers for ninth place with three other teams - Duke, Virginia and Florida State. Pitt beat Duke and Virginia head-to-head, so we’ll put the Panthers ahead of the Blue Devils and the Cavaliers. I don’t know how the tiebreaker would shake out between Pitt and FSU, but we’ll assume Pitt loses it, so that would put the Panthers in 10th place overall in the conference.

A brutal season with a 3-5 record in the conference led to a 10th-place finish - and Bovada is projecting Pitt to finish worse? I know that handicapping the favorites isn’t the same as projecting a finishing order, but it’s close, and in my view, Bovada is off-base on this one.

There are plenty of question marks about this team, for sure, but the one thing the outside world talks about the most re: Pitt football 2018 is the schedule; it’s regularly referred to as one of the toughest in college football, and for good reason - the Panthers have a real gauntlet to run.

But here’s the thing: that perception of a gauntlet largely revolves around three games - Penn State, Central Florida and Notre Dame. And that’s a tough three games, to be sure, but it’s only three games. The rest of the schedule isn’t quite so daunting.

The home portion of the ACC slate has Georgia Tech, Syracuse, Duke and Virginia Tech coming to Heinz Field; for a variety of reasons, I think Pitt can win all four of those games. Then the Panthers have to go to North Carolina (they’re gonna win one of those games eventually), Virginia (they shouldn’t stop winning those games anytime soon), Wake Forest (a pretty significant step down from the last few Atlantic Division opponents) and Miami (okay, that’s a tough one).

The truth is, Pitt’s tough schedule is really a tough non-conference schedule; the ACC portion of the schedule isn’t that bad, and if you told me Pitt was going to go 7-5 overall but 6-2 in the conference, I wouldn’t be surprised in the least. That actually seems fairly plausible.

And an outcome like that would certainly put Pitt higher than 11th in the final ACC rankings.