MORE HEADLINES - Beatty on Addison, working Yellen and more | PODCAST: The losing streak, the final five games and more | Bates on Notre Dame, motivation and more | Inside the offensive numbers: Snaps, targets and more | Inside the defensive numbers: Pressures, receptions allowed and more | Video: Narduzzi's final talk before Notre Dame | Narduzzi on Yellen, Book and more

In this week’s 3-2-1 Column, we’re thinking about negatives, positives, the run game, the offensive line and more.

THREE THINGS WE KNOW

Still close after all these years
I thought a lot about Pitt’s loss to Miami this week. I’m guessing you did, too.

It was a 31-19 defeat, the Panthers’ third loss in a row and a continuation of the disappointment that started a few weeks ago when Pitt fell to N.C. State at Heinz Field. There were a lot of elements in the most recent loss, a lot of plays, mistakes and decisions that led to the outcome.

If you’re like me, you’ve probably spent the last week, or at least the early portion of it, thinking about those plays and mistakes and decisions, trying to figure out where things went wrong and how likely it is that they go right in the future.

Somewhere along the way, if you’re like me, you might have also spent a few minutes on a related train of thought. Because as I considered how that game went and the things that happened in those 60 minutes, I couldn’t help but thinking that Pitt was pretty close.

Miami didn’t blow out the Panthers, despite the double-digit score. The Hurricanes weren’t that far ahead of Pitt on a talent level, and it was clear that the Panthers were pretty close.

In fact, that has been the case with all three games Pitt has lost this season: none was a blowout, and there wasn’t one loss I would look at and say, “Man, Pitt really never had a chance.” There were competitive in every one of those three games; each was very much a winnable contest and Pitt just fell a bit short.

That’s a positive. It’s better to be close than the alternative, and it’s encouraging that the program is competitive with its peers.

At least, I suspect that’s what we would be saying if this was Pat Narduzzi’s first year with the Panthers. Or maybe even his second year. I think we did say that in Narduzzi’s first year. But that first year was five years ago, and in Year Six, you shouldn’t just be getting close in games.

You should be winning them.

When there are games like this in a coach’s early years, you can talk about how it’s good that a team got close, that once the coach gets “his guys” and really builds the roster the way he wants it, those close games will turn into wins. That’s typical “new coach” talk - not that coaches say that stuff, but fans and media certainly do. It’s common practice when there’s a coaching change.

It’s fine and it’s logical. It makes sense that it might take time to build a winning program, and because of that, it’s encouraging when a team gets close in those first few years. Close losses are okay because you can convince yourself that once the coach has rebuilt the roster, the close losses will become wins.

That’s how it’s supposed to work.

And yet here we are in Narduzzi’s sixth season, with a roster full of his players, and Pitt is still just getting close. The Panthers have what should be their best team under Narduzzi, and a three-game losing streak has been the result thus far - three winnable games, three missed opportunities and three disappointments.

The worst part is, Pitt can’t get those games back. Even if the Panthers sort themselves out and go 4-1 over the final five games - a hyperbolic hypothetical, but relevant for this discussion - then this losing streak, particularly the N.C. State and Boston College losses, will be the difference between an okay 7-4 season and a really good 9-2 record.

Those losses can’t be undone, even by a complete reversal of fortunes. The mark left by the disappointment of those defeats can’t be erased. And there is little solace in the fact that Pitt was close.

Some positives
Let’s not get too down right now. It’s Friday, right? You might have a job and you might have things to do, but it’s still Friday, so let’s look on the sunny side of life for a minute, especially since this Friday - in Pittsburgh at least - has a chance to be one of the last really nice weather days for awhile. So here are five things I think about Pitt that are not negative right now.

1. Young skill
I don’t think there is any doubt about Jordan Addison: he has lived up to every expectation and then some. He is Pitt’s leading receiver with 38 catches, he has gained more first downs than any player on the team and his reception rate (69.1%) is higher than any other Pitt receiver. He has had some drops - four in the N.C. State and Boston College games combined - but he rounded back into form at Miami with a monster eight-catch/147-yard performance. Addison has looked like a stud, and he’s just getting started.

He’s not the only one either. Israel Abanikanda has been limited by opportunity (just 23 carries) and, apparently, injury (he didn’t make the trip to Miami). But he has shown flashes of potential and looks right now like he has the highest ceiling of any back on the roster. Jaylon Barden has also seen limited opportunities (just three targets all season) but he has speed to spare and you could probably make a case for him playing over a few of the upperclassmen, or at least getting a chance to show what he can do. Those three should give you a little encouragement about the young playmaking ability on this offense.

2. DL depth
Assuming Patrick Jones and Rashad Weaver don’t come back to Pitt in 2021, the Panthers’ defensive line will take a step back. That’s inevitable, but it’s also more of a reflection on how good those guys are than it is a comment on the quality of the backups. Because the backups across the defensive line look pretty good. Even without Jones and Weaver, Pitt will have Deslin Alexandre, John Morgan and Habakkuk Baldonado back next season, plus Dayon Hayes, who has flashed as a freshman. And that’s just the ends; all of the tackles should be back as well, save for Keyshon Camp.

We talked all offseason about how this defensive line was stacked, and I haven’t seen anything to change my mind about that.

3. Emergence at LB
The biggest breakout performance this season has been sophomore linebacker SirVocea Dennis. He’s tied for the team lead with 37 total tackles, he’s second in tackles for loss with 6.5 and he has two sacks. Dennis has come out of nowhere to be one of the defense’s most consistent players, and he wasn’t even a starter to open the season. Chances are, he’ll step back into a reserve role when Cam Bright is back to 100%, but that’s beside the point: the point is that Dennis’ emergence gives Pitt another reliable, proven commodity at linebacker - and on defense - for 2021, in addition to the strong work he’s putting in this season.

4. Recruiting
This is of little solace to Pitt fans looking for wins right now - which is a perfectly reasonable request - but Pitt’s 2021 recruiting class is still holding up quite nicely as October reaches its final week. The 20-man class is currently ranked No. 22 in the nation and No. 5 in the ACC, but beyond the rankings, it just looks like a really good class. There are two four-star prospects, a host of top-line three-stars and some underrated lower-three’s who are staying off the radar due to COVID-related changes to their high school senior seasons. Regardless of all of that, there is some real talent in the class, and that follows the classes of 2019 and 2020, which already looked like they could be Narduzzi’s best.

I do believe that Pitt’s recruiting has gotten better in the last three years, and if you’re looking for positives, that’s one.

5. Joey Yellen
This is a stretch due to sample size, but I believe there were some encouraging signs from Joey Yellen in his first Pitt start on Saturday. The Arizona State transfer wasn’t perfect, of course; he had a few passes that could have been picked off and he needs to secure the ball better when he’s getting tackled. But I thought he showed some nice touch on his passes and did a good job moving in and out of the pocket to find open receivers downfield.

I’m not close to entertaining a conversation about who should start when Kenny Pickett returns from injury, and I’m not even on board with declaring the 2021 quarterback competition to be settled, because I think Davis Beville is a talented quarterback who will get a fair shot at the job. But when looking at one start, on the road, against an ACC opponent, I thought Yellen performed pretty well, and if you’re looking at bright spots for the future, I think that’s one. I’m really interested to see how he does this weekend, assuming he gets the start once again.

The run game, part <enter number of times we’ve covered this topic here>
Hey, I have a unique idea:

Let’s talk about Pitt’s running game, or lack thereof. That will be something different.

I mean, I don’t know how we can get away from this. It’s almost to the point of being fascinating. Almost. The Panthers had 22 net rushing yards on 26 attempts at Miami on Saturday. Yes, that includes sacks and sack yardage, but if you take those stats out, you’re still left with 18 rushing attempts for 49 yards; that’s 2.7 yards per carry.

In case you’re not sure, that’s bad.

The thing that’s still really amazing to me is the abrupt change from 2018’s run game extravaganza to the complete lack of success in that regard since then. You know how good Pitt’s running game was in 2018: the Panthers had two 1,000-yard rushers and ran for more than 3,000 yards as a team over the course of 14 games that season.

Since then, the Panthers have rushed for a grand total of 2,186 yards.

Let’s say it one more time for emphasis:

In 2018, Pitt rushed for 3,191 yards in 14 games. In 19 games since then, the Panthers have rushed for 2,186 yards. That’s a 1,005-yard deficit despite playing five more games. Pitt averaged 227.9 rushing yards per game in 2018; in the last 19 games, the Panthers have averaged 115.1. It’s quite literally half the production.

Just looking at the individual game numbers is shocking. 200-yard rushing days weren’t all that uncommon in 2018. The Panthers topped 200 rushing yards eight times in 14 games that season; they haven’t done it once since then.

Similarly, Pitt was held under 100 rushing yards just once in 2018. That was a 69-yard game in the regular-season finale loss at Miami. In the last 19 games, the Panthers have nine sub-100 games as a team. Pitt ran for 208 yards in the Sun Bowl loss against Stanford to end the 2018 season, and then turned around eight months later and ran for just 78 in the 2019 season-opening loss to Virginia.

The running game, quite simply, fell off a cliff.

Now, maybe that’s all a testament to Mike Herndon and Connor Dintino, and maybe the rushing attack just could never bounce back from their eligibility running out, but somehow, I don’t think that’s it. I mean, yes, I do believe that Pitt is lacking in certain areas on the offensive line, and talent is certainly an issue.

But when the drop-off is not just severe but remarkably precise, when you can literally draw a dividing line between Pitt having a good run game and Pitt having a bad run game, and it just so happens that the line you’ve drawn is also the transition of an offensive coordinator change…

I don’t want to say this is all on Mark Whipple, and we’ve gone back and forth over the last few weeks trying to figure out where to place the bulk of the blame (The coordinator? The offensive line coach? The offensive linemen? The running backs?). But it’s clear that something isn’t working - it’s clear that the thing is broken to the point where any rushing attempt feels like a waste of a down - and it’s tough not to put a fair amount of that on Whipple directly.

TWO QUESTIONS WE HAVE

How fast can you fix an offensive line?
Let’s talk about one specific area with the run game: the offensive line.

We can put a fair amount of blame for the issues on Whipple, but there’s also something to be said for the fact that the guys up front just don’t seem to block very well. The grading system at Pro Football Focus isn’t a definitive authority, but it’s worth considering, and not one of Pitt’s starting offensive lineman ranks in the top 50 nationally in run-blocking among offensive linemen with at least 245 snaps.

Jimmy Morrissey is the highest-graded of Pitt’s starters, and he ranks No. 59 in run-blocking. Jake Kradel is next, and he’s at No. 83. Carter Warren, Bryce Hargrove and Gabe Houy are all ranked between Nos. 147 and 183.

That’s just one way to slice the onion, though. The overall picture - the big, eye-watering bite out of the onion - is the overall production of the run game, and it’s tough not to put a lot of that on the linemen and their performances thus far.

I don’t think anyone would disagree about the offensive line being an issue, but let’s get goal-oriented here, and since the goal is to have a better, more effective offensive line, the question is simple:

How fast can you fix an offensive line?

I’m of the mind that it takes awhile. Offensive linemen typically take a few years to develop; unlike receiver or running back, it’s tough to expect freshmen to come in and make an impact right away on the line. That caliber of offensive line prospect does exist, but those guys are the elite, the tip of the spear, and they usually find themselves playing for the usual suspects.

For schools like Pitt - and the vast majority of college football - the foundation for a strong offensive line is built on evaluation and development. The Pitt coaching staff has to find talented prospects and coach them into productive college players. And that takes time. There is no quick fix. And if you haven’t evaluated and recruited the right players and developed them well, then you’re going to get stuck in a hole that will take several years to get out of.

That’s sobering. And I think I answered my question.

Can you fix an offensive line in a hurry? No, you really can’t.

Sure, you can get transfers and that kind of thing, but that’s all Band-Aids and temporary fixes. Programs with strong offensive lines - also generally referred to as “good programs” - build them over time and create a standard at the position. They recruit well, develop those players and get 2-3 years out of them as starters, while the younger players develop during that time and become starters around their third seasons.

That’s how it’s supposed to work. But it’s not working that way at Pitt, and Pat Narduzzi has to find the answer. Is it the players or the coaching? Is the talent not good enough or has the development not been sufficient? And if it’s on the talent, who takes the responsibility for that talent?

Narduzzi decided it was the coaching when he fired John Peterson after three seasons and hired Dave Borbely to handle the offensive line. Now Borbely is in his third season, and while he does have that 3,000-yard rushing season on his resume from 2018, that was a long time - and a lot of bad rushing performances - ago. Narduzzi will have to decide if another move is in order.

What can Pitt do in the final five games?
This is a million-dollar question right here, and I’ll announce it right off the bat:

I don’t have the answer.

Well, I should clarify that. I have no idea what Pitt will do in the final five games, but I do have some idea of what Pitt can do in the final five.

Simply put, the Panthers can win a few games, despite the popular sentiment that a three or four-win season is on the way.

Here’s the thing that happens: When a team loses multiple games in a row, the losing seems like it will never end. The things the team does poorly seem like its permanent condition, and the things it does well seem like fleeting moments, teases of what could have been or maybe just dumb luck.

And there’s some truth in that. You don’t lose three games in a row by doing a lot of things well. You earn a three-game losing streak with consistent mistakes and errors, and when you’re talking about football, where there’s a week in between every game, the mistakes and errors seem even more omnipresent because it’s hard to think about anything else over the course of 20-plus days.

The result is that you start to feel like the team won’t win again. I can understand that: the bad certainly outweighs the good right now, and it’s tough to see a point where the good will outweigh the bad.

But I’m of the opinion that Pitt will have quite a few opportunities to right the ship. Of the final five opponents - Notre Dame, Florida State, Georgia Tech, Virginia Tech and Clemson - only Clemson stands as being an impossible out. I mean, nothing is impossible in football, as we all know, but we can be real for a moment: Pitt’s chances of winning that game are pretty low.

The other four, though, are all winnable games.

I know, I know: N.C. State and Boston College and Miami were winnable games, too, and we saw what happened there. But while I said earlier that there’s little solace in being close, perhaps the only positive you can take from those games is that no one would believe Pitt wasn’t good enough to win them.

Pitt failed to win them, but it wasn’t a matter of not having enough talent to win them.

Now, being good enough to win and actually winning are two different things. That’s the basic premise of underachievement: teams that are good enough to win but fail to do so are underachievers, and in the last three weeks, Pitt has underachieved.

But that doesn’t mean the Panthers will continue to underachieve. In fact, I’m willing to say that they will achieve - hell, maybe even overachieve - at least a few more times this season.

The big question is how many times Pitt can pull that off. Two more wins would mean a 5-6 season, which would be supremely disappointing. Ultimately, no amount of wins in the final five games will totally shed the feeling of disappointment about this season, but it can still be salvaged, to some extent. That’s a tall order, though, because a 3-2 record over the next five games means a 6-5 record, which would also be pretty bad.

That means Pitt would need to go 4-1 to even come close to having something less than a certifiable Bad Season. And 4-1 is a very lofty goal. That would mean correcting all the issues, fixing all the mistakes and doing things right more often than not.

That's a tall order. But that's the situation Pitt has put itself in.

ONE PREDICTION

The depth chart will continue to be meaningless
This isn’t really a prediction; we all know that the official two-deeps released by Pitt every Monday have very little in terms of real-life implications.

But still, there are times when things show up on the depth chart that seem like they are tangible, noteworthy changes. Like last week, when Vincent Davis stayed atop the running back two-deep but his backups were listed as follows:

Israel Abanikanda
Daniel Carter
Todd Sibley Jr. or
A.J. Davis

That was a notable change, since in previous weeks, Vincent Davis was at the top of the list and the other four were separated by “OR’s”. Dropping all the “OR” designations seemed pretty significant to me, so much so that I wrote in this column last week that the youth movement was happening at running back.

Vincent Davis and Israel Abanikanda; the future is now. A.J. Davis and Todd Sibley would be relegated to third or fourth on the list, at best, with the coaches committing to the freshman and sophomores.

Yep. Youth movement. Wave of the future. And that led directly to…

…starting running back Todd Sibley.

That’s right. Sibley got the start at Miami on Saturday, and while Vincent Davis still ended up with the most carries (he had nine), Sibley’s start and Abanikanda’s complete absence (he didn’t make the trip) were a pretty clear demonstration of how little the two-deep really means.

To be fair, Sibley probably earned the start with his play in practice during the week and Abanikanda probably got banged up during the week, so those were situations that developed after the depth chart was published, so that’s understandable.

But how about this week? At 11:50 am, Pitt released its latest game notes with the updated two-deep, although “updated” isn’t really accurate since there weren’t any updates or changes. The depth chart looked the same as it did last week.

That means it included redshirt junior Grant Carrigan as the backup at tight end. Which is funny since, roughly 10 minutes after the game notes were released, Pat Narduzzi held his weekly press conference and announced that Carrigan is out for the season.

Look, I’m not really making a big deal of this. Sometimes I just marvel at it all. I suppose this is less of a prediction and more just me ranting about something. But it’s been amazing to me to watch the two-deep acrobatics over the years, and the last couple weeks have been particularly, um, entertaining.