The 3-2-1 Column: Getting closer to football, winnable games and more

I usually sit down and start planning this column and its sections on Tuesday of a given week and really commit to writing on Wednesday and Thursday. During the season - football or hoops - this is a pretty tried-and-true process. The big storylines are typically pretty clear from early in the week and it’s not too hard to piece together a (hopefully) coherent series of topics for the column.

The offseason gets a little trickier, if only because the news comes in ebbs and flows. There will be weeks when lots of things happen and then drier spells when we have to get more creative in finding topics to write about.

The worst time, though, is when those topics that seem relevant and interesting on Tuesday get overshadowed by something else before we publish the column on Friday or, even worse, change altogether.

So right now, I’m taking some risks writing on Wednesday about a topic that has experienced constant change more than anything I’ve seen in a long time:

The return of college football.

Every day, it seems, there’s some new development that portends something, good or bad, about if and when college football will be back. Those developments range from blustering (politicians commenting on it) to emotional (coaches commenting on it), and sometimes you might even get something of value when a person who’s actually in position to affect these things chimes in (like university presidents or conference commissioners).

But things just keep changing because this whole situation is changing. We see that in our everyday lives and we see it, without a doubt, in sports. We see these changes every day because the situation evolves and change every day.

We all want to know where this is heading. We all want to know what the end point is. We all want a road map. But the problem is, the situation is too unpredictable. We don’t know enough to have a road map. We don’t know enough to see the end point. We don’t know enough to have a concrete idea of where this is heading.

We’re sitting here pretending we know what the situation will be in September, and I’m still facing uncertainty about a trip to the Outer Banks in June.

So we’re left to wonder and hypothesize and guess.

And hope. We’re left to do that, too.

We’re left to hope that somehow something that approximates a normal college football season is going to happen. Some days, that hope seems more viable than others.

And these days, the viability of hope changes quickly.

This week’s changes
I feel like every week we could spend time in this column talking about the latest news or developments that will potentially impact the possibility of having a football season this year.

This week in things that seem important

I’m inevitably going to talk about these things every week because that remains a pretty big question on everyone’s mind: Will there be football?

(I know we all have bigger questions, but as far as this website and the people who frequent it are considered, that’s a pretty big query.)

This week, I think there were some positive signs. On Wednesday reports came out that the NCAA is going to allow schools to hold voluntary workouts for football and men’s and women’s basketball starting on June 1. That’s a big step forward, particularly after the NCAA decided last week to extend the recruiting dead period through the end of June.

The dead period extension concerned me, but the decision to allow voluntary workouts is a positive, to be sure. It’s one step closer to football actually happening and, most importantly, it lays the groundwork for preseason work to ramp up.

That’s hugely important. We spoke to Jaylen Twyman and Patrick Jones this week and they both said they’d only need a couple weeks to get ready for the season, but they’re young and optimistic; most coaches would say they need more time than that to truly prepare.

Holding voluntary workouts in June - either on the first of the month or later - is a big step because it starts everyone down the path of holding actual training camp, and that leads to real football. So that was big news, even if it remains to be seen which schools will actually start holding workouts on June 1.

That’s just one side of the issue, though, because the NCAA can make every rule it wants and it won’t matter if the schools - or the states the schools are in - decide to be slower in reopening.

Along those lines, then, there were other relevant developments this week. Like the news that Notre Dame, Syracuse and a few other schools are going to use accelerated calendars for the fall semester, starting school in mid-August and finishing the semester before Thanksgiving.

That’s pretty significant because it’s a clear and actionable road map to on-campus school happening. I’ve said for awhile that I find it hard to imagine college football without actual college; compelling student-athletes to return to campus even if the general student body is not allowed back seems like a dicey proposition, at best, and one that could draw legal challenges.

So seeing schools put definitive plans in place for an on-campus fall semester is encouraging. It’s not necessarily a plan for having college football - questions like how many fans can come in and what testing looks like still remain - but it’s an important first step toward getting a “regular” season.

The pressure should be on
As the 2020 season becomes more of a reality - or as its cancellation becomes less of one - I find myself dwelling more and more on what’s at stake for Pitt this fall.

This is a topic we’ve covered before, and to be honest, I think it’s one we’ll come back to at various points throughout the summer and fall.

The pressure is on for Pitt and Pat Narduzzi - as well it should be.

This is Year Six for Narduzzi, as you well know. The past five seasons have seen a fair number of highs and quite a few lows. On an acute level, 2020 needs to have more than its share of highs, but from a broader view, it has to reach a certain level.

It has to be considered a success.

Now, “success” is a subjective term. We saw that as recently as 2018, when Pitt won the Coastal Division (a success) but went 7-7 with some brutal losses (not a success). Even if you turn the clock back to the Panthers’ last 10-win season in 2009, you would find plenty of fans who spent the offseason talking about how it was a disappointment since Pitt didn’t beat Cincinnati to win the Big East.

So maybe “success” is never truly attainable short of a national championship, at least for some percentage of the fanbase.

For the rational rest, though, we can set the bar somewhere a little shy of winning the College Football Playoffs. If Pitt gets to 10 wins, that should probably be considered a success. Maybe even nine, depending on the circumstances.

And here’s the kicker:

That’s what Pitt should do this season.

This is the part we’re going to be repeating for the next three-to-six months the imperative. We’ve already said it a few times in the last five months, and I’m not going to pretend like this is breaking new ground. But I’m saying it again here because I think it’s fair to keep the idea at the forefront.

There should be some pressure on Pitt and Narduzzi this season. With the talent returning and the lack of turnover on the coaching staff and the winnable schedule, there are a lot of factors that would seemingly line up for a successful season.

The excuses of previous years - offered more by fans and media than by players and coaches - have been mostly eradicated. The right personnel for the defense? Got it. Keeping an offensive coordinator for consecutive seasons? Got it. A more manageable nonconference schedule? Got it.

Pitt, under Narduzzi, is at a point now where the biggest question is how the Panthers can turn last season’s disappointments into successes. Games like Miami and Boston College simply can’t happen in 2020; avoiding those kinds of losses can be the difference between seven regular-season wins and nine. Pitt has to avoid those losses this season.

I don’t usually get into absolutes like calling a season “make-or-break” because I don’t think things are quite as black-and-white as that. But I do think it’s of the utmost importance for the Panthers to take something of a step forward in 2020, and the pressure that is on them to do that is deserved.

TWO QUESTIONS WE HAVE

How best to achieve that success?
Consider this to be a continuation of that last section of the column. A segue, if you will:

Pitt needs to achieve a certain level of success > How can Pitt achieve that level of success?

And like that last section of the column, this will be one you’ve heard before because I think it bears repeating. I’ll bring it out again in July, I imagine. And quite possibly once more during the season.

Say it with me:

Pitt needs to win the winnable games - something that has been less reliable in the last few seasons.

The important distinction is what I mean by “winnable.” I’m not talking about the Notre Dame game in 2018; yes, Pitt could have won that game and it would have been huge to beat a top-five team on the road. But that was a game where the Panthers were underdogs, by the sports books and in the matchup, and I don’t think anyone went into that game saying Pitt should win it.

The same goes for the Penn State game this past season. Again, a win that could have been very good for Pitt, and one that was right there for the taking. But like the Notre Dame game a year earlier, few expected the Panthers to win in State College last September.

No, those aren’t the kinds of games I’m talking about. I’m talking about games where you can say with a fair amount of certainty that Pitt should win. Last year that would have been Ohio or Delaware or Duke or Syracuse or Georgia Tech - those games would count.

But so would Miami and Boston College, and there’s the distinction. Pitt lost those games, as you well remember, just like the Panthers fell short against North Carolina and Stanford in 2018. Those four games all should have been wins for Pitt, and if they had been, 2018 would have been a 9-5 season instead of 7-7 and last year would have been 10-3 instead of 8-5.

How would the perception change if Pitt was coming off 19 wins from the last two seasons instead of 15? How much difference would it make if you could say that Pitt had won nine and 10 games in consecutive seasons instead of seven and eight?

It would make a considerable amount of difference, I suspect. And the Panthers wouldn’t have needed to do anything crazy: just beat four teams that were not very good.

Which brings us to this season. Pitt’s schedule is manageable, and I would say there are seven games that fit into this “winnable” category I’m talking about: Miami (Oh.), Marshall, Richmond, Duke, Georgia Tech, Virginia and Syracuse (Virginia might be a stretch as defending Coastal champs, but the Cavaliers have a decent amount of personnel to replace and I expect them to take a step back).

That’s seven games right there. Seven games that are, to varying degrees, in the “winnable” - or we can call it “should-win” - category.

Realistically, this Pitt team should have those seven wins as the baseline, with the games against Miami (Fla.), Notre Dame, Florida State, North Carolina and Virginia Tech as the determining factors in how successful this season ultimately is.

The key is to not put yourself in a hole by losing one of those seven games. Get those seven as the floor and then bear down to build on them.

Who’s the best back now?
As most of you probably know, we have added a second weekly podcast in the last month or two. Released on Fridays, it has been an interview podcast, with a different Pitt-related guest on each episode. We started with Pat Bostick and have since spoken to Latef Grim, Tyler Palko, Scott McKillop, Maurice Ffrench and Jeff Capel, and I have really enjoyed catching up with those guys.

This week’s guest is former Pitt running back Curtis Martin, and I have to say, I might have enjoyed that conversation the most. I thought it was as insightful as any interview we’ve done, and Martin is a really, really interesting guy.

You should check out the podcast and give it a listen, but there was one topic I’ll highlight here because it’s a fun discussion topic. I asked Martin to set himself aside and take his pick of great Pitt running backs: Tony Dorsett, Craig “Ironhead” Heyward, LeSean McCoy or James Conner.

I don’t want to spoil the podcast, so I’ll just say that Martin’s answer would probably surprise you.

Also surprising to me was when I asked Martin about getting selected to the Pitt Athletics Hall of Fame. He said he didn’t really think he deserved it because his Pitt career wasn’t all that illustrious. He only had one 1,000-yard season and was the Panthers’ leading rusher just once in his four-year career. We all know that was due to injuries - he had some interesting thoughts on that topic, too - but it was really interesting to hear Martin’s frank and candid responses to those questions.

It got me thinking about that list of backs, though. I don’t think it’s a surprise to anyone to say that Pitt’s got quite a legacy of running backs. When a guy like Martin isn’t even in the top ten in career rushing - he’s about 100 yards behind No. 10, Elliott Walker - that says something.

So who’s the best back in that group? How would you rank Pitt’s all-time backs?

It’s hard not to reflexively put Dorsett at No. 1. He won the Heisman Trophy, after all, and had a 2,000-yard season in 1976. He holds virtually every Pitt rushing record, so it would be tough to put anyone ahead of him.

But who’s next?

Conner is Pitt’s second-leading rusher with 3,733 yards over essentially three seasons. Ray Graham, Curvin Richards, Heyward, Dion Lewis, Qadree Ollison, McCoy, Billy West and Walker round out the top 10, in that order.

If it’s me, I might lean toward McCoy. He averaged better than 1,400 yards in his two seasons at Pitt; Lewis was better by a few yards, but he also played one more game than McCoy.

There’s more to it than numbers, though. If you watched McCoy in action at Pitt, you knew you were witnessing greatness. For two seasons, he was Pitt’s only offensive threat. That’s not hyperbole; the Panthers relied on him in 2007 and 2008, and the Panthers’ best wins of those two seasons were all among his finest performances:

137 yards vs. Cincinnati 2007
148 yards at West Virginia 2007
142 yards and 2 touchdowns at USF 2008
169 yards and 1 touchdown at Notre Dame 2008
183 yards and 2 touchdowns vs. West Virginia 2008

Every one of those teams knew what was coming, and not one of them could do anything to stop him. He was sensational and electric, and his NFL career has built on that potential.

So I would put McCoy right after Dorsett on the list of all-time great Pitt backs. What’s your list?

ONE PREDICTION

Vincent Davis will be the leading rusher this year
I don’t know about this one, but I’m thinking about running backs so I figure I’ll stay on that topic.

Look, if you haven’t figured this out after three years of this 3-2-1 Column format, the “prediction” section isn’t always a prediction. A lot of times - most times? - I use it as an opportunity to discuss another topic more than I lay down a hard-and-fast prediction.

Maybe that’s because most, if not all, of my predictions end up being wrong. Or maybe it’s just because the format is the format but I’m really just looking to talk about Pitt sports.

Anyway, we’ll wrap it up today with a prediction that I will definitely come back to if I’m right, even though it’s really just a chance to discuss a topic. And that topic is the running game.

I’m not sure where Pitt fans are with the running game. They know it has to be better in 2020 than it was in 2019; that much is certain. But I don’t know which of the team’s running backs goes into the season with the highest expectations from the fan base.

AJ Davis is a senior, but he has never flashed much in the way of top-end potential, and fans don’t seem to think much of his chances.

Todd Sibley had a few good moments in his redshirt sophomore season last year, but he got hurt and his health is a question mark.

Vincent Davis definitely has speed, but his size is a deterrent for fans looking to name a No. 1 back.

Really, I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of fans pointed to Israel Abanikanda as the projected leading rusher in 2020. We always love to pile hype on freshmen, especially running back given how plenty of first-year players at that position have experienced success.

If you feel like the returning options have shown you what you can do and you’re not all that thrilled with what you’ve seen, then the newcomer - the unseen - can become quite appealing. So when I run a poll on the Panther-Lair.com asking readers who they think will be the leading rusher this season, I won’t be shocked at all if Abanikanda is the top choice.

But I’m going to go with Vincent Davis, but not by a landslide. In fact, my guess is we’ll see another committee approach this season, for a variety of reasons. The biggest reason is that I think the two backs with the highest ceilings also have some limitations that will keep them from being a runaway 1,000-yard back.

Those two players would be Vincent Davis and Israel Abanikanda. Davis is tough but small, and his size is going to limit his volume. And Abanikanda is bigger but a freshman, and his inexperience is going to limit his carries.

So I think you’ll see the coaches rotate those two backs with AJ Davis and Todd Sibley, riding the hot hand when one presents itself and generally spreading the carries out. And if the coaches do that, I’m going to bet on Vincent Davis being the back who comes out ahead in yardage this season, if only by a little.

I wouldn’t be surprised at all if Abanikanda leads the team in rushing over the final quarter of the season or something like that. But my guess is the coaches will ease him in, to some extent, and Vincent Davis will use his propensity for big runs to build a cushion in yardage and lead the team for 2020.