Do you think the game today had any effect on local recruits? I was thinking
- Thread starter furfoot
- Start date
I think you could make the case that both teams looked good today. Pitt looked all world in the first half, but then PSU came storming back at the end. If I'm a recruit, I can see positives on both sides. That said, if your decision is about this game and not where you feel comfortable for four years you need to step back and reevaluate.
It's not like it has no effect, but the impact of end-of-season records and rankings is so much greater. If one team ends up in the top 15 and the other one is 3-9, that's what will make a difference not this one game.
I think the game fits Franklin's pitch nicely. We're building for the future, and we're still getting our bearings, but we're not far off. After 4 years of not having 85 schollies, this young team goes into Pitt and fights a senior-laden team to the end coming up just short.
I don't think this game will have much impact on recruiting since it was close in the end. But I am concerned about the impact of blow-outs down the road, or finishing with less than 8 wins. Whether fair or not, a 7-5 season or worse does not demonstrate progress.
If the tackling on defense doesn't get better (and quickly) then we might have some recruits questioning the ability of our coaching staff. At times in both of our games it looked like a free-for-all. I can understand and accept possible reasons for this (a lack of depth and fear of injuries during practice), but we need to do much better. I thought Pitt got away from what they did offensively to great success in the first half. This game could have been more lopsided.
On offense we need to show a lot more variety and get the ball to our play-makers in space. I thought we called a run-game that played right into Pitt's defensive strategy (of run-blitzing). I was under the impression that Moorehead's system would take advantage of what the defensive alignment gives you. I saw no evidence of this. In fact we seemed rather inflexible -- most plays starting with the same run-fake.
Bottom line ... we need to show that we can win one or two games that we are expected, on paper, to lose. To a recruit this demonstrates the ability of the coaching staff. Barbecues and swim parties won't be enough in the long run.
If the tackling on defense doesn't get better (and quickly) then we might have some recruits questioning the ability of our coaching staff. At times in both of our games it looked like a free-for-all. I can understand and accept possible reasons for this (a lack of depth and fear of injuries during practice), but we need to do much better. I thought Pitt got away from what they did offensively to great success in the first half. This game could have been more lopsided.
On offense we need to show a lot more variety and get the ball to our play-makers in space. I thought we called a run-game that played right into Pitt's defensive strategy (of run-blitzing). I was under the impression that Moorehead's system would take advantage of what the defensive alignment gives you. I saw no evidence of this. In fact we seemed rather inflexible -- most plays starting with the same run-fake.
Bottom line ... we need to show that we can win one or two games that we are expected, on paper, to lose. To a recruit this demonstrates the ability of the coaching staff. Barbecues and swim parties won't be enough in the long run.
Yeah, that's what a lot of people don't get. Pitt has something like 27 seniors on the team. They are a heavily experienced, veteran team that just about lost at home to a team that at the beginning of the year was expected to have three senior starters. THREE. All this team lacks is experience and they're now getting it.
This is the first year Penn State has had 85 scholarship players since 2011/2012, and yet they still almost won. And without a turnover or two, they probably would have won. People that look at Penn State objectively get this, and recruits get this. The important thing is that CJF can show that Penn State's trajectory is going up, and it clearly is.
This team = 1992 PSU, not quite there yet on its way to some great teams in the mid 90s.
Seriously? One game? "Hey Tom, I was gonna go to Penn State but they lost to Pitt so I'm packin' my bags for Oakland."
THIS! Nobody (probably) likes moral victories but to come back from the abysmal start to have the chance to pull it out at the end despite losing two more starters early says a lot about the moxie(!) of the team. Looks like the learning stage is well underway and the future is brighter than the haters are willing to admit.
And here is another reality the haters don't want to understand...even if Franklin isn't the long-term guy, bailing on him now would be the worst thing to do for the future. What this program needs more than anything after the past is recruiting stability. Obviously our classes are still off a normal cycle. We need to stock the shelves with 4-5 decent recruiting classes (which Franklin has proven he can do even under terrible circumstances). Going with a new coaching staff now would set things back yet again. And all the negativity about Franklin doesn't help recruiting either. Even if you don't like Franklin as a game coach, why not try to help the man continue to bring in talent for the next guy?
Also, Franklin isn't just trying to rebuild from the sanctions. He's trying to renovate the foundation that started to fall behind at the turn of the century. It's a massive project that takes time and $$$. Remember the "dark years"??? I sure do. PSU was losing to non-power 5 teams and Pitt back then too. We haven't been a program that never loses "those teams" for decades. It's funny to me that the haters think Franklin should just waltz in here and never lose to a solid Temple or Pitt team. Maybe some day we will be back to that level...but we aren't now and haven't been for awhile. We will never get there if we don't give coaches time and support.
I agree and a lot of people really don't see this.
Franklin is putting together a solid and sustainable program. He also hires coordinators he could become HCs one day. That would maintain continuity if he was gone. First Shoop, and now we'll see about Moorhead. Compare that to O'Brien. O'Brien brought in Roof, a failed HC. Then he brought in Butler who was horrible. He never even hired an OC. He fired Vanderlinden even though he knew he was about to quit himself. There was no coaching continuity at all when he left. Even compare it to Paterno. At the end half of his staff was retired-in-place (including him). It was like Bradley could have maybe become the HC, and fans were crossing their fingers that he would proceed to fire everyone else. I think this is better.
Great points and I agree completely. Franklin has his minor coachig issues, but all coaches do. He definitely needs to improve in some areas. But like a player I think he will continue to be a better coach too.
He's already shown an ability to assess talent, fix issues, etc.
We can bicker about timeouts and play calls. But from 10K feet, Franklin is doing a very solid job. And even if he's not the long term guy, giving him positive support can only help the future.
I believe he's a planner and he thinks ahead to future years, plans for contingencies, etc. His ultimate goal might be NFL HC, and that's a goal he might never be likely to attain, so I actually think he could be here for the long term. I could easily see him being in this job for 15 years.
Definitely big-thinker, architect, etc, which is exactly what I think this program needed after the past 15 years.
I could see him being a Pete Carroll. If he can get a couple big wins in this year or next the flood gates may open for him. But that's a big IF right now. Regardless, he has a great foundation building. I really hope the admins see that and aren't swayed by whining donors or our short-sighted fan base.
No baring at all on recruiting wouldn't be either way, those That say so are just fooling themselves.
If recruits like to play in front of a large crowd like attended the game today, they better strongly consider Penn State because the only time Pitt gets a crowd like that is when they play Penn State. On the other hand, Penn State gets a larger crowd than that each home game. If recruits are considering PSU and Pitt, they better attend another Pitt game and see the impact PSU had on the crowd at the game today. PSU came back tough against a much senior Pitt team. PSU is a much younger team.
One of your fans posted this in an earlier thread, but any recruit who chooses his 4 year commitment based off the results of one game is pretty much a dullard.
Maybe you can say that the positive result for both teams is it shows in state recruits that they don't have to leave the state to play in a great college football environment.
Maybe you can say that the positive result for both teams is it shows in state recruits that they don't have to leave the state to play in a great college football environment.
There would have been a big recruiting impact if we lost 63-14, which at one point it looked like we would.
The reality is that both of these teams will be around 7-5 and both will need to sell recruits on where things are going in the future.
The reality is that both of these teams will be around 7-5 and both will need to sell recruits on where things are going in the future.
Atmosphere today was certainly a plus for Pitt. Big question is what will the recruits think when they return to Heinz for another game and find the usual Pitt atmosphere? Tough act for Pitt to duplicate. Only one more PSU game at Heinz for any player currently in high school.
I don't think the loss hurts PSU (or helps Pitt) significantly. Recruits are looking at the bigger picture.
That said, I would like to see this next PSU class full of OLs, DLs and LBs, even if it means the class gets ranked outside the Top 25.
I'm curious to what a recruit who was attending this " away" game thinks looking at the huge turnout of Penn State fans.
Rest of the years Home attendance for Pitt should be interesting to watch..
I've been going to Pitt PSU away games a long time I'm that old. The PSU fans at attendance this year was no different than 30 years ago. The battle for recruits will come done to the same as years past , where the kid feels most comfortable at urban or rural campuses bottom line.
Publicly, Franklin's seat went from warm to hot in the press with the loss (see the Fox Sports article that came out about an hour after the game.) You know how announcers like to have their stories for each game, and if one of their key stories announcers focus on for the rest of the games this year is how Franklin has no signature wins and may be on the hot seat, well, that won't be good for recruiting. A win yesterday would've kept that story line from developing.
Hot seat, and the 2 coaches, Pitt and Penn St. article in the Pittsburrgh Tribune today.
No kids pick schools for different reasons rarely because who won or lost the most recent contest between the two schools
Yep, and they realize the only reason for yesterday's great game day atmosphere was the PSU fans that made it such. When they come back to an empty Heinz, then go and experience a PSU home game, they will still realize that spitt is a 2nd class program.
Pitt has 18 seniors, 12 are starters, and the PK is a starter. Some have started for multiple years. Penn St has many young players as Pitt did 2 yrs ago. They also will have many returning starters. The problem with that is playing time. In reading many of the recruits interviews and articles, a main theme with the top players seems to be PT and/or a chance to start. That is one thing Pitt will be able to offer with this class. Penn St, especially with some of the high-level recruits they signed, will be a tougher sell with PT. Regardless, both staffs will find positives to give them. This game probably did not affect most recruits in a big way. They will choose by relationships with the staff, and their comfort level, plus some other intangibles, one being playing time. LOI day is awhile down the road yet, so there's no need to worry about it now.
I went through the rosters that both schools have on their respective football websites. Here is the class breakdown based on eligibility year.
Penn State
SR - 12
JR - 28
SO - 26
FR - 51
Pitt
SR - 19
JR - 21
SO - 26
FR - 44
Pitt has more Seniors (19 to 12), but if you look at upperclassmen both teams have exactly 40 Jr/Sr.
Somehow Penn St has 7 more freshmen which means the Lions have 7 more total players than Pitt (117 to 110). That's a head scratcher?
A number of those kids were walk-ons during the sanctions and have seen little to no playing time. Some of them I have never even heard of before I took a look at the roster. Penn State has like THREE seniors that are starters. Eight Of the seniors I had never heard of and I don't think ever saw meaningful, if any, playing time. One is a kicker/punter, one is a JUCO O-lineman (b/c we're desperate on the line), one is a legacy kid and has seen limited action. Pitt is playong how many seniors on the two deep with significant playing time?
Seriously, "Hot Seat" articles could be written by any no talent hack looking for clicks. Normally their insight is about as deep as a bird bath.
The ultimate irony here is most of these same writers voted O'Brien as coach of the year with an 8-4 record that was significantly more talented and experienced in the upper class than any team Franklin has led to this point. So O'Brien the genius goes from 8-4 to 7-5 and leaves. Franklin takes over the bare bones of that 7-5 teams, keeps it bowl eligible while mostly being under the shadow of scholarship reductions and he's somehow an idiot? The whole argument is a joke.
As for signature wins, if you're head coach at PSU, you're unfortunately slim on the schools that count as "signature wins". That list of schools usually starts with Ohio State, Michigan and Michigan State....and ends right there. I do get a kick out of people slamming his record against those schools. Franklin took over a team with 65 scholarships and a schedule has seen those 3 teams ranked in the top 10 on 5 of the 6 occasions where games were played. Anyone with half a brain would see those being losses even if coached by Lombardi.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Wrestling Could Penn State be hosting a wrestling dual at Beaver Stadium this fall?- Latest: The Spin Meister
