Tigers clinch ACC Atlantic with a win against Pitt

Nov 7, 2016, 12:35 PM

That's motivation.

Pitt worries me a little for one main reason - they play dirty, especially on the back end. They play almost exclusively man-to-man on the back end, and load the box, do their best to take away the entirety of the opponent's run game. Their DB's will grab, hold, tug jerseys, and commit blatant pass interference almost every throw on the grounds that the refs can't possibly call them all...and Narduzzi is a very vocal ref intimidator; he'll be whining and howling the whole game on the sidelines lobbying for (and against) calls.

A weak ref crew can really tilt a game in Pitt's favor, because if Pitt gets away with it, the more they'll do it.

So cross your fingers for a strong crew that's willing to stand up to Pitt's antics and Narduzzi's incessant lobbying. Deshaun was also dialed in on the deep ball last week - as he wasn't earlier in the year - and he's going to have to be again, because Narduzzi will not alter the way he plays defense. And those straight verts are going to be there. Here's hoping Watson's shoulder won't hinder him from hitting them.

Pitt's also pretty good, and occasionally explosive, on offense. They're fairly rugged up front, and RB James Conner is a no-kidding hoss; he's rushed for 712 yards at 4.6 a clip thus far this year - after, oh yeah, beating cancer - and is certainly on pace for 1,000 and looks to be getting stronger as the year goes on. Which maybe happens the more the chemo gets out of his system. Their QB, Nathan Peterman, throws fairly well (130 of 215 - 60.5% - for 1806 and 14 TD's versus only 4 picks) and is a lot more athletic than you'd expect; they throw mostly off play-action and will do a fair amount of read-option and RPO, and Peterman isn't shy about taking off with it; he's added 53 rushes for 191 and another TD and that's after his sack-yardage total is deducted. His two big weapons are junior WR Jester Weah - 26 catches for 563, 6 TD's, at a whopping 21.7 yards per grab - and TE Scott Orndoff, who has 21 catches for 354 (16.9 yards per catch) and another 2 TD's himself.

Pitt got lit up last week by Miami, losing 51-28 and Brad Kaaya shelled them pretty mercilessly, but that was also Pitt's only bad loss; they lost by one at UNC, a field goal against VT, and a touchdown at Oklahoma State. They beat Penn State 42-39 early on in the season and also beat GT (again by a field goal). The bottom line is, Clemson can't just stroll out and win and then go work on their Mannequin Challenge after the game; Pitt is rugged and effective - and, I think I mentioned, distinctly grabby. They're almost certainly going to show up with extra stickum on their grabby little hands and denial on their mouths, and they will get after us offensively. They're 50th of 128 teams in total O, and 87th of 128 defensively...their real Achilles heel is passing defense, where they rate just 126th of 128 FCS teams - and again, did I mention they compensate by grabbing a lot (like, every play!) and then screeching at the refs when they call it? Because they do.

Not sure I'd pick Clemson to cover the 20-point spread, especially if Pitt can uglify the game the way they're going to want to, and especially if Watson's arm is a little gimpy and he doesn't come out razor-sharp.

Whatever, though, at this point who really cares about style points? Win and we're in the ACC title game. Win that and we're in the playoffs...and in between we get this exhibition game against our feathered would-be rivals down I-26; they talk a lot of smack but they play in the utterly abysmal SEC East and lost last year to - get this - the Citadel. I kid you not.

Time to close this thing out....

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

Tigers clinch ACC Atlantic with a win against Pitt

Re: Tigers clinch ACC Atlantic with a win against Pitt

So, to be clear, are you saying Pitt is a little grabby on

Re: So, to be clear, are you saying Pitt is a little grabby on

If I we're y'all, I'd be a little uneasy heading into this

Re: If I we're y'all, I'd be a little uneasy heading into this

Q, i missed your post last week, was curious

Re: Q, i missed your post last week, was curious

Nice, but "win and we're in the playoffs"??

TigerBoard POTD