Pat Narduzzi has Pitt's demons on the ropes

Check out the advanced-stats glossary here. Below, a unique review of last year's team, a unit-by-unit breakdown of this year's roster, the full 2016 schedule with win projections for each game, and more.

1. The demons are wobbly

Call it the Curse of Johnny Majors. In the last 18 seasons, since Majors retired and Walt Harris took over, Pitt has had a winning record in one-possession games just five times and has been at least two games under .500 in such games nine times. In this nearly two-decade sample, the Panthers are 35-53 in these contests, a 0.397 win percentage.

The Panthers have managed to attend 13 bowls and share two conference titles in these 18 years. If these demons that have taken over Heinz Field ever relinquish their powers, Pitt could easily become an annual ACC Coastal contender.

-- Pitt football's got demons. Pat Narduzzi might be the guy to exorcise them

As fans, we have plenty of funny tendencies. If you raise the stature of our program just enough to break our heart with high-stakes losses, we will resent you for it.

It's funny (if you're not a Pitt fan, at least) to look back to the end of the last decade.

Under Dave Wannstedt, Pitt pulled off one of its most significant upsets, in 2007 (taking down WVU in Morgantown to prevent the Mountaineers from advancing to the BCS title game), then went 9-4 and 10-3 over the next two seasons. The Panthers went 8-5 in 2010, giving them 27 wins over a three-year period for the first time since 1981-83.

And Wannstedt resigned under pressure, hated by a large portion of Pitt fans.

The major reason was the tease. A 27-12 record is undoubtedly good, and in 2009, Wannstedt engineered Pitt's first top-15 finish in the polls since Dan Marino's last year (1982). But he gave Pitt fans a glimpse at what they could be and couldn't get them there.

In 2008, the Panthers lost 28-21 to Cincinnati and 3-0 to Oregon State in the Sun Bowl. In 2009, they lost 38-31 to NC State and 19-16 to WVU and 45-44 to Cincinnati. In 2010, they lost 27-24 to Utah and 23-17 to Notre Dame and 30-28 to UConn. As good as they were (and they were quite good, ranking in the S&P+ top 20 all three years), close-game deficiencies prevented them from being even better. So he got run out of town.

And in the four years that followed, Pitt went 6-7, 6-7, 7-6, and 6-7. Not only was the promise gone, but the close-game execution wasn't any better.

Early in Narduzzi's first year, Pitt came back from a 10-point deficit to tie Iowa in Iowa City, only to lose via 57-yard field goal at the buzzer. It was a Pitt-style heartbreaker that suggested the Panthers' demons were stronger than Narduzzi's impeccable résumé.

But then a funny thing started happening. Pitt won at Virginia Tech by four, at Georgia Tech by three, and at Syracuse by three. After a momentary setback, they manhandled Duke and Louisville. They went 6-2 in ACC Coastal play, missing out on a division title only when a comeback attempt against UNC came up just short. And even in that game, there was promise and fortitude -- Pitt trailed 23-6 in the third quarter before charging back.

The Panthers weren't very good -- their No. 40 S&P+ ranking was the average of Paul Chryst's last two years (36th in 2013, 44th in 2014). But that almost made 2015's 8-5 finish more encouraging. The Panthers were young but still showed an ability to come back against good teams and maneuver in close games. For Pitt, that was almost a more important hurdle than actually improving.

Now comes the improvement. In theory, at least.

The Panthers return their starting quarterback, their top two rushers, four of their top six receiving targets, four offensive line starters, their top four defensive linemen, four of five linebackers, four of five defensive backs, and one of the best punts-and-kickoffs combinations in the country. For all we know, the turnaround in close-game fortune was a product of total randomness and will turn right back around. But the combination of fortitude and production seems awfully dangerous.

And I didn't even mention James Conner in that paragraph. Or the return of the Pitt Script. The Panthers have a lot going for them at the moment.

2015 Schedule & Results

Record: 8-5 | Adj. Record: 10-3 | Final F/+ Rk: 46 | Final S&P+ Rk: 40
Date	Opponent	Opp. F/+ Rk	Score	W-L	Percentile Performance	Win Expectancy	vs. S&P+	Performance vs. Vegas
5-Sep	Youngstown State	N/A	45-37	W	56%	72%	-11.6
12-Sep	at Akron	84	24-7	W	85%	90%	-1.4	+4.0
19-Sep	at Iowa	38	24-27	L	48%	16%	-3.2	+2.5
3-Oct	at Virginia Tech	59	17-13	W	91%	98%	+9.0	+9.0
10-Oct	Virginia	78	26-19	W	87%	99%	-4.0	-3.0
17-Oct	at Georgia Tech	64	31-28	W	67%	73%	+6.0	+6.5
24-Oct	at Syracuse	85	23-20	W	51%	44%	-1.7	-4.0
29-Oct	North Carolina	24	19-26	L	37%	4%	-8.8	-4.0
7-Nov	Notre Dame	7	30-42	L	47%	13%	-2.4	-3.5
14-Nov	at Duke	74	31-13	W	84%	89%	+25.1	+21.5
21-Nov	Louisville	39	45-34	W	84%	87%	+10.4	+9.0
27-Nov	Miami-FL	62	24-29	L	54%	36%	-11.2	-11.0
28-Dec	vs. Navy	21	28-44	L	50%	12%	-9.3	-12.5

Category	Offense	Rk	Defense	Rk
S&P+	33.9	38	25.6	50
Points Per Game	28.2	68	26.1	57

2. The next step: defending good teams

Pitt grading out as about a top-40 team (and no better) makes sense when you look at the Panthers' results. The Panthers were mostly unsuccessful against better teams and mostly successful against worse ones, and the difference was almost entirely on the defensive side of the ball.

• Pitt vs. F/+ top 40:
  Record: 1-4 | Average percentile performance: 53% (~top 60) | Yards per play: Opp 6.3, Pitt 5.9 (-0.4)
• Pitt vs. everyone else:
  Record: 7-1 | Average percentile performance: 72% (~top 35) | Yards per play: Pitt 5.7, Opp 5.2 (+0.5)

Pitt had the luxury of not facing a ton of good offenses in 2015, and the ones the Panthers faced did pretty well. UNC, Notre Dame, and Navy combined for 37 points per game and 6.8 yards per play. Georgia Tech managed 28 and 8.8 in October, before injuries had completely crippled the Yellow Jackets' attack, and Louisville managed 34 points and 5.7 late in the year. Everyone else: 20.6 points per game, 4.9 yards per play.

The offense, meanwhile was strangely consistent. Between the fifth and 12th games of the season, the Panthers averaged between 5.3 and 6.3 yards per play each week. The offense grew into itself (which makes sense considering this was a run-first attack that featured two freshman running backs), and the defense controlled mediocre to bad attacks.

Offense

FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.19	101	IsoPPP+	106.7	46
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	44.4%	33	Succ. Rt. +	106.3	48
FIELD POSITION	Def. Avg. FP	26.8	10	Def. FP+	23.7	1
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	4.2	95	Redzone S&P+	104.5	54
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	20.2		ACTUAL	16	-4.2

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	82	39	48	46
RUSHING	44	23	40	19
PASSING	99	60	54	63
Standard Downs		37	49	37
Passing Downs		62	40	73

Q1 Rk	47	1st Down Rk	41
Q2 Rk	67	2nd Down Rk	29
Q3 Rk	31	3rd Down Rk	71
Q4 Rk	38

3. A Matt Canada offense

Pitt returns a ton of production on both sides, but barely one year on the job, Narduzzi had to replace one coordinator. Jim Chaney left to become the coordinator at Georgia, and Narduzzi replaced him with NC State's Matt Canada.

Canada has also been an O.C. at Butler, NIU (twice), alma mater Indiana, and Wisconsin and spent quite a bit of time under State's Dave Doeren. His brand of a spread-with-power attack has produced three Off. S&P+ top-30 rankings in the last five years (21st at NIU in 2011, 25th at Wisconsin in 2012, 30th at NC State in 2015). And while two of those included a quarterback providing a run threat, his 2012 Wisconsin attack did not.

Senior Nate Peterman gave Chaney about five non-sack rushes for 30-35 yards per game, so he might be able to punish opponents for getting distracted by the running back. But considering the returning talent, expect said running back of choice to be used quite frequently.

Quarterback

Note: players in bold below are 2016 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.

Player	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Comp	Att	Yards	TD	INT	Comp Rate	Sacks	Sack Rate	Yards/ Att.
Nate Peterman	6'2, 225	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8884	193	314	2287	20	8	61.5%	25	7.4%	6.3
Chad Voytik					16	24	112	1	1	66.7%	4	14.3%	2.6
Manny Stocker	6'2, 220	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8257
Ben DiNucci	6'2, 210	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8148
Thomas McVittie	6'5, 225	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8764

Running Back

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Rushes	Yards	TD	Yards/ Carry	Hlt Yds/ Opp.	Opp. Rate	Fumbles	Fum. Lost
James Conner (2014)	RB	6'2, 240	Jr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8370	298	1765	26	5.9	4.9	46.0%	4	3
Qadree Ollison	RB	6'2, 230	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8498	212	1121	11	5.3	7.0	32.5%	2	2
Darrin Hall	RB	5'11, 215	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8974	64	257	2	4.0	2.7	37.5%	0	0
Nate Peterman	QB	6'2, 225	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8884	60	387	1	6.5	5.1	51.7%	8	1
Chris James	RB					56	253	0	4.5	4.4	35.7%	2	1
Tyler Boyd	WR					41	349	0	8.5	6.6	61.0%	5	0
Rachid Ibrahim (2014)	RB	6'1, 195	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8001	33	263	0	8.0	5.9	60.6%	0	0
Chad Voytik	QB					16	76	1	4.8	7.7	25.0%	2	1
Jordan Whitehead	SS	5'11, 185	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9494	12	122	2	10.2	5.2	83.3%	0	0
George Aston	FB	6'0, 240	So.	NR	NR
Colton Lively	FB	6'0, 240	Jr.	NR	NR
George Hill	RB	5'11, 200	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9289
Chawntez Moss	RB	5'11, 195	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8462

4. Hey, James :)

Is it possible to have too many running backs? As freshmen, Qadree Ollison and Darrin Hall each showed potential -- Ollison was awfully explosive for a 230-pounder, and Hall was the more efficient of the two -- while taking on a much larger role than expected.

They had to do so because Conner was only available for one game. He rushed eight times for 77 yards and two scores in two quarters against Youngstown State, then suffered an MCL injury that ended his season.

Then, in December, he announced that he had been diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Cancer started the fight and @JamesConner_ is going to finish it! #ConnerStrong

— Pat Narduzzi (@CoachDuzzPittFB) December 4, 2015

Conner finished it. On May 23, he announced he was cancer-free.

God is AMAZING. Just got the call that my body is clean of cancer!!! Been a long road but God had my back. Thanks everyone who said prayers!

— James Conner (@JamesConner_) May 23, 2016

In a demoralizing offseason, Conner's recovery has been an incredible bright spot.

And if he can stay healthy, Canada's system could feature him well. The trick will be making sure Ollison and Hall are also developing. And maybe four-star freshman George Hill. And Chawntez Moss, who was in for spring. This is a crowded backfield, and while Canada has proven in the past that he wants balance between run and pass, he would be well-served to skew toward the former.

And that sentiment only grows stronger when you note what Pitt is returning up front. Even while blocking for two freshmen, Pitt managed to rank 24th in Adj. Line Yards, 20th in stuff rate, and 22nd in power success rate. The Panthers return an all-conference left side up front -- tackle Adam Bisnowaty, guard Dorian Johnson and bring back their right-side starters as well.

Receiving Corps

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	Targets	Catches	Yards	Catch Rate	Target Rate	Yds/ Target	%SD	Success Rate	IsoPPP
Tyler Boyd	WR					126	91	926	72.2%	38.9%	7.3	58.7%	52.4%	1.30
Dontez Ford	WR	6'2, 215	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8007	49	27	518	55.1%	15.1%	10.6	59.2%	51.0%	1.86
J.P. Holtz	TE					38	24	350	63.2%	11.7%	9.2	52.6%	57.9%	1.56
Qadree Ollison	RB	6'2, 230	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8498	22	14	77	63.6%	6.8%	3.5	59.1%	22.7%	1.35
Scott Orndoff	TE	6'5, 265	Sr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8584	21	13	244	61.9%	6.5%	11.6	71.4%	57.1%	2.01
Zach Challingsworth	WR	6'2, 200	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8185	18	12	171	66.7%	5.6%	9.5	27.8%	55.6%	1.64
Chris James	RB	5'11, 210				10	7	48	70.0%	3.1%	4.8	60.0%	40.0%	1.03
George Aston	FB	6'0, 240	So.	NR	NR	9	8	40	88.9%	2.8%	4.4	77.8%	55.6%	0.80
Darrin Hall	RB	5'11, 215	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8974	9	5	30	55.6%	2.8%	3.3	55.6%	22.2%	1.40
Elijah Zeise	WR					8	5	54	62.5%	2.5%	6.8	75.0%	62.5%	1.01
Jester Weah	WR	6'3, 205	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8191	5	0	0	0.0%	1.5%	0.0	40.0%	0.0%	0.00
Jaymar Parrish	TE	6'2, 270	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8245	2	1	3	50.0%	0.6%	1.5	100.0%	0.0%	0.00
Quadree Henderson	WR	5'8, 170	So.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8590	2	2	1	100.0%	0.6%	0.5	50.0%	0.0%	0.00
Zach Poker	TE	6'4, 235	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8041
Tre Tipton	WR	6'0, 170	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8156
Rafael Araujo-Lopes	WR	5'9, 190	So.	2 stars (5.3)	NR
Ruben Flowers	WR	6'3, 190	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8761
Aaron Mathews	WR	6'4, 190	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8776

5. Efficiency options: check

Chaney was getting big plays out of Ollison but wasn't generating a ton of efficiency with the run game, so he asked the passing game to help in that regard. Tyler Boyd basically turned into a tight end, catching 72 percent of his passes with a 52 percent success rate but averaging only 10.2 yards per catch (he averaged 16.2 as a sophomore in 2014). Meanwhile, with Boyd targeted almost three times more than any other Panther, guys like Dontez Ford and tight end Scott Orndoff became prime deep threats.

Boyd is now a Cincinnati Bengal, which means the training wheels are off for the receiving corps. Granted, Conner's return should mean improved efficiency, but Ford, Orndoff, Zach Challingsworth, and other potential contributors like Jester Weah and Quadree Henderson (yes, Pitt has a Qadree and a Quadree) will now have to prove they can get open while drawing more attention from opposing defensive backs.

Typically a stat line like Ford's -- 10.6 yards per target as a No. 2 option -- translates well to the No. 1 role. But since Boyd was basically the No. 1 AND No. 2 target, this is a pretty unique situation. But if the run game is producing more five-yard gains (as opposed to mostly one-yarders and 15-yarders), that could open up downfield opportunities.

Offensive Line

Category	Adj. Line Yds	Std. Downs LY/carry	Pass. Downs LY/carry	Opp. Rate	Power Success Rate	Stuff Rate	Adj. Sack Rate	Std. Downs Sack Rt.	Pass. Downs Sack Rt.
Team	110.2	3.3	2.75	39.9%	75.5%	16.4%	75.0	6.9%	8.9%
Rank	24	13	104	53	22	20	105	100	90

Player	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	2015 Starts	Career Starts	Honors/Notes
Adam Bisnowaty	LT	6'6, 300	Sr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8954	12	31	2015 2nd All-ACC
Dorian Johnson	LG	6'5, 300	Sr.	5 stars (6.1)	0.9772	13	28	2015 2nd All-ACC
Artie Rowell	C					12	27
Alex Officer	RG	6'4, 335	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8404	13	23
Brian O'Neill	RT	6'6, 290	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8144	12	12
Alex Bookser	RT	6'6, 310	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.9223	2	2
Gabe Roberts	C					1	2
Jaryd Jones-Smith	RT	6'7, 335	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8277	0	2
Aaron Reese	LT	6'5, 315	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8239	0	0
John Guy	LG	6'7, 310	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	NR	0	0
Mike Herndon	RG	6'4, 305	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.7907	0	0
Carson Baker	RT	6'5, 325	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7854	0	0
Mike Grimm	OL	6'6, 325	So.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8721	0	0
Connor Dintino	OL	6'3, 310	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8356	0	0
Alex Paulina	OL	6'3, 300	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8600
Tony Pilato	OL	6'5, 315	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8457

Defense

FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE
	Raw Category		Rk	Opp. Adj. Category		Rk
EXPLOSIVENESS	IsoPPP	1.40	112	IsoPPP+	103.7	53
EFFICIENCY	Succ. Rt.	37.6%	25	Succ. Rt. +	116.0	18
FIELD POSITION	Off. Avg. FP	30.5	53	Off. FP+	33.0	13
FINISHING DRIVES	Pts. Per Scoring Opportunity	5.1	119	Redzone S&P+	108.6	31
TURNOVERS	EXPECTED	19.3		ACTUAL	16.0	-3.3

Category	Yards/ Game Rk	S&P+ Rk	Success Rt. Rk	PPP+ Rk
OVERALL	37	38	18	53
RUSHING	40	53	28	74
PASSING	54	21	21	27
Standard Downs		16	5	30
Passing Downs		82	81	86

Q1 Rk	70	1st Down Rk	39
Q2 Rk	45	2nd Down Rk	21
Q3 Rk	35	3rd Down Rk	98
Q4 Rk	20

6. Half-Narduzzi'd

This almost looked like a Narduzzi defense. As Mark Dantonio's coordinator at Michigan State, Narduzzi all but patented a high-risk, high-leverage defense that attacked offenses and forced them to try plays they can't normally make. This style results in three-and-outs, turnovers, and the occasional gash. If you get enough of the first two, you can live with the gashes.

Pitt looked the part on standard downs. The Panthers were fifth in Standard Downs Success Rate+ and honed in more and more as a game progressed -- their ranking in each quarter was better than the one before it.

But while they were strangely effective at rushing the passer on standard downs, they continuously let opponents off the ropes. The passing-downs pass rush was mostly nonexistent, and opponents were allowed to complete a less-than-Narduzziish 53 percent of their passes on third-and-4 or more. And while opponent adjustments were kind to Pitt's numbers, the Panthers still allowed 5.1 points per scoring opportunity, one of the highest raw averages in the country.

So we'll say that the Pitt defense has only been partially weaponized. Still, the Panthers improved from 65th to 50th in Def. S&P+ with a lineup young enough to return most of its pieces in 2016.

Defensive Line

Category	Adj. Line Yds	Std. Downs LY/carry	Pass. Downs LY/carry	Opp. Rate	Power Success Rate	Stuff Rate	Adj. Sack Rate	Std. Downs Sack Rt.	Pass. Downs Sack Rt.
Team	115	2.70	3.07	35.0%	68.2%	19.8%	130.6	10.0%	6.7%
Rank	14	38	51	31	81	67	22	2	79

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Ejuan Price	DE	6'0, 250	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.9000	13	39.0	6.3%	19.5	11.5	0	1	1	1
Shakir Soto	DT	6'3, 270	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8473	13	19.5	3.1%	3.0	2.0	0	0	0	0
Rori Blair	DE	6'4, 240	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8200	12	19.0	3.1%	3.5	1.5	0	2	1	0
Tyrique Jarrett	NT	6'3, 335	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8617	13	16.5	2.7%	7.0	2.0	0	0	0	0
Darryl Render	DT					12	16.0	2.6%	1.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Khaynin Mosley-Smith	NT					12	11.0	1.8%	2.0	0.5	0	0	1	0
Mark Scarpinato	DL					8	4.5	0.7%	0.5	0.0	0	1	0	0
Jeremiah Taleni	DT	6'2, 295	Jr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8120	8	3.5	0.6%	1.5	0.0	0	0	0	0
Zach Poker	DE					4	3.0	0.5%	1.5	1.0	0	0	0	0
Allen Edwards	DE	6'4, 240	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8155
Justin Moody	NT	6'3, 280	Jr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8528
Dewayne Hendrix (Tennessee)	DE	6'4, 270	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9428
Shane Roy	DT	6'4, 280	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8407
James Folston	DE	6'3, 240	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.7956
Keyshon Camp	DT	6'4, 275	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.9048
Amir Watts	DT	6'3, 270	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8840

Linebackers

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Matt Galambos	MIKE	6'2, 240	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8315	13	69.5	11.2%	10.0	5.0	2	1	2	0
Nicholas Grigsby	STAR					13	55.5	9.0%	9.5	3.5	0	2	2	0
Mike Caprara	MONEY	6'0, 230	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.7000	13	40.0	6.5%	9.5	4.0	1	1	0	0
Bam Bradley	MONEY	6'2, 230	Sr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8728	13	28.0	4.5%	5.0	1.0	0	0	1	0
Quintin Wirginis	MIKE	6'2, 240	Jr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8005	13	15.0	2.4%	0.0	0.0	0	1	0	0
Matt Steinbeck	STAR					7	4.5	0.7%	1.5	0.0	0	1	0	0
Jameel Poteat	STAR					12	2.5	0.4%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Oluwaseun Idowu	LB	6'0, 215	So.	NR	NR	10	1.5	0.2%	0.0	0.0	0	0	0	0
Elijah Zeise	STAR	6'2, 215	So.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8437
Jalen Williams	LB	6'2, 210	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8351
Anthony McKee Jr.	LB	6'2, 205	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8863
Saleem Brightwell	LB	6'0, 195	RSFr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8550
Kaezon Pugh	LB	6'1, 210	Fr.	4 stars (5.8)	0.8761
Chase Pine	LB	6'2, 220	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8628

7. If the defensive tackles hold up...

With Ejuan Price granted a sixth year of eligibility, most of Pitt's front seven is set. Price is one of the ACC's best pass rushers, and be it junior Rori Blair, Tennessee transfer Dewayne Hendrix, or someone else, he should have a decent complement across from him. Meanwhile, Matt Galambos is a versatile, active middle linebacker, and both linebackers Mike Caprara and Bam Bradley proved solid in play-making spots last year.

So that's five-sevenths of a good front seven. And if seniors Shakir Soto and Tyrique Jarrett stay healthy at tackle, that's a dynamite unit.

If Soto and/or Jarrett get hurt, however, I have no idea who takes their place. Junior Jeremiah Taleni could be useful, but after that you're looking at unknowns -- junior Justin Moody, sophomore Shane Roy, or freshmen. This could turn out just fine, but depth at tackle is a major question mark.

The good news is that not every team has to prove its depth at a given position. It's a roll of the dice.

Secondary

Name	Pos	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Rivals	247 Comp.	GP	Tackles	% of Team	TFL	Sacks	Int	PBU	FF	FR
Jordan Whitehead	SS	5'11, 185	So.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9494	13	91.0	14.7%	6	0.5	1	6	1	1
Avonte Maddox	CB	5'9, 170	Jr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8377	13	63.5	10.2%	1	0.5	3	12	0	0
Lafayette Pitts	CB					13	31.5	5.1%	2	1	1	6	1	0
Terrish Webb	FS	5'11, 190	Sr.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8061	11	21.5	3.5%	0	0	2	3	1	1
Reggie Mitchell	FS	6'0, 190	Sr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8144	6	13.5	2.2%	0.5	0	0	1	0	0
Pat Amara	FS					12	12.5	2.0%	0.5	0	0	1	0	0
Dennis Briggs	CB	5'10, 190	So.	2 stars (5.3)	0.8085	13	6.5	1.0%	1	1	0	0	1	0
Ryan Lewis	CB	6'0, 195	Sr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8022	13	6.0	1.0%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jevonte Pitts	SS					12	6.0	1.0%	0	0	0	0	1	0
Phillipie Motley	CB	5'10, 180	So.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8410	12	3.0	0.5%	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jay Stocker	DB	6'2, 185	RSFr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8656
Malik Henderson	DB	6'0, 185	RSFr.	3 stars (5.5)	0.8433
Dane Jackson	CB	6'0, 180	RSFr.	2 stars (5.4)	0.8114
Damar Hamlin	DB	6'1, 185	Fr.	4 stars (5.9)	0.9306
Therran Coleman	DB	6'0, 190	Fr.	3 stars (5.7)	0.8625
Henry Miller	DB	6'3, 205	Fr.	3 stars (5.6)	0.8569

8. Sometimes-fly zone

My Study Hall mate Ian Boyd wrote about Narduzzi's defense and Pitt's personnel recently.

As it happens, the Panthers are returning their boundary corner Avonte Maddox, free safety Terrish Webb, and strong safety Jordan Whitehead but are looking for players to step up at field corner and space-backer. [...]

When Maddox and Whitehead join forces on the boundary it creates quite an impressive advantage for the Panthers.

Whitehead was a freshman revelation last year, displaying such impressive athleticism that he was even given 12 carries and two receptions on offense. This secondary was too young and thin to avoid mistakes here and there, but a foursome of returnees -- Whitehead, Maddox, Webb, and safety Reggie Mitchell -- offer hope for immense improvement.

Ian is right -- Whitehead and Maddox made for a strong pair of play-makers, especially considering they were a freshman and sophomore, respectively, last year. They combined for seven tackles for loss, four picks, and 18 breakups last year; I'd be surprised if those numbers didn't all go up.

There's a question of depth here as well -- after those four, the leading returning tackler (corner Dennis Briggs) had 6.5, and any injuries would force Narduzzi to dip into a well of freshmen. Still, the promise is obvious.

Special Teams

Punter	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Punts	Avg	TB	FC	I20	FC/I20 Ratio
Ryan Winslow	6'5, 210	Jr.	63	41.1	7	24	19	68.3%

Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Kickoffs	Avg	TB	OOB	TB%
Chris Blewitt	5'9, 190	Sr.	69	63.1	43	0	62.3%

Place-Kicker	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	PAT	FG (0-39)	Pct	FG (40+)	Pct
Chris Blewitt	5'9, 190	Sr.	42-43	9-11	81.8%	6-12	50.0%

Returner	Pos.	Ht, Wt	2016 Year	Returns	Avg.	TD
Quadree Henderson	KR	5'8, 170	So.	18	28.0	1
Tyler Boyd	KR			11	23.4	0
Avonte Maddox	PR	5'9, 170	Jr.	8	6.0	0
Tyler Boyd	PR			8	0.9	0

Category	Rk
Special Teams S&P+	43
Field Goal Efficiency	86
Punt Return Success Rate	106
Kick Return Success Rate	51
Punt Success Rate	23
Kickoff Success Rate	7

9. Force more punts, then return them

Chris Blewitt has one of the biggest legs in college football; he made six of 12 longer field goals and booted nearly two-thirds of his kickoffs for touchbacks. Meanwhile, punter Ryan Winslow doesn't necessarily get elite depth on his kicks, but few of his punts are returnable. Because of them, Pitt should have another solid special teams unit. But to improve beyond solid, the Panthers need to get something more consistent out of the return game. Quadree Henderson did return a kickoff for a touchdown but had a lot of short, ineffective returns, too, and Avonte Maddox got little momentum returning punts. That the whole unit is back is good, but a few more decent returns would make this a top-20 unit.

2016 Schedule & Projection Factors

2016 Schedule
Date	Opponent	Proj. S&P+ Rk	Proj. Margin	Win Probability
3-Sep	Villanova	NR	33.4	97%
10-Sep	Penn State	28	2.5	56%
17-Sep	at Oklahoma State	23	-5.8	37%
24-Sep	at North Carolina	27	-4.5	40%
1-Oct	Marshall	75	13.3	78%
8-Oct	Georgia Tech	54	9.4	71%
15-Oct	at Virginia	68	4.9	61%
27-Oct	Virginia Tech	32	4.5	60%
5-Nov	at Miami	30	-3.2	43%
12-Nov	at Clemson	3	-17.4	16%
19-Nov	Duke	51	9.2	70%
26-Nov	Syracuse	44	8.1	68%
Projected wins: 7.0

Five-Year F/+ Rk	11.3% (43)
2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk	35 / 37
2015 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin*	0 / -0.9
2015 TO Luck/Game	+0.4
Returning Production (Off. / Def.)	72% (72%, 72%)
2015 Second-order wins (difference)	7.3 (0.7)

10. Playing well as a favorite

If you've read most of these ACC previews so far, you've noticed that seemingly everybody is ending up with between about five and seven projected wins. These are based on odds -- so, a 60 percent chance of winning equals 0.6 wins -- and as this suggests, the middle of the ACC is all sorts of crowded.

For Pitt, it is no different. Per S&P+, the Panthers have two likely wins, one likely loss, three games between 37 and 43 percent, and six between 56 and 71 percent. If they play well as a favorite, they could end up going 8-4 or 9-3. If Conner's return and a second year in Narduzzi's system result in a bump beyond Pitt's projected ranking of 29th, then you could be looking at the ACC Coastal favorite.

Those are ifs, though. The offense has to prove that it can move on without its security blanket (Tyler Boyd), and the defense has to make a few more plays on passing downs. But these goals are reasonable and at least semi-realistic.

Narduzzi has Pitt's demons wobbly with what he and his team showed in 2015. Now the Panthers have the experience to do some damage.