Over the past two weeks we've heard all about the numerous connections between Pittsburgh and the Arizona Cardinals, and there are plenty. So many, in fact, that the Cardinals are jokingly referred to as "Pittsburgh west" by Steelers fans.
Start your work week off right with Monday Morning Coffee, where Fanhouse scours YouTube for the finest college football footage available. Either that or we give up after a couple minutes and just post the "I Like Turtles" kid.
The Pitt Panthers are heading into the 2008 season buoyed by a strong returning team and a stunning upset of likely title contenders West Virginia to finish their 2007 campaign. It's rather unfamiliar territory for Pitt fans under the age of 30, as Pitt has spent the last 20 years somewhere between "mediocre" and "punchline." Yes, Pitt went to a BCS Bowl in 2004, but they were smoked by Utah, finished ranked #25, and were generally regarded as the worst team in BCS history until Hawaii redefined "suck" last year. Oh, and their coach is known best for his inconsistent facial hair.
Things weren't always so bad for Panthers, though. Back in the late 70s and early 80s, they featured guys like Dan Marino, Tony Dorsett, and the man who (sorry, Michigan fans) most deserved to be the first defensive Heisman winner, Hugh Green. Though the Panthers would never capture the MNC in the era, they came awfully close. Here, they face Georgia in the 1980 Sugar Bowl.
Yes, that's the Jackie Sherrill. This would be his last game coaching for Pitt, moving on to coach at Texas A&M for a then-record $1.7 million over 6 years (seriously, that was a record). He resigned among controversy in 1988, leaving the Aggies in smoldering, NCAA-sanctioned ruins. After three years away from the game, Sherrill stepped in as head coach at Mississippi State in 1991. He stayed for 12 seasons, leaving the Bulldogs in (surprise!) even worse, smoldering, NCAA-sanctioned ruins. He does, however, make the bowtie "work."
Old School" is the College Football FanHouse's irregular look back at the rich history of college football, usually through the medium of embeddable flash video. Check out the Old School archive for more famous plays and infamous hair.
One of the biggest wins over Pitt in Mountaineer history. Probably a lot like this years game will be remembered by Pitt fans. Badump-bah! The Voice of the Mountaineers, Jack Fleming narrates and at the 1:44 mark you can see that there used to be a lot more guns at Old Mountaineer Field. And hats off for getting Yes to do the sound track. That #33 for Pitt is some guy named Dorsett.
Besides being against a Pitt team that was ranked and had one of the best running backs in the history of college football, this game is most remembered for the dramatic ending that seems story book for the home team and nightmarish for the visitors as Bill McKenzie kicked the winning field goal as time expired. Not some of Fleming's best work, at least until they cut in to his live play-by-play. I guess they didn't want to step on Rick Wakeman's toes while he wowed us with those funky keyboards.
The Chicago Tribune's David Haugh puts forth an interesting idea: push Cedric Benson until he fails or flourishes. Of course, we'll need some clarification on what exactly it means to "fail or flourish," particularly since Tony Dorsett has already seen enough. That said, Haugh makes a good case for not giving up on Benson just yet:
After his first 362 NFL carries, opponents mocked him publicly. Headlines labeled him a bust. Fans ripped him on talk radio and on Sunday afternoons. He had gained a disappointing 1,264 yards in three sporadic seasons. Thomas Jones had worn out his welcome in Arizona in 2002.
Benson, in three seasons, has gained 1,335 yards on 360 carries. But, Haugh writes, the similarities shouldn't reassure Bears fans because Benson isn't necessarily just about to turn the corner.
All the numbers suggest, really, is that highly drafted NFL running backs who struggle early and face mounting pressure around town can benefit from a change of scenery, as Jones did.
Now I don't know if this is really the case, or if Haugh is just drawing conclusions on two data points. For the sake of argument, let's assume the former.
