Lewis, Graham struggle against West Virginia
• Pitt's tailback tandem — Dion Lewis and Ray Graham — struggled to find a rhythm or room to run against rival West Virginia on Friday afternoon. The Mountaineers dominated the trenches, allowing linebackers J.T. Thomas and Anthony Leonard to keep both in check. The Lewis-Graham tandem carried the ball 15 times in the first half for 38 yards; quarterback Tino Sunseri rushed for 38 against the Big East's best run defense. Lewis finished with 34 yards on 11 carries, and Graham had 21 on 10 attempts, but their fumbles were more damaging. "The turnovers prevented us from taking the lead," coach Dave Wannstedt said. "We came out after halftime and gave up one play to begin the second half. Then, the air kind of came out of the balloon."
• The Mountaineers' first three scoring drives covered 119 yards in only seven plays. The Panthers fell behind, 21-7, early in the third quarter after the defense allowed touchdown drives of one, three and three plays.
• Pitt committed a season-high four turnovers: three lost fumbles and an interception. The Panthers had prepared for the Mountaineers' stripping tactics, yet Lewis and Graham still relinquished the ball. "You have to give it to West Virginia," Sunseri said. "They understood that turnovers were the key." Sunseri put the Panthers in an early hole with an interception that gave West Virginia a 7-0 lead. "We really got off to a bad start," he said. "I thought I could make a throw, and it didn't happen. When you play a good team like West Virginia, those mistakes will come back to bite you."
Pitt vs. WVU The Backyard Brawl 1 1⁄26/10
West Virginia defeats Pitt, 35-10, in the 103rd Backyard Brawl Friday November 26, 2010 at Heinz Field.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.