ShareThis Page

Pitt senior Alecxih frustrated by second-consecutive loss

| Sunday, Oct. 16, 2011

Pitt senior defensive tackle Chas Alecxih — 285 pounds of anger and frustration — looked like a volcano just before it explodes.

Frustrated by Pitt's second consecutive loss and angered by Utah offensive left tackle John Cullen, who he called a "dirty, dirty player," Alecxih wanted to erupt during and after Utah's 26-14 victory.

He didn't, but he was clear about his feelings for Cullen and the rest of the Utah offensive linemen.

"That's the most angry I have ever felt in my college career," Alecxih said. "(No.) 77's (Cullen's) fat (butt) came up and cheap-shoted me when we were about to end the game. Too bad I wasn't in such control of myself or I would have hit him back.

"He waited until after the play and came up and hit me on the blindside. I was pretty upset about that. I'm not going to lie to you. He was a dirty, dirty player."

The play occurred in the fourth quarter, and the personal foul against Utah pushed the Utes out of field goal range, keeping Pitt's slim hopes alive.

Alecxih stormed off the field after the play, looking like he wanted to throw his helmet, but he kept his temper in check.

"We watched them on film and knew they were pretty dirty and knew they were going to keep coming at us after the play," he said. "So, we just prepared ourselves.

"I guess some teams do that. They think it gives them an advantage. I'm glad we all got out of there with no injuries."

Utah offensive right tackle Tony Bergstrom defended his team's style of play.

"The biggest thing is we're an aggressive team," he said. "We go right up to the whistle. We do our best not to go (past the whistle). Everyone does the best they can.

"We're not going to curb the aggression just because there's a chance that you might get called. We're trying to keep it within the whistle, but we're an aggressive team. So are they. That's how good teams are. You've got to be that way."

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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 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.