ShareThis Page
College

Pitt preparing for USF trickery

Kevin Gorman
| Wednesday, Oct. 1, 2008

USF has successfully converted three fake punts in its past two meetings against Pitt, forcing Panthers coach Dave Wannstedt to adjust his scheme to prevent the Bulls from pulling another on Thursday.

"I hate to use this word, but you probably need to be a little more conservative," he said. "When we got caught each time, we were trying to force the issue with blocks. It does force you to re-evaluate what you're doing - which we have - and it forces you to be a little more conservative."

  • Wannstedt said right tackle Joe Thomas (ankle) returned to practice and should be ready to play tomorrow, but Wannstedt added that he has confidence in backup Lucas Nix, a 6-foot-6, 290-pound freshman.
  • "We're hoping to play him more, and I think we will before it's all said and done," Wannstedt said. "If Joe can't go or is limited, Lucas can play. He'll be fine."

  • When asked if the repeated drops by starting split end Oderick Turner have opened the door for freshman Jonathan Baldwin to earn more playing time, Wannstedt instead said that junior Cedric McGee "will get more work."
  • Digits

    95 Number of Floridians on USF's roster, including 19 starters and both specialists. The only out-of-state starters are tight end Cedric Hill and strong safety Carlton Williams, both of Valdosta, Ga., and cornerback Jerome Murphy, of Elizabeth, N.J. Pitt has 15 Floridians.

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 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.

click me