Pitt's sloppy play leads to too many penalties, 3 losses in a row

Let’s examine one of Pat Narduzzi’s statements after Pitt’s 24-20 loss to Clemson, the Panthers’ third in a row and the second that could have been avoided in any number of ways.

“We have a good football team,” said the coach, who is looking more and more despondent with every postgame news conference. “We just have to be cleaner.”

He’s right about the need to clean things up, but good teams are usually smooth with their execution while minimizing penalties, or they wouldn’t be — you know — good teams.

Pitt (7-3, 3-3) committed 24 penalties for a negative total of 175 yards in its two most recent defeats. The Panthers are fourth worst in the ACC with 73 penalties for 664 negative yards (third worst).

“It’s attention to detail,” Narduzzi said. “We talk about it every day. We just have to be more disciplined. We’re not an undisciplined football team. Things happen in the heat of the moment. Guys get anxious, and we didn’t do a good enough job.”

Surviving “the heat of the moment” is also what good teams do.

Here’s a look at Pitt’s three-game losing streak and how the Panthers have allowed a promising season to drift toward mediocrity by being sloppy.

• We can forgive the Panthers for the 48-25 loss to SMU on the road. The Mustangs (9-1) are the clearly better team, No. 13 in the nation, according to the Associated Press, and No. 14 in the College Football Playoff rankings (for now). They are on their way to the ACC championship game. If Pitt had defeated Virginia or Clemson (both games were within its grasp), the loss to SMU could be forgiven.

• The offense jumped the track against Virginia, committing three holding penalties, including one by tackle Ryan Baer that negated a 2-point conversion that would have tied the score in the fourth quarter. Then, when a Virginia field goal created a five-point deficit, Pitt was forced to push for a touchdown. Instead of a setting up for a tying field goal, quarterback Nate Yarnell threw deep, was intercepted at the Virginia 14 and Pitt lost 24-19.

• In the 24-20 loss to Clemson, three penalties in a row at the Tigers 2 helped keep Pitt out of the end zone. Seven points instead of three from Ben Sauls’ field goal would have changed momentum and trimmed Clemson’s lead to 17-14.

From there, Pitt would have gone ahead 24-17 with a touchdown and another Sauls field goal. Would a seven-point lead in the final 90 seconds have changed the outcome? We’ll never know. But Cade Klubnik’s 50-yard dash to the end zone would have only tied the score. When Pitt reached the Clemson 26 on its next possession, there’s no need for Yarnell to throw toward the end zone where he was intercepted again.

That’s one of the ways you lose three in a row.

None of this is meant to suggest Pitt is devoid of certain positive elements.

Start with the defense that sacked Klubnik five times and stuffed Phil Mafah, one of the ACC’s best running backs.

And the quarterbacks (plural). Not many teams can bring a guy off the bench and have him complete 34 of 54 passes (nearly 63%) for 350 yards and a touchdown. That’s what Yarnell did Saturday when he wasn’t getting sacked eight times. Imagine what Pitt’s quarterbacks might do if they had more time to think, throw and move.

Do you remember how excited Pitt fans were about redshirt freshman quarterback Eli Holstein? Yarnell’s 350 passing yards are second most this season behind Holstein’s 381 against North Carolina.

Of course, there’s another issue.

Holstein and Yarnell have combined for a total of six touchdown passes in the past five games after Holstein threw 15 in the first five. Good teams also score more than 25 points per game, and Pitt hasn’t done that on offense since Oct. 5.

Look up. It’s November. The season — and opportunities to salvage it — are fading.