clock menu more-arrow no yes mobile

Filed under:

NCAA 14 simulations for Pitt football

We ran some NCAA 14 simulations to see how Pitt fared. Yes, simulations, because one is never enough.

How does EA Sports see Pitt faring in the 2013 season?
How does EA Sports see Pitt faring in the 2013 season?

A couple of weeks ago we posted the results of a NCAA 14 simulation run by CBS Sports. To be blunt, it did not go well for Pitt. That got me thinking, is Pitt really this bad? There was obviously only one way to find out: more simulations. Really though, what does one simulation tell you? The simple solution was to run five simulations. Yes, five simulations. This eliminates oddities such as injuries, coaches quitting mid-season to go to Arizona State, the zombie apocalypse, etc.

What do we know about Pitt and NCAA 14? There was our post outlining some of Pitt's top players a few weeks back, so there's that. The CBS simulation claims Pitt will only win two games, with one of them being in conference. That's not good. Overall, Pitt is rated an average of 77 - a score averaged between their offensive rating (77) and defensive rating (80). I'm no math major, even I know that isn't correct. How did they get that score? Beats me. Pitt also receives a three star rating for prestige, whatever that means. That ACC logo sure looks pretty sweet next to our wordmark, though! When I went to choose Pitt I was asked if I was sure I wanted to proceed with this team. Check back with me later, I haven't had time to test to see if this was a Pitt only feature or if it applies to everyone.

Now, let's take a look at each of the five simulations:

Season 1

Overall record: 1-11

ACC record: 0-8

ACC Coastal Finish: 7th

Brief summary - or call it the lowlights:

  • Blown out by FSU to start the season, Not Tom Savage injured before halftime.
  • Only win occurs versus New Mexico, in overtime (yes, we lost to Old Dominion).
  • Silver linings! Close losses to Duke (OT), Virginia, and Navy.
  • Shutout by Virginia Tech and North Carolina, and neither of them were close.
  • ACC Championship Game: FSU over VT
  • National Championship Game: Alabama over Texas A&M

Season 2

Overall record: 4-8

ACC record: 3-5

ACC Coastal Finish: 5th

Brief summary:

  • Blown out by FSU to start the season, again.
  • Still lost to Old Dominion.
  • Silver linings! 4x more wins than simulation 1.
  • Slaughtered by Notre Dame.
  • ACC Championship Game: GT over Maryland
  • National Championship Game: Alabama over Texas A&M

Season 3

Overall record: 7-6

ACC record: 4-4

ACC Coastal Finish: 4th

Bowl game(!): Loss in Music City Bowl to Missouri, and it wasn't close

Brief Summary:

  • Close loss to FSU to start the season (progress!).
  • Dominated New Mexico, Old Dominion, Duke, and Navy.
  • Slaughtered by Notre Dame.
  • ACC Championship Game: VT over FSU
  • National Championship Game: VT over Alabama (#goacc)

Season 4

Overall record: 3-9

ACC record: 1-7

ACC Coastal Finish: 7th

Brief Summary:

  • Blown out by FSU to start the season.
  • Dominated New Mexico.
  • Slaughtered by Navy, Notre Dame, Georgia Tech, and Syracuse.
  • ACC Championship Game: FSU over VT
  • National Championship Game: Texas A&M over Alabama

Season 5

Overall record: 5-7

ACC record: 3-5

ACC Coastal Finish: 5th

Brief Summary:

  • Close win over FSU to start the season!!!!
  • Lose by 1 to New Mexico (beat FSU, lose to NM, that's so Pitt).
  • Dominated Old Dominion and Navy.
  • Slaughtered by Georgia Tech and Notre Dame.
  • Silver linings! Close losses to New Mexico, Syracuse, and Miami.
  • ACC Championship Game: VT over Clemson
  • National Championship Game: Florida over Nebraska

The Averages

Well, that didn't go so well. Five simulations, one winning season, woof.

Average overall record: 4 wins, 8.2 losses.

Average ACC record: 2.2 wins, 5.8 losses.

Average ACC Coastal Finish: 5.6th

Below are some stat lines for key players over the five simulations so everyone can see just how things progressed. There were the expected (Street was always the lead receiver). A bright spot: J.P. Holtz was always the number two receiver. Whether a good sign about Holtz, or a bad sign about the rest of the receiving core (well, what's left) I'm not sure.

For all graphs click for a larger (and likely much more legible) version.



At QB the completed percentage jumped out at me. It was pretty steady regardless of fluctuations everywhere else. We really need to hope for simulation three, by the way.

Running back:


Not Isaac Bennett appears to be pretty sure handed, going through three of the five simulations without losing a fumble. I'd take that any day of the week (especially on Saturday, or Friday, or Monday night).

Wide receiver:


Unfortunately Not Devin Street does not gain the yards he needs to break the record, in any of the seasons. Average catches of anywhere from 13 to 16 yards per catch makes us remember all the Tino under-thrown passes though and what could have been.

Tight end:


Not Holtz ended as the second best receiver in all five of the simulations. With the exception of the first simulation, which just went all downhill from the start, he put up pretty good numbers and consistent production.

There you have it, EA Sports five best guesses as to how Pitt will do. What does all of this mean? Absolutely nothing of course - however Labor Day is right around the corner. #BeatFSU