CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- Standing upright in a cramped interview room in the bowels of Ericsson Stadium, Pittsburgh's star wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald respectfully fielded a barrage of badgering inquiries from a room full of pestering reporters. Though nearly every question pertained only to his individual performance and his individual plans, he responded to each calmly and with thorough, considerate answers, acknowledging his personal shortcomings in this game and deflecting praise as best he could toward his teammates.
Outside, he embraced his parents and proceeded to walk slowly toward the team bus. Immediately, he was surrounded by a dozen autograph seekers, many of whom were decked out entirely in orange, yet Fitzgerald dutifully, albeit absent-mindedly, signed each souvenir. He appeared to be visibly contemplative and perhaps even shell-shocked from his team's 23-16 loss to Virginia.
The biggest national story of Tire Bowl II was of course Fitzgerald's middling performance in what may well have been the final game of his college career. But he was impressive even in defeat, if not for his on-field accomplishments than for his off-field demeanor.
He was only thrown to six times all game. He caught five of those passes for 77 yards, but that was not exactly the production Pitt was likely looking for from its Heisman runner-up receiver. He had every right to have called for the ball more and to have bashed the offensive game plan publicly for not taking better advantage of the size mismatches he had on Virginia's corners. The 6-foot-3 Fitzgerald boasted four inches on Tony Franklin, five on Jamaine Winborne and seven over Almondo "Muffin" Curry.
But what the story of Tire Bowl II should be, however, is Virginia's well-planned defensive scheme that stymied Fitzgerald with frequent double coverages and, more importantly, unexpected blitz packages that rattled Pitt quarterback Rod Rutherford and sent him to the turf for five sacks.
Muffin rightfully cited the total defensive effort as the reason for Fitzgerald's off day.
Containing Fitzgerald "definitely had a lot to do with the way we were disguising our coverages and the amount of pressure the defensive linemen were putting on the quarterback," the co-captain said. "I think our defense as a whole did a good job of containing the most dominant player in the NCAA."
Two of the more spectacular defensive stops came on identical cornerback blitzes from the quarterback's right side. The left-handed Rutherford never saw either coming, with Winborne sacking him on a crucial 4th-and-10 in the second quarter and Curry bringing him down in the fourth.
"We already had it in the game plan," Winborne said of the corner blitzes. "We tried to send it to his backside since he's a left-handed quarterback, and they never adjusted."
The Cavaliers made big plays when it counted and, clinging to a one score lead for the entire fourth quarter, held Fitzgerald without a catch in the game's final stanza.
"We just picked our intensity up," junior defensive end Chris Canty said. "This game was not going to be won on the offensive side of the ball. We just had to stop them defensively -- if they can't score, they can't win. They scored only three points in the second half."
Despite the impressive win over a Pitt team ranked as high as ninth nationally earlier this season, the atmosphere in the postgame Virginia locker room was not an elated one. There were no fights to march the bowl championship trophy triumphantly out of the locker room. Instead, that duty fell to an equipment manager who walked it out anonymously and without any hoopla onto the team bus.
The defensive-minded Al Groh was rightfully pleased with his unit's performance, and, when I asked him to sum up the season in just a handful of words, he said the year was "everything it could have been."
But I can't imagine he meant it.
Virginia was stuck in a holding pattern this year after failing to improve on the success of 2002's 9-5 season. This was a year of high expectations in which the Cavaliers were to ascend the mountain of national contention, but instead they plateaued and now face 2004 with serious concerns at quarterback.
But the Virginia defense that slowed Pittsburgh's explosive offense and the running game that amassed 196 yards certainly alleviate a lot of fears in Wahoo Nation for the continued progression of the Cavaliers.
Taking home the Tire Bowl II title ensured that Virginia has infinitely more Tire Bowl titles than the rest of college football combined, and it -- along with the upset of Virginia Tech -- rejuvenated hope for Virginia's continued upward progression.
It was not, however, the ending most Cavalier fans had hoped for at the season's beginning. But it was further proof that Virginia can play with the big dogs, and that the future of the program remains bright.
Read More
You cannot say money is the problem for Virginia football
By Peter Kriebel | 5 hours agoMoney, after all, is just one aspect of a winning program.
West Coast woes strike again as men’s basketball gets hammered by Stanford
By Emory Huffman | 17 hours agoVirginia, once again in a lost season, looked aimless on the floor.
ISTVAN: Tony Bennett left Virginia in a hole
By Ben Istvan | YesterdayHis decision to retire doomed this men's basketball season.
