Q: Paul you can't stretch the field if your quarterback can't make the throw. So my question is -- why does Matt Cavanaugh continue to call plays that BILL STULL CANNOT MAKE?

Bob Fitzmaurice, St. Pete Beach, Fla.

ZEISE: I agree some of the throws that Stull struggles with he keeps getting asked to make and that doesn't make sense. But I disagree about not being able to stretch the field. Stull's deep balls have been pretty bad this year, no question, he's just not very accurate with them -- but he needs to keep throwing them because, especially with so much film of Jonathan Baldwin running down the field and making some big plays, it does help keep defenses honest. The threat of throwing over the top is about the only thing that kept defenses, especially late in the season, from going to a nine-man defensive front. Stull hasn't been very good at throwing deep -- but he has connected enough to make defenses think about it and that's the only little opening a guy like LeSean McCoy needs to get free.

Q: I understand we need to run the ball but why do we make it so easy for the opposing defense? Defenses are too well prepared and Pitt isn't good enough for that to work consistently. Why doesn't the staff mix up some formations and use some shifting (not just trading the TE from one side to the other) and motion?

Justin Malivuk, Delaware, Ohio

ZEISE: I disagree -- I think one thing the staff has been very good at is using a lot of motion and shifting and different formations to get the running game going. I think sometimes, too much, in fact as I'd like to see the same personnel group on the field for more than one play at a time -- and my favorite sequence of the year was when they stopped trying to think against West Virginia and lined up and ran McCoy 11 of 12 plays to win the game. Pitt does a lot of things to try and show different formations and they've showed they can run out of multiple formations, so while Matt Cavanaugh can be criticized for some things, I don't think this is one of them.

Q: Would it not make more sense for the Big East to drop one bowl and pour some Big East money into making the St. Pete Bowl a bigger deal?

James Manfred, Clearwater, Fla.

ZEISE: It would make sense for the Big East to drop the PapaJohns.Com bowl if it can't come up with more cash than it does -- but it is not up to the conference to artificially pump up a bowl. What sense would that make? It would be pumping money into the bowl to get a fraction of it back in terms of the payout? The St. Petersburg bowl will do fine if it keeps getting good matchups and it is the kind of bowl that is good for the Big East -- it is a desirable location, a very cheap and easy flight from just about every city in the conference and it is a very good time (you don't have to miss the holidays) for people. I think in the future this will be a great bowl for Pitt to get to because Florida is the one place that Pitt fans will travel to and it is a state where there seems to be a lot of transplanted Pitt fans as well.