Q: Paul, are these coaches so stubborn that they would rather lose than switch? No powerful offensive line means no power football!

George Shaffer, Morgantown, W.Va.

ZEISE: No, Dave Wannstedt and Matt Cavanaugh want to win, probably worse than any of you. It kills them that they aren't being successful -- one because coaches want to win and two because these two coaches bleed blue and gold and want to see Pitt succeed. I just think they have a certain philosophy that has carried them to where they are at and they believe in it and it isn't that easy to accept change. Think about whatever it is you do for a living: There comes a point where you probably are set in certain ways and don't want to learn new things or new ideas because your ways have served you well over the years. I am not defending them, but I understand it and I understand why it is so hard for them to change. But I don't think it is fair to suggest that these two guys don't care deeply about Pitt winning or losing because that is absolutely false. They want to win in the worse way and I know it tears them both up that it hasn't happened for them.

Q: I was at the game, and to me it seemed like Pitt didnt make any adjustments defensivly in the second half to stop BG's spread offense what's your take?

Michael LaRocka, Burgettstown

ZEISE: I really don't know how to say this any more -- the defense was not the problem. The defense didn't pitch a shutout, but outside of a couple of plays from that goofball formation, Bowling Green didn't do much on offense -- and certainly it had nothing to do with Pitt not understanding how to stop the spread. I think you know me by now, I'll call them as I see them and while I have no problem putting the blame for the offensive ineptitude squarely on the coaches -- the defensive staff had a good plan and had the players made a few plays, they'd have held that team to less than 14 points. Think about it. Pitt had two opportunities to recover fumbles and did not. Pitt had two interceptions in their hands and dropped them. Pitt's safety had three key plays and a fourth big play stopped and missed the tackle. Those things happen, but it tells me the defense was in the right place to make plays. I don't worry about the defense, the defense will be good and will be fine. That team ran for 2.3 yards per carry and had very few big plays. It had 250 total yards -- and that is an offense designed to go up and down the field. Pitt's defense could have certainly made a few more plays -- the plays were there to be made -- but it wasn't because the players weren't in position to make them.

Q: Is this the angriest you have ever seen Pitt fans since you started the Q&A?

Mark Schilajew, Huntingdon

ZEISE: Actually, yes, and by a lot. I mean, I have lost track of how many e-mails, phone messages and whatnot I have received, plus you read the message boards, listen to talk radio -- there is a lot of anger and I think it is three years of frustration finally boiling over. I mean, when Walt Harris had his low moments, there would be anger but at least 30 to 35 percent of the correspondence was defending him. I don't know that I have received one e-mail this week that was even remotely positive or trying to defend the coaching staff. It has ALL been negative, so that's why it is pretty easy to figure out that this has been as bad as it gets for the coaching staff and the program in terms of an unhappy fan base.