ADVERTISEMENT

Names that have been thrown out so far for OC

9nationalchampionships said:
Okay all college games are over so hopefully we hear some news shortly on the OC......unless he is coming from one of the NFL teams that are still playing ( Van Pelt ?)
Click to expand...

Van Pelt is a somewhat uninspiring name aside from his ties to the Pack and Aaron Rogers. Did he ever have much success as an OC? I know those were some terrible Bills teams he coached on. He would be a "safe" pick to me. He also seems like someone that is probably close to getting an NFL OC job somewhere, especially given the success of his predecessor (McAdoo). Taking one of his Packers counterparts (Getsy) would be the higher risk, higher reward move given what he has done to revitalize the Packers receiving corp this year. He is already known as an innovator and a rising star within the Packers organization. I think he's probably a little too green to jump into the OC role here but stranger things have happened. He will be a HC before he reaches 40.

If we are waiting on a Packers coach we will be waiting for a while as I don't see them losing with Rogers playing as he has of late.

On D I would really like to see Scott Schafer brought in as our DC, perhaps co-DC w/ Conklin and AHC. I'm not saying Conklin has been bad (been more of a talent gap as opposed to bad coaching) but Shafer is a proven commodity who has worked with Narduzzi and shares his defensive philosophy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: galladt
Get out the lower division coaches, McDonald's employee's, people who never called a game , and fired coaches , put all into a hat , pick one and that is my bet
 
TD_istheman said:
Get out the lower division coaches, McDonald's employee's, people who never called a game , and fired coaches , put all into a hat , pick one and that is my bet
Click to expand...


Obviously. Because that's what Narduzzi did with his two prior OC hires, right?
 
in other news, fleck gets Warriner the OSU OC to be his OL coach. i wonder who his OC will be. now, urban can slide his new OC in his role.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pitt Magician
i think tenn still needs an oc and oregon. the ducks are trying to hire mario christobal for their oc. hope they fill theirs soon.
 
So Alabama brought in an outsider , while he was on staff, and didn't feel he was worthy of being promoted ? I don't know what to think , will be open minded , but couldn't we swing higher for 1 million
 
I'm trying to figure out why he didn't get the job when Kiffin left , and we know Stark was brought into replace Kiffin one day.
 
Sark is one of the best offensive minds in college football that's why he is taking over,Napier is a good offensive guy but he's not on sark level,if he didn't have a drinking problem he's still the HC at USC
 
Pitt Law '04 said:
Obviously. Because that's what Narduzzi did with his two prior OC hires, right?
Click to expand...
We can hope that Narduzzi will fight the bean counters to be able to at least equal the qualifications that Chaney and Canada had. All involved hopefully know that he needs a legit OC since he is a defensive specialist.

But to be fair to the doubters (and I lean that way), it would be much more consistent with Pitt's history to double down on a cheap, safe (as in, won't leave because nobody else will want him) guy, given the scars of having lost two in two years, rather than another "in demand" guy (let alone a splash hire). Pitt itself is responsible for such pessimism. The ghost of Matt House still looms.

And even if they secure a competent one, it's already bad enough in the midst of the final recruiting stretch that the guy isn't already in place by now. Especially if he might have connections to any decent recruits he could sway to our side if he has time. But to assuage any doubts our existing prospects may have, or will be thrust upon them by our enemies. Before anyone points at Tennessee or Oregon still also searching, well, they have better resources and recent pedigrees to absorb that gap. More confidence they'll spend to get a good one even if it hasn't completed. We haven't earned that confidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: runshadyrun
Pitt1992 said:
Sark is one of the best offensive minds in college football that's why he is taking over,Napier is a good offensive guy but he's not on sark level,if he didn't have a drinking problem he's still the HC at USC
Click to expand...

This.

Sark > Napier by quite a bit.

Napier is highly thought of but he's unproven. He was fired as the OC at Clemson but I think he was only 29. He's been a fast riser and still highly thought of but you take Sark over him all day long at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BannedMember7F
Napier would be about as splashy of a hire as one could expect. It would be somewhat of a risk, no doubt, but one with upside. Factor in his recruiting skills and I think it'd be a big win for us.

Now take the OC savings and hire Scott Shafer in some capacity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piranha
CaptainMurphy said:
Napier would be about as splashy of a hire as one could expect. It would be somewhat of a risk, no doubt, but one with upside. Factor in his recruiting skills and I think it'd be a big win for us.

Now take the OC savings and hire Scott Shafer in some capacity.
Click to expand...
I agree and hope there's some reality behind this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piranha
TheNoise88 said:
We can hope that Narduzzi will fight the bean counters to be able to at least equal the qualifications that Chaney and Canada had. All involved hopefully know that he needs a legit OC since he is a defensive specialist.

But to be fair to the doubters (and I lean that way), it would be much more consistent with Pitt's history to double down on a cheap, safe (as in, won't leave because nobody else will want him) guy, given the scars of having lost two in two years, rather than another "in demand" guy (let alone a splash hire). Pitt itself is responsible for such pessimism. The ghost of Matt House still looms.

And even if they secure a competent one, it's already bad enough in the midst of the final recruiting stretch that the guy isn't already in place by now. Especially if he might have connections to any decent recruits he could sway to our side if he has time. But to assuage any doubts our existing prospects may have, or will be thrust upon them by our enemies. Before anyone points at Tennessee or Oregon still also searching, well, they have better resources and recent pedigrees to absorb that gap. More confidence they'll spend to get a good one even if it hasn't completed. We haven't earned that confidence.
Click to expand...


It's time to let go of the past, man. The two most recent hires have been top notch OCs who were both from other Power 5 schools when hired.

Those are the only hires for which we can judge Gallagher and Narduzzi--and certainly more relevant than something that happened when Smiley was here. Or something that happened 20 years ago.

Or maybe you're just looking for an excuse to complain?

As for the timing, we're right on schedule. Narduzzi hired both prior OCs right around this time. Look it up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piranha
Pitt Law '04 said:
It's time to let go of the past, man. The two most recent hires have been top notch OCs who were both from other Power 5 schools when hired.

Those are the only hires for which we can judge Gallagher and Narduzzi--and certainly more relevant than something that happened when Smiley was here. Or something that happened 20 years ago.

Or maybe you're just looking for an excuse to complain?

As for the timing, we're right on schedule. Narduzzi hired both prior OCs right around this time. Look it up.
Click to expand...
I acknowledged Chaney and Canada were good hires for that position.

But this administration isn't without dubious precedent itself. Stallings for example. And overall, Narduzzi's original assistants were overall not much to be over the moon about.

We haven't yet earned confidence, as I concluded.
 
TheNoise88 said:
And overall, Narduzzi's original assistants were overall not much to be over the moon about.
Click to expand...

I'd assume at least part of this comes from jumping from coordinator to coach as opposed as taking your entire coaching staff with you when moving from job to job as the HC. He couldn't/wouldn't try to raid MSU and was left to cobble together a staff as best he could and make do where there wasn't an ideal fit. As time goes on he'll be able to replace as needed with his guys.
 
TheNoise88 said:
I acknowledged Chaney and Canada were good hires for that position.

But this administration isn't without dubious precedent itself. Stallings for example. And overall, Narduzzi's original assistants were overall not much to be over the moon about.

We haven't yet earned confidence, as I concluded.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can complain about Stallings from that perspective. He was a sitting head coach at a power 5 program and had been for quite a long time.

One can certainly disagree about whether he was sufficiently accomplished or had won enough. But your original complaint related to doing things "on the cheap" which wasn't the case here at all. If Pitt wanted to be cheap or safe, it could have hired Brandin Knight.

As for the original assistants, I think you're the first person I've ever heard complain about them from a budget point of view. Off the top of my head, we poached sitting assistants from several Power 5 schools, including Andre Powell (from Maryland), Kevin Sherman (from Purdue), and Jim Chaney (from Arkansas).

This sounds like complaining for the sake of complaining. Though despite your complaints, I trust you are doing your part to help Pitt's athletic budget through donations and season ticket purchases. How many games did you attend this season? Or are you waiting to donate or buy seats until they've "earned" your confidence sufficient for you to support the team?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Piranha
Narduzzi hired Chaney and Canada. Each of them had many many years of play calling experience. I was expecting him to stay the course with the new hire. Another guy w/heavy experience.

If you believe the internet rumors of Napier and if he ends up the guy, Narduzzi is changing things up, going for less experience and a bigger bump on the recruiting side.
 
Pitt Law '04 said:
I don't see how you can complain about Stallings from that perspective. He was a sitting head coach at a power 5 program and had been for quite a long time.

One can certainly disagree about whether he was sufficiently accomplished or had won enough. But your original complaint related to doing things "on the cheap" which wasn't the case here at all. If Pitt wanted to be cheap or safe, it could have hired Brandin Knight.

As for the original assistants, I think you're the first person I've ever heard complain about them from a budget point of view. Off the top of my head, we poached sitting assistants from several Power 5 schools, including Andre Powell (from Maryland), Kevin Sherman (from Purdue), and Jim Chaney (from Arkansas).

This sounds like complaining for the sake of complaining. Though despite your complaints, I trust you are doing your part to help Pitt's athletic budget through donations and season ticket purchases. How many games did you attend this season? Or are you waiting to donate or buy seats until they've "earned" your confidence sufficient for you to support the team?
Click to expand...
You make a valid point that they could have gone cheaper with the hoops coach. But the hire itself (especially with out first trying to salvage Dixon by revamping his assistants) is reason for doubt. I'd hope the fact Jamie didn't hesitate to leave all his Pitt assistants behind should settle any doubt that they were at least part of the problem in the past few years. And Stallings, well, it's unfortunate for him on a personal level because he seems a good guy but the hire really was not adequate given what we were giving up (yes, past couple years excepted).

I don't mean to be pessimistic, I'd like to think the last two OC show reason to expect a solid replacement. For that position specifically, they have been legit for Narduzzi. I really just meant to point out why the more extreme doubters have some validity to their thinking based on overall hires.

And enough with the "fans suck" sentiment. 40 years without sniffing a championship. The core support is pretty damn good considering that. Some of the loss of support also goes back to Pitt itself slamming the door on boosters when we were at our peak. If I didn't buy tickets and donate and go to games already, I wouldn't hang around boards like this and implore for improvement. I'm not the problem for giving a sh*t. Those that don't are the problem. But they have a good reason.
 
Last edited:
TheNoise88 said:
You make a valid point that they could have gone cheaper with the hoops coach. But the hire itself (especially with out first trying to salvage Dixon by revamping his assistants) is reason for doubt. I'd hope the fact Jamie didn't hesitate to leave all his Pitt assistants behind should settle any doubt that they were at least part of the problem in the past few years. And Stallings, well, it's unfortunate for him on a personal level because he seems a good guy but the hire really was not adequate given what we were giving up (yes, past couple years excepted).

I don't mean to be pessimistic, I'd like to think the last two OC show reason to expect a solid replacement. For that position specifically, they have been legit for Narduzzi. I really just meant to point out why the more extreme doubters have some validity to their thinking based on overall hires.

And enough with the "fans suck" sentiment. 40 years without sniffing a championship. The core support is pretty damn good considering that. Some of the loss of support also goes back to Pitt itself slamming the door on boosters when we were at our peak. If I didn't buy tickets and donate and go to games already, I wouldn't hang around boards like this and implore for improvement. I'm not the problem for giving a sh*t. Those that don't are the problem. But they have a good reason.
Click to expand...


But none of this is responsive or even germane to the complaints you raised earlier. You complained about going cheap or not being big time enough.

Now you're just making generalized complaints and failing to justify the negativity to begin with.

I'm pleased to hear you donate and buy tickets. In my experience, the folks who bitch about Pitt being cheap or complain about the administration are the same ones who never donate a dime and can be found sitting in their recliners during home games,
 
Last edited:
Tomorrow might be the day we find out. I know all the steam is on Napier right now, I'm thinking the majority might be wrong. Time will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sherepower
Napier would be a disappointment to be honest , not saying he won't do good , but when he was fired last , his team was 6-7, and Dabo said enough is enough and Bama brought in the drunk to replace Kiffin, just wondering why he wasn't promoted
 
CaptainMurphy said:
Napier would be about as splashy of a hire as one could expect. It would be somewhat of a risk, no doubt, but one with upside. Factor in his recruiting skills and I think it'd be a big win for us.

Now take the OC savings and hire Scott Shafer in some capacity.
Click to expand...


Fired twice , what upside ?
 
Pitt Law '04 said:
But none of this is responsive or even germane to the complaints you raised earlier. You complained about going cheap or not being big time enough.

Now you're just making generalized complaints and failing to justify the negativity to begin with.

I'm pleased to hear you donate and buy tickets. In my experience, the folks who bitch about Pitt being cheap or complain about the administration are the same ones who never donate a dime and can be found sitting in their recliners during home games,
Click to expand...
So it doesn't matter that my "general" complaints are about irrefutably true items, I guess? We've been cheap many times. Not all (I acknowledged the OC hires were legit), but many. We've not gone nearly big enough most times (on occasion, we've stepped up, such as new bigger deals for Dixon), but rarely.

That's why we never sniff championships. And championships should be the objective in sports. Not just fielding a program to collect shared revenues. That's not legit competitiveness. That's being the Pirates.

But more immediately, it's why there are doubters at hiring time, like now. More often than not, we're underwhelmed by the hires. Whether due to money or plain old half-assery. That was the germane (or is it Tito?) point. I more than justified the cause of doubt. You simply are annoyed that I'm right.
 
TheNoise88 said:
So it doesn't matter that my "general" complaints are about irrefutably true items, I guess? We've been cheap many times. Not all (I acknowledged the OC hires were legit), but many. We've not gone nearly big enough most times (on occasion, we've stepped up, such as new bigger deals for Dixon), but rarely.

That's why we never sniff championships. And championships should be the objective in sports. Not just fielding a program to collect shared revenues. That's not legit competitiveness. That's being the Pirates.

But more immediately, it's why there are doubters at hiring time, like now. More often than not, we're underwhelmed by the hires. Whether due to money or plain old half-assery. That was the germane (or is it Tito?) point. I more than justified the cause of doubt. You simply are annoyed that I'm right.
Click to expand...

What did you say that was true?

You conceded that the OC hires were legit.

You mentioned Stallings, I told you it wasn't a cheap hire, and you conceded the point. But said you didn't like the hire--though for different reasons than you originally asserted. The new points having nothing to do with institutional commitment (your original argument in case you forget since you've changed it).

You asserted that the football staff was underwhelming. I told you that you were wrong and cited examples. You abandoned that point.

What you have offered isn't proof of anything. They are instead unsupported assertions.

Since Gallagher was appointed the athletic department has done nothing but make big time decisions. Heck throw in the men's soccer coach and the swimming coach.

As for your allusion to the Pirates, it couldn't be more inapt. Pitt sports are not a money making enterprise. They pocket no profit and don't try to. In fact, the athletic department spends millions more than it generates in revenue. It's foolish to claim otherwise.

You simply don't know what you're talking about.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pitt-Chains, PHATWOOD, Pitt Magician and 1 other person
Three things I believe Narduzzi is after

1. Actual OC experience(as much as possible). I base that on first two hires

2. QB type guy

3. Recruiter
 
while were still waiting......

keep an eye on new freshman RB at FSU, Cam Akers. Going to be great. He enrolled early. Dalvin Cook departs and Cam Akers enters the picture.

Next season, Bama/FSU week one, cannot wait.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

U

Steelers Have Been Slime Ball Liars For A While

Replies
32
Views
2K
Football Board
lilspainishflea
lilspainishflea
S

Weird start times for NCAAT at PPG

Replies
36
Views
1K
Basketball Board
happjack
H
jlazinger

Lazinger's Lists - 2024 Bball @ Clemson - The one that got away.

Replies
4
Views
360
Center Court at the Pete
jlazinger
jlazinger
B

Roster without Bub

Replies
11
Views
662
Center Court at the Pete
jlazinger
jlazinger
Zeldas Open Roof

OT: Golf Courses

Replies
167
Views
5K
Football Board
wbrpanther
W
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back