DT, you are absolutely correct. The only thing I will add is now is not the time to judge whether or not Stallings can right the ship. I'd say we will have a better handle on that one after year 3.
2017?
- Thread starter gary2
- Start date
He made the dance 3 of those years.
That's not good enough?
Yes- everything now is on Stallings.
I think we will have a pretty good handle on it by December. If the 2018 recruiting class looks the same or worse than the 2017 class, that will tell us a great deal.
I have a full head of hair.... unlike Dixon who was balding and also a bum when it came to coaching and recruiting in particular.
I agree, I said it many times that 2018 is a critical recruiting class for Stallings. So far, I am not sure I can say I am optimistic it will be better than 17. Golden was a good start, but doesn't seem like many other impact recruits have Pitt in serious contention. Forrester they seem in decent shape with but who knows with the rest.
Look, I am certainly one of the ones who think Dixon clearly had a heavy hand in last years debacle and this year upcoming debacle of seasons. I have given my reasons many times previously so I won't beat that dead horse any longer.
But you are clearly delusional in your hate of Dixon. He did much much much more good for this University that definitely outweighs his last few years of letting the program slip. You lose any validity to your opinions posting nonsense like above.
But other than our seniors this past year what was behind them. I am talking about talent thru the program. JD did not recruit well after Pitt entered the ACC. I liked JD but facts are facts. Stallings will be here at least 3 years. Deal with it.
We don't know/ and they were run off.
Except for 2 players - entirely stallings construction.
They were Dixon players who left-by definition that means, with the exception of Johsnon(an outlier)they were garbage.
And it means that this roster, outside of sterling and Luther- are entirely Kevin Stallings .
Like I said.
You can stArt hating the new coach now, instead of the old one
Right run off to the Old Dominions of the world and Savanah St's of the world.
Why should it take 3 years of coaching to know that? We will know with 2 full seasons of coaching and 3 recruiting classes IMO.
But, let's be clear, (and I agree) the results Jamie Dixon got his last 4 years were not "good enough". What is "good enough" for Stallings?
We already know he missed the NCAAT last year and will undoubtedly miss it this year, so he can't match the number of trips.
We don't know because Stallings refused to play them, despite the fact he didn't change the 2016 recruiting class at all and didn't push out anyone before the start of the season.
And what has Stallings recruited to Pitt so far? Certainly not talent that can compete in the ACC, that much is for sure. So the same can be said for Stallings...his coaching is simply not good and it has also shown in the lack of talent he has recruited so far.
And I have to differ with your "last 4 years" comment. Maybe last 2 years, and that was merely recruiting on par or slightly better than what we've seen from Stallings so far. Certainly Dixon's coaching was FAR superior to anything that Stallings has done in his entire career. That is objective, as you put it. The facts don't reflect your comment about last 4 years of Dixon.
But it really doesn't matter now because what we're seeing on the court, last year and going forward, is entirely on Stallings and his incompetence. Dixon isn't here. Quit with the comparisons already, because there really isn't one.
Let's see how many of you even bother to show up at The Pete this year. I'll be there, holding my nose, but still there. Maybe when Stallings is gone, the program will have a chance to get better. But it's still Pitt and I support Pitt. That doesn't mean I have to support a jackass coach.
Soufy, you could damn well be right. But I will not root for him to fail just because I don't like him.
At least two of those guys will be at schools with better teams than us this year.
Whether you root for or against him has no effect on his results.
Well one fact is apparent. There are only 2 Dixon recruits from the past 4 years left. Without the turmoil there would be 3 [Cam]. The rest weren't good enough. I am not defending Stallings or even including him in this discussion. The discussion is about what was left in the program after Dixon baled.
That's correct. Could we at least wait for the results? Like it or not he'll get at least 3 years.
He was 4-14 last year. That's a result. What results do you expect to see in 2018? Better or worse than 4-14?
How did you determine this? Because Stallings never played them?
Right, so I think the, absolute, best case scenario is Stallings is 8-28 in his first two years in the ACC. Want to put his benchmark at .500 in conference? So he just needs to go 23-3 in his 3rd year to get to an acceptable level after 3 years. Oh...wait...that is actually impossible? Ok, so he would need to go a combined 28-8 in his 3rd and 4th seasons just to get there.
There is actually a decent chance (I think better than us winning 4 ACC games) we win 0 ACC games this year. If that happens, Stallings would need to go 32-4 in 2 ACC seasons to get to .500 in conference.
So, for all those folks saying "give Stallings a chance" or "wait for the results" and you at least put up the low expectation of being a .500 coach in conference, know that you are likely asking him to, AT LEAST, win 28 of 36 games in conference in years 3 and 4 to barely get there. If he just goes .500 (18-18) in those 3rd and 4th years, his ACC winning percentage will almost assuredly be .361 or lower.
The rest weren't good enough?? I question that conclusion. Just because Stallings determined that they shouldn't be here or just because they left because they saw the writing on the wall, or for whatever reason, that doesn't mean they "weren't good enough". In all likelihood, there were plenty good enough. Just not wanted by Stallings, who is a very poor judge of ability and a very poor coach. Forget Dixon (he didn't bale. He was pushed out by a numbnuts and he was smart). This has nothing to do with him. It has everything to do with Stallings' coaching ability, or lack thereof, and judge of player ability, or lack thereof.
I'll withhold judgement for this year until after this year's results are in. But anyone with 2 eyes and some common sense knows that this year could be a lot worse than last year, and probably will be.
Minimum number of total wins for this year to be considered semi-successful is 16. In my mind, that will buy Stallings some time. If less than that, buyouts need to be explored ASAP. And I just don't see more than 8 wins total this year. Not with this coach.
If Stallings is a very poor judge of ability and a very poor coach how did so many of the players he recruited and coached make the NBA? I have yet to have someone explain that to me.
Did he have "so many"?
Heck, say he is a good recruiter or evaluator of talent? Whichever/both. Who cares? What are his results?
If one concludes Stallings had more talent to work with at Vanderbilt than Pitt had during the overlap of the Howland-Dixon era at Pitt--then, the only logical conclusion is that Stallings can't coach-em up as well as Howland-Dixon could and its corollary that he will need far better talent than he had at Vanderbilt to succeed in the ACC.
Given this, we will know by December-January whether Stallings can succeed at Pitt based on the quality of the 2018 class signed in November and the OOC and early ACC W-L results.
Given this, we will know by December-January whether Stallings can succeed at Pitt based on the quality of the 2018 class signed in November and the OOC and early ACC W-L results.
We'll see.... I won't say we are more talented but besides losing Cam Johnson I am not sure we are any less talented when comparing to the departing underclassmen that have left.
Don't misunderstand me, Stallings has stunk so far overall. But the players that left at the underclass level were awful. Maybe Stallings plays a part in that for not developing them. But it is obvious they were no good based on the schools they ended up going to. If they were legit talents, other legit D1 schools would have come knocking for them. Besides Cam, none had any of those options.
Yes the rest were not good enough. Not only did Stallings determine but so did about 70 power 5 conference D1 schools since none ended up anywhere noteworthy after Cam.
Sorry, there is plenty to get on Stallings cause he has stunk overall so far in his time at Pitt. And you can maybe include not developing any of the departing underclassmen as a reaosn to get on him. But to act like he let the FAB 5 leave for other schools is delusional at best. The majority of those kids were simply not high D1 caliber players. If they were they would have had more options than where they ended up.
Why did KS re-recruit Dixon's entire 2016 class? Dixon was regarded as a mediocre to (lately) poor recruiter. What changed so drastically in 12 months that KS liked all those kids who wanted to open their recruitments, and then suddenly the national consensus was they all sucked? Did the other 350 D1 coaches observe Pitt's practices?
If you guys want to hang your hat on the underclassmen being total garbage, that's fine, but then you need to own that Stallings was a lazy SOB for signing them and bringing in ZERO additional talent in that class. Logical consistency, folks.
The great unknown at this point is whether Dixon could have coached these kids up any further to at least be competitive in the ACC. I think he could have because he did in the past. We'll never know. We know Stallings is totally incapable of doing that and never will.
Yes, other P5 schools determined they weren't good enough, based on the results that Stallings produced, which is awful. With a good coach coaching them this past year, who knows how other schools would have looked at them. I still contend that they were good enough but were let down by Stallings, thus making them unattractive and unwanted by other schools. Again, we'll never know because they weren't coached well enough by Stallings to give any indication how good they could be. He just can't do that.
Stallings was a good coach for a period of time, who plateaued and faded over the final years of his tenure at Vandy. Judging him now based on his results circa 2008 is no more valid for him than it is for Dixon. 2018 will be his 4th losing season out of 6. That's a bad coach.
I totally agree. I was and still am critical of what he did with the 2016 class not adding to it.
I don't know if it was total incompetence by sticking to that class or him thinking he was doing the right thing for those kids since they were already committed and he didn't want to push them out that late in the process but whatever reason he certainly failed for that incoming class. Not disputing that at all.
Maybe, I certainly won't defend Stallings ability to coach them up. I am sure Dixon would have coached them up better. Not disputing that at all.
But I find it hard to believe that no other schools would see an opportunity to coach these kids up considering they would have 3 years of eligibility left after sitting out a year. It's not like they are seniors transferring. They were freshmen who would have multiple years left in a program.
While I am sure Stallings not coaching them up has a role, the reality is these kids who departed were simply not that talented and not that sought after.
And this is really the point. If you're great recruiter and a great coach then your team makes the tourney better than half the time, right? I would also hope that you make the sweet 16 more recently than a decade ago.
KS is what he is so i'm not trying to diminish what he's done but let's not pretend that he's an over achieving P5 coach.
I am not, at all. They weren't really highly rated recruits and then they didn't play at all for an entire year. We would be in an absolute uproar if we took a transfer who was a 3 star recruit, played like 70 minutes, and has to sit out a year. Even if you liked the kid as a recruit, you already lost a year of development AND he can't play for another year. I'm not surprised in the slightest they couldn't get any decent offers as transfers. Plus, those are the 2016 recruits, which are best case scenario. Imagine how much it would be for Wilson, who played less last year than his FR year. I'm not sure how much was on him and how much was on Stallings, but no one would take that transfer.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I think any of those players were destined to be really good, but I am not surprised at all they had no real transfer options. Any coaches would be insane to take them.
Hell, look at Ellison for us and compare. He was a decent rotation player/almost starter (albeit on a terrible team and was about to be pushed way down the bench) who had produced a good bit for two years and his options were few and far between. Geno Thorpe was even worse. To be a successful transfer you have to really be proven you can be a high level contributor right away or have enormous upside.
They weren't highly recruited and they weren't very good. And that is why they landed where they did.
Similar threads
