This isn't meant as a defense of Dixon, but just as some evidence and basis for what Pitt can reasonably expect from our next coach. The problem with creating a "super league" of strong basketball programs is that there will be 135 wins and 135 losses in the conference every year. How far from 9-9 can a team really expect to be? Here's the results from the last three seasons, since we joined the ACC:
UVA 0.833
Duke 0.722
UNC 0.704
UL 0.667(2 seasons)
-----------------
Cuse 0.593
ND 0.574
Mia 0.556
Pitt 0.519
Clemson 0.519
FSU 0.463
NCSt 0.444
----------------
VT 0.333 (2 seasons)
GT 0.315
WF 0.194(2 seasons)
BC 0.111(2 seasons)
A record of 11-7 equals 0.611. That means only 4 programs have averaged 11-7 or better for the last three years. Miami, Pitt, Clemson, FSU, and NCSt are between 10-8 to 8-10. Cuse and ND are just slightly better than 10-8 so far.
It just seems dangerous to me for fans to expect an annual finish of 11-7. We did it in 2013, but doing it every year is really going to be a serious challenge. If Pitt (or Miami, FSU, etc.) aren't on the top of their game, it is going to be very easy to finish with only 8 wins or fewer (as NCSt saw this season).
UVA 0.833
Duke 0.722
UNC 0.704
UL 0.667(2 seasons)
-----------------
Cuse 0.593
ND 0.574
Mia 0.556
Pitt 0.519
Clemson 0.519
FSU 0.463
NCSt 0.444
----------------
VT 0.333 (2 seasons)
GT 0.315
WF 0.194(2 seasons)
BC 0.111(2 seasons)
A record of 11-7 equals 0.611. That means only 4 programs have averaged 11-7 or better for the last three years. Miami, Pitt, Clemson, FSU, and NCSt are between 10-8 to 8-10. Cuse and ND are just slightly better than 10-8 so far.
It just seems dangerous to me for fans to expect an annual finish of 11-7. We did it in 2013, but doing it every year is really going to be a serious challenge. If Pitt (or Miami, FSU, etc.) aren't on the top of their game, it is going to be very easy to finish with only 8 wins or fewer (as NCSt saw this season).
