ADVERTISEMENT

David Wannstedt. That's it.

You’re both correct, to varying extents

Dave was never one to rely on a playmaking quarterback. And as Souf points out, he went 11-12 with Palko as the qb

If Bostick lived up to his hype....or any other qb. Wannstedt recruited.....what likely happens is that Tino doesn’t start in 2010, and Pitt likely wins 8-9 regular season games that year and the conference
 
Las Panteras said:
I will repeat what I have stated on this issue:

If Pat Bostick lived up to the hype...Wannstedt would have been here for 10 years and turned the reins over to Narduzzi with a program in far better shape than what transpired immediately after he left.
Click to expand...
Wannstedt may have stayed longer, but I doubt he would have won much more or anything of real importance. The guy is just a loser when push comes to shove. He cowers in the face of expectations and pressure. Time after time after time the guy folded. He did everything he could to choke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brickfhouse and OriginalEther
SoufOaklin4Life said:
And I played along
If bostick panned out we’d likely peak at 3rd place in the big east.
Like we did with a competent bill stull
Click to expand...

I'll play along as well. First the reality. The seven years post Wanny we have witnessed..............

A coaching revolving door.
4 losing seasons.
Two national embarrassments with Haywood and Fraud.
One bowl victory, a three pointer against bowling Green.
Numerous stupefying losses.
Lousy recruiting we are still working through.

Those are the facts. And here I thought surpassing the level of mediocrity attributed to DW would be easy. Guess not.

Now for the what ifs..................

Next year looks to be more of the same old same old.
Wanny would have won at least six-ten more games in the same time span. Don't buy that OK, but one thing I'm certain is that he would have comfortably bettered the gang of four.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Las Panteras
Seneca_Valley said:
I'll play along as well. First the reality. The seven years post Wanny we have witnessed..............

A coaching revolving door.
4 losing seasons.
Two national embarrassments with Haywood and Fraud.
One bowl victory, a three pointer against bowling Green.
Numerous stupefying losses.
Lousy recruiting we are still working through.

Those are the facts. And here I thought surpassing the level of mediocrity attributed to DW would be easy. Guess not.

Now for the what ifs..................

Next year looks to be more of the same old same old.
Wanny would have won at least six-ten more games in the same time span. Don't buy that OK, but one thing I'm certain is that he would have comfortably bettered the gang of four.
Click to expand...
I think he probably would have. I think either (Graham or Chryst) of them would have if they would have been in place the entire time. I think both are better coaches than Wannstedt. I also think Wannstedt would have struggled mightily in the ACC and our record in the ACC would be no better.
 
Jpripper88 said:
I think he probably would have. I think either (Graham or Chryst) of them would have if they would have been in place the entire time. I think both are better coaches than Wannstedt. I also think Wannstedt would have struggled mightily in the ACC and our record in the ACC would be no better.
Click to expand...

Graham left when he realized he wasn't able to deliver on the bullshit he was peddling. He was fired from his dream job this year, in case you haven't caught up. Hard to imagine any success here based on his recruiting.

Maybe Chryst but again he left. And his recruiting was spotty in that he left little defensive talent for Narduzzi. Another 6 win season in his fourth year and he would have been canned.

DW was hamstrung with a 1) budget that pales with what Narduzzi works with and 2) operating in a conference that was perceived to be considered third rate. I would have loved to see what he could have achieved in the ACC.
 
Seneca_Valley said:
Graham left when he realized he wasn't able to deliver on the bullshit he was peddling. He was fired from his dream job this year, in case you haven't caught up. Hard to imagine any success here based on his recruiting.

Maybe Chryst but again he left. And his recruiting was spotty in that he left little defensive talent for Narduzzi. Another 6 win season in his fourth year and he would have been canned.

DW was hamstrung with a 1) budget that pales with what Narduzzi works with and 2) operating in a conference that was perceived to be considered third rate. I would have loved to see what he could have achieved in the ACC.
Click to expand...
Sadly, Dave struggled with peers in the big east.
It’s silly to think in a much more talented conference he’d have performed better.
See uconn, Rutgers, and cincy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OriginalEther and Jpripper88
Seneca_Valley said:
Graham left when he realized he wasn't able to deliver on the bullshit he was peddling. He was fired from his dream job this year, in case you haven't caught up. Hard to imagine any success here based on his recruiting.

Maybe Chryst but again he left. And his recruiting was spotty in that he left little defensive talent for Narduzzi. Another 6 win season in his fourth year and he would have been canned.

DW was hamstrung with a 1) budget that pales with what Narduzzi works with and 2) operating in a conference that was perceived to be considered third rate. I would have loved to see what he could have achieved in the ACC.
Click to expand...
I am caught up.

Dave Wannstedt is not a good football coach. He couldn't even win the BE and he was out recruiting everyone. You really think him having the 5th or 6th most talented team in the ACC would have ended up better?
 
  • Like
Reactions: brickfhouse and OriginalEther
SoufOaklin4Life said:
Sadly, Dave struggled with peers in the big east.
It’s silly to think in a much more talented conference he’d have performed better.
See uconn, Rutgers, and cincy.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many times I have to post this, but early on DW competed against teams that were among the best in their school's history. The Big East was not a lousy conference . Perception isn't reality.

Why is it a stretch to think with a bigger budget and better access to recruits with ACC affiliation he wouldn't. Silly is thinking otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Las Panteras
Seneca_Valley said:
I don't know how many times I have to post this, but early on DW competed against teams that were among the best in their school's history. The Big East was not a lousy conference . Perception isn't reality.

Why is it a stretch to think with a bigger budget and better access to recruits with ACC affiliation he wouldn't. Silly is thinking otherwise.
Click to expand...
Narduzzi has a .553 Win % and people act like he can do no wrong..
 
Seneca_Valley said:
I don't know how many times I have to post this, but early on DW competed against teams that were among the best in their school's history. The Big East was not a lousy conference . Perception isn't reality.

Why is it a stretch to think with a bigger budget and better access to recruits with ACC affiliation he wouldn't. Silly is thinking otherwise.
Click to expand...
Because he struggled against teams with less talent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OriginalEther
Seneca_Valley said:
I don't know how many times I have to post this, but early on DW competed against teams that were among the best in their school's history. The Big East was not a lousy conference . Perception isn't reality.

Why is it a stretch to think with a bigger budget and better access to recruits with ACC affiliation he wouldn't. Silly is thinking otherwise.
Click to expand...
Those teams were "the best in their school's history" because the competition was terrible and most of the time they were beating Dave Wannstedt.

The BE was absolutely terrible. He was out recruiting every single BE school and he could never win it. He wouldn't have been out recruiting AT LEAST 3 schools (and probably 5) in the ACC and he would still be the same, very bad, coach.
 
Seneca_Valley said:
Lazy argument. Try again.
Click to expand...
How is it a "lazy argument"? The guy had more talent than any team in the BE and couldn't win that conference in 7 years. In the ACC he would be lucky to have the 4th most talented team and likely still be #6. How does a guy never winning with a clear talent advantage end up a winning when he will be at clear talent disadvantage?
 
  • Like
Reactions: OriginalEther
Seneca_Valley said:
Why is it a stretch to think with a bigger budget and better access to recruits with ACC affiliation he wouldn't. Silly is thinking otherwise.
Click to expand...

I'm sure with an ACC budget and affiliation Wannstedt would have had more success against Rutgers and UConn.o_O
As it is, being part of the ACC means playing against Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, Miami, etc every year, and schools like Clemson and Florida State in some years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jpripper88
I usually point this out when Wanny's coaching ability comes up, so here it is again.

Wannstedt had one of the most talented teams compared to it's conference opponents... EVER. In 2009 (I think) Pitt had HALF of the first team All Big East on offense and defense. That's amazing. I'm not sure any team in modern times has ever done that. Pitt literally had half of the conference all stars on their squad. Plus they had 4 second team all big east players. Plus they had the offensive player of the year and BOTH co defensive players of the year. That's amazing. I don't even think Miami accomplished that when they had great national championship teams in the sub-par Big East. Wanny finished THIRD in the conference with THAT team. AMAZING.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brickfhouse and Jpripper88
Jpripper88 said:
How is it a "lazy argument"? The guy had more talent than any team in the BE and couldn't win that conference in 7 years. In the ACC he would be lucky to have the 4th most talented team and likely still be #6. How does a guy never winning with a clear talent advantage end up a winning when he will be at clear talent disadvantage?
Click to expand...

It is a lazy argument. The teams in question beat the likes of Oklahoma, Auburn, North Carolina, Georgia, a very good Oregon State team to name the ones that come to mind. Louisville, WVU, Cincinnati, Rutgers all had solid teams for a 2-3 year stretch. These teams had talent. To suggest that we had a significant talent edge over them, especially when DW was rebuilding the team is ludicrous.

And by the way, DW coached only six years.
 
Seneca_Valley said:
It is a lazy argument. The teams in question beat the likes of Oklahoma, Auburn, North Carolina, Georgia, a very good Oregon State team to name the ones that come to mind. Louisville, WVU, Cincinnati, Rutgers all had solid teams for a 2-3 year stretch. These teams had talent. To suggest that we had a significant talent edge over them, especially when DW was rebuilding the team is ludicrous.

And by the way, DW coached only six years.
Click to expand...

We had a significant talent edge in 2009. Third place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brickfhouse and Jpripper88
HailtoPitt said:
I usually point this out when Wanny's coaching ability comes up, so here it is again.

Wannstedt had one of the most talented teams compared to it's conference opponents... EVER. In 2009 (I think) Pitt had HALF of the first team All Big East on offense and defense. That's amazing. I'm not sure any team in modern times has ever done that. Pitt literally had half of the conference all stars on their squad. Plus they had 4 second team all big east players. Plus they had the offensive player of the year and BOTH co defensive players of the year. That's amazing. I don't even think Miami accomplished that when they had great national championship teams in the sub-par Big East. Wanny finished THIRD in the conference with THAT team. AMAZING.
Click to expand...

Well that is one way to spin it. Might have been the case in 2009, not the entire six years DW coached.

And there is a problem with your narrative. Unfortunately for us, Cincinnati was a well coached undefeated team that beat 4 ranked opponents during the year, and managed to squeak out a one point win in the last minute. And by the way, was well represented with All big east honors. We lost a shoot out to a very, very, good team. Don't they deserve a little credit?
 
Last edited:
Seneca_Valley said:
It is a lazy argument. The teams in question beat the likes of Oklahoma, Auburn, North Carolina, Georgia, a very good Oregon State team to name the ones that come to mind. Louisville, WVU, Cincinnati, Rutgers all had solid teams for a 2-3 year stretch. These teams had talent. To suggest that we had a significant talent edge over them, especially when DW was rebuilding the team is ludicrous.

And by the way, DW coached only six years.
Click to expand...
We did have a huge talent edge. We beat them in recruiting every year. You just named wins over 5 schools for 5 BE schools, over a period of 6 years, in one of scenarios. Notice we only beat one of them. Every other BCS conference had better competition. Every single one.

Why was Dave Wannstedt rebuilding the team? He inherited a program that went 9-4, 8-5, and 8-4 the 3 years before he got there. In 2005, he had a legitimate starting QB, 3 RBs who played in the NFL, two NFL OL, a 1300 yard WR, 4 LBs who would play in the NFL, 2 NFL CBs (one who would be one of the best of all time), and a solid K and P. He proceeded to go 5-6, 6-6, and 5-7 in his first 3 years.

It isn't a lazy argument. It is the truth. The BE was awful and clearly the worst BCS conference. Dave Wannstedt inherited a solid program and had advantages over every BE program. He couldn't do anything with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski11585 and brickfhouse
upj87 said:
and this differs from Narduzzi how?
Click to expand...
There are legitimate criticisms of HCPN, but he has not looked to be a Wannstedt. Wannstedt took a solid program and immediately sucked. He lost games left and right to schools with less talent. HCPN has been playing schedules with 5-6 more talented teams on them. He beats those teams sometimes. He loses them most of the time. He wins most of the rest of the games with equal or worse talent. In his 1st 2 years HCPN only lost to one team with less talent: Navy. Every other loss was to a more talented team. He also beat VT, PSU, and Clemson. This year we beat Miami, but lost more of the talent toss ups.

I mean, there is no chance Dave Wannstedt goes 16-10 in his first 2 years against that 2015-2016 schedule. We have AT LEAST 5 more losses those two seasons (if you play that schedule and don't account for the bowl game difference) and are 11-15.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OriginalEther
HailtoPitt said:
We had a significant talent edge in 2009. Third place.
Click to expand...
Jpripper88 said:
We did have a huge talent edge. We beat them in recruiting every year. You just named wins over 5 schools for 5 BE schools, over a period of 6 years, in one of scenarios. Notice we only beat one of them. Every other BCS conference had better competition. Every single one.

Why was Dave Wannstedt rebuilding the team? He inherited a program that went 9-4, 8-5, and 8-4 the 3 years before he got there. In 2005, he had a legitimate starting QB, 3 RBs who played in the NFL, two NFL OL, a 1300 yard WR, 4 LBs who would play in the NFL, 2 NFL CBs (one who would be one of the best of all time), and a solid K and P. He proceeded to go 5-6, 6-6, and 5-7 in his first 3 years.

It isn't a lazy argument. It is the truth. The BE was awful and clearly the worst BCS conference. Dave Wannstedt inherited a solid program and had advantages over every BE program. He couldn't do anything with it.
Click to expand...

You really are dense. Talent is measured on the field, not on LOI signing day. If you want to count stars and summarily use that as your argument you would be wrong. The BE teams in question won a lot of games and beat some very respectable teams. they were talented. I don't care how many stars were assigned to their players names on LOI day.

And what on earth does what the 2002 and 2003 records matter with respect to the team DW inherited? I'll tell you what ...nothing. And the truth is that 2004 juggernaut you described needed late game rallies to beat the likes of Temple and Furman. That juggernaut you describe needed a WTF loss by BC to win a four way tie breaker for the conference championship. And then got bludgeoned in the Fiesta bowl. What DW inherited was a team with a few nice pieces and a whole lot of meh.

Have the last word, I'm done wrestling in the mud with you. Believe what you want. My opening addressed the fact that going on eight years and I am still waiting for this program to win nine games. Maybe next decade.
 
Seneca_Valley said:
You really are dense. Talent is measured on the field, not on LOI signing day. If you want to count stars and summarily use that as your argument you would be wrong. The BE teams in question won a lot of games and beat some very respectable teams. they were talented. I don't care how many stars were assigned to their players names on LOI day.

And what on earth does what the 2002 and 2003 records matter with respect to the team DW inherited? I'll tell you what ...nothing. And the truth is that 2004 juggernaut you described needed late game rallies to beat the likes of Temple and Furman. That juggernaut you describe needed a WTF loss by BC to win a four way tie breaker for the conference championship. And then got bludgeoned in the Fiesta bowl. What DW inherited was a team with a few nice pieces and a whole lot of meh.

Have the last word, I'm done wrestling in the mud with you. Believe what you want. My opening addressed the fact that going on eight years and I am still waiting for this program to win nine games. Maybe next decade.
Click to expand...
Except coaching, especially having an absolute dunce as HC, plays an enormous part of the success of those teams. Throw the records out. I gave you a number of examples of the talent on that 2005 team. Dave Wannstedt went 5-6. He got embarrassed by ND in the opener on National TV.

Those BE tams were not very talented. They were not very good. They played awful competition. Do you want to use NFL draft picks as a measure of talent? Those BE teams (especially if you take Pitt out of the equation) fall very short there, as well. It is all relative and the other BCS leagues were all head and shoulders better. Which BCS conference was the BE better than? Which years?

It is much, much harder for us to win 9 games (even though it shouldn't be THIS hard) because our competition is much, much better. They have more talent and they have better coaches.

One side is providing examples and facts and you are just shaking pom-poms for Wanny.
 
Seneca_Valley said:
Well that is one way to spin it. Might have been the case in 2009, not the entire six years DW coached.

And there is a problem with your narrative. Unfortunately for us, Cincinnati was a well coached undefeated team that beat 4 ranked opponents during the year, and managed to squeak out a one point win in the last minute. And by the way, was well represented with All big east honors. We lost a shoot out to a very, very, good team. Don't they deserve a little credit?
Click to expand...

Spin? We came in third place and lost two Big East conference games... with half of the all Big East team, and the offensive player of the year, and both defensive players of the year. The team was stacked, and I challenge anyone to find another team stacked that much in regards to its conference opponents. I'm not sure that it has ever happened. We did it... and managed third place.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: OriginalEther and Jpripper88
HailtoPitt said:
Spin? We came in third place and lost two Big East conference games... with half of the all Big East team, and the offensive player of the year, and both defense players of the year. The team was stacked, and I challenge anyone to find another team stacked that much in regards to it's conference opponents. I'm not sure that it has ever happened. We did it... and managed third place.
Click to expand...
BUT HE SAYS "SAMMICH" AND "N'AT"!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: OriginalEther
I would say the Big East from that time frame wasn’t always terrible. In fact, the league was pretty strong in 2006 and 2008. Not Sec West strong of course. What the league always lacked was that killer program like an Alabama or an Oklahoma

Of course, that doesn’t make it remotely excusable in how Wannstedt missed a bowl game his first three seasons. Or, how in 2010, when the conference truly was putrid, how Pitt failed to win in despite a two game lead on Halloween and not having to beat Wvu in the process

He had two good seasons here. Four were failures. And he showed little reason to believe future seasons would have been any better
Again, as it is, he sure did his best to make sure his successors didn’t succeed either
 
OriginalEther said:
I would say the Big East from that time frame wasn’t always terrible. In fact, the league was pretty strong in 2006 and 2008. Not Sec West strong of course. What the league always lacked was that killer program like an Alabama or an Oklahoma

Of course, that doesn’t make it remotely excusable in how Wannstedt missed a bowl game his first three seasons. Or, how in 2010, when the conference truly was putrid, how Pitt failed to win in despite a two game lead on Halloween and not having to beat Wvu in the process

He had two good seasons here. Four were failures. And he showed little reason to believe future seasons would have been any better
Again, as it is, he sure did his best to make sure his successors didn’t succeed either
Click to expand...

Wow, we agree somewhat on the strength of the conference. By no means a powerhouse, but not a whole lot different than the ACC.

Regarding bowl games, if DW had the benefit of a 12 game schedule like his successors and added a cupcake Pitt would have been eligible in 2005 and won the minimum in 2006. Our lousy fan base, fewer bowls, and lousy conference tie ins are more responsible than DW for sitting at home.

We'll continue to disagree about his character.
 
SoufOaklin4Life said:
Yes-
I prefer someone with experience doing the job.

We’ve seen how all that experience didn’t help him running a single college program.

He can be an assistant in charge of fundraising-
Using all those connections to improve our athletic donations.
Which he’s probably do for free.
Click to expand...
You keep referring to this all the while he led Pitt to some of the most success they've seen in decades. You can't just cut that part out. It fits your story, I know, but it's a half truth
With that said - I do agree they should go with someone a lot more qualified for the job. When people on this board think AD, they only think football. There's a gazillion more things to the position that just football and hiring coaches.
 
Jpripper88 said:
Numerous since being fired.

Winning and game day experience is how you connect. Dave Wannstedt is the anti winner. He will surround himself with similar people and we will be much worse off.
Click to expand...
42 - 31 at Pitt of all places where 6 -6 is the norm is an anti winner?
 
  • Like
Reactions: paulbl99
OriginalEther said:
Three come pretty quickly to mind:
1. His shots during the Oklahoma State this year

2. His shot during the Fiu game in 2014

3. His public criticism of his successor in 2011. Which, in context of him keeping in contact with the players (and their subsequent admission of them refusing to buy into the new system) leads to his more egregious offense of trying to sabotage Pitt football
Click to expand...


What were the shots during the OSU an FIU games? ESPN was plastering pictures of our fans sleeping in their seats, what did Dave say? What did he say during the FIU game? As far as his predecessor, he should have been criticized - it was a sh*tty hire and Wannstadt got shafted by our toolbox AD at the time. This program needed stability, OEther ... Wannstadt knew they had it, and knew it took recruiting to win --- and Pederson DID NOT, he was the one who sabotaged this university with the way things went down with Wannstadt and the subsequent hire. Wannstadt was the Head Coach and recruited most of the ONLY 10-win team this university has seen in the last 30 years, so I think he knows what it takes to win.
 
passedout said:
What were the shots during the OSU an FIU games? ESPN was plastering pictures of our fans sleeping in their seats, what did Dave say? What did he say during the FIU game? As far as his predecessor, he should have been criticized - it was a sh*tty hire and Wannstadt got shafted by our toolbox AD at the time. This program needed stability, OEther ... Wannstadt knew they had it, and knew it took recruiting to win --- and Pederson DID NOT, he was the one who sabotaged this university with the way things went down with Wannstadt and the subsequent hire. Wannstadt was the Head Coach and recruited most of the ONLY 10-win team this university has seen in the last 30 years, so I think he knows what it takes to win.
Click to expand...
Dave WANNSTEDT
 
  • Like
Reactions: paulbl99
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P

I think Zack Austin has improved beyond belief this season

Replies
11
Views
675
Premium Basketball Forum
TheSpecialSauce
T
Chairman Moe

Takeaways

Replies
10
Views
1K
Football Board
Gunga_Galunga
Gunga_Galunga
DT_PITT

Notre Dame Game & Other Dribbles ...

Replies
18
Views
1K
Basketball Board
Parkview57
Parkview57
W

Pitt vs UNC Friday @7

Replies
57
Views
3K
The Field House
Cranberry Pantherfan
Cranberry Pantherfan
Chris Peak

Recruiting Update Two transfer visitors today

Replies
77
Views
7K
Premium Football Forum
TitoBeagle
T
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back