I don’t think the buyout is the limitation. If it was the easy solution would be to hire an OC (Brennan Marion for example) make him coach in waiting have him report to the athletic department not Narduzzi. Narduzzi would definitely look for a new role or retire then.
I think Pitt leadership still wants Narduzzi
- Thread starter Purdue_Panther
- Start date
I’m sorry… what???? No HC in America under 70 is working under those terms
Another dumb thread in a long list of dumb threads! Not sure if you guys have access to the internet but check our record out over the last 40 years and then search the last couple of years. There is no way we are firing Coach Duzz unless we do not win 7 games next year. Spend your time thinking about OTHER things!
Of course they still want him. You think they are going to do a buyout and take money away from volleyball , soccer, wrestling , etc? This is one of the cheapest Athletic Dept in the country and they don't prioritize football at all. What has the Athletic Dept. done since 1983 to suggest they care about football? I can name a bunch of things to show they do not care across multiple administrations.
They just want a team good enough to get ACC money that does not embarrass the University with arrest/discipline issues. Everything better then that is luck/stars aligning.
They just want a team good enough to get ACC money that does not embarrass the University with arrest/discipline issues. Everything better then that is luck/stars aligning.
Narduzzi gave them an ACC Championship with mostly damn good players that were under the radar and didn't have a boatload of blood bloods recruiting them.
They are probably either too cheap to buy him out, or to cheap and backwards in their thinking to realize that's probably the last ACC Championship they will sniff without paying big bucks for it. (At least the conference inits current form)
The stars are aligned for Louisville. Cards better take advantage of it.
FWIW, Coach in waiting is the dumbest idea on the planet. No coach is going to "wait" to get a $4 or $5 million increase in salary.
The dumbest idea on the planet is having an offensive coordinator that answers to the athletic department and not the head coach.
Well, we're probably not going to win 7 games next year so that'll likely be put to the test. I still don't see Pitt coming up with the second-largest buyout in college football history.
Reality is 8 wins is a good season for most programs outside the blue bloods, which we aren’t, with an occasional 9-11 win season and not bottoming out for more than a season or two.
Has nothing to do with the eggheads.
Using your 8 win (61.5%) standard, since 2010 Pitt has had 6 out of 14 seasons with 8 wins or better. Let's look at some of our rivals and other similarly built schools.
Arizona ST- 5 out of 14
Arkansas- 4 out of 14
Baylor- 7 out of 14
Boston College- 0 out of 14
Cincinnati- 9 out of 14 Non-P5 schedule but still.
Duke- 5 out of 14
GT- 3 out of 14
Iowa- 7 out of 14
Kansas St- 10 out of 14
Kentucky- 3 out of 14
Louisville- 9 out of 14
Maryland- 2 out of 14
Mich St- 7 out of 14
Minnesota- 6 out of 14
North Carolina- 7 out of 14
NC St- 9 out of 14
Northwestern- 4 out of 14
Oklahoma St- 11 out of 14
Purdue- 2 out of 14
Stanford- 9 out of 14
Syracuse- 3 out of 14
TCU- 6 out of 14
Texas Tech- 4 out of 14
UCLA- 6 out of 14
Virginia- 3 out of 14
VT- 6 out of 14
Wash St- 4 out of 14
WVU- 6 out of 14
Wisconsin- 11 out of 14
11 teams were better than Pitt. 5 were even with Pitt. Finally 12 were worse than Pitt. So what you say does hold water. With that said, I would say out of this list, only GT and Stanford were like Pitt in the sense they were right there with the blue bloods back in the day but they did not seize the opportunity in front of them and they are sitting on the outside look in just like Pitt. Also this shows how bad the ACC teams are with how few of them have many 8 win or better seasons. I did not add Miami since they flirt with blue blood status, but they have not had many 8 win or better seasons as of late either. The ACC really is not a good conference for football.
I would say that Pitt, GT, and Stanford being able to do that with the lack of resources we have and apathetic college football culture compared to the BIG and SEC schools (hell, even Big XII schools), it was amazing we were able to sustain high level success for a few years.
Pitt does pretty well overall since the 2000s with it's peer schools, especially since we have one of the lowest donation/ticket support in the P5.
And based on the apathy it seems to be out there to even donate to Alliance412, even minimal amounts, that is going to be another roadblock Pitt has against other schools in the future. NIL can't be blamed on the university.
Pitt does pretty well overall since the 2000s with it's peer schools, especially since we have one of the lowest donation/ticket support in the P5.
And based on the apathy it seems to be out there to even donate to Alliance412, even minimal amounts, that is going to be another roadblock Pitt has against other schools in the future. NIL can't be blamed on the university.
I think you misunderstood my comments in regard to Pitt/GT/Standford. All 3 could very much be blue bloods today with blue blood resources if they didn't screw the pooch back in the day.
Alliance412 has almost raised enough money to match Georgia's offer for Bart!!!
So depressing.
That's your opinion and we just disagree. We will never know what could have been, but we know that all 3 screwed up and are the status that they are now.
That's fine. I think all 3 hit a their turn for the flash in the pan for non bluebloods, but just looking at their support, the pro mentality culture of the fanbase, etc, it would never be sustainable long term.
Pitt stadium only had like 40K back in it's heyday, and our fanbase, outside of some diehards, are notoriously cheap and fairweather. And when the program dropped off after it's first year in the early 80s, everyone jumped ship rather quickly. I mean, even look at today. We had our two best seasons in over 40 years, after some relatively decent football for the previous 7, and everyone is jumping ship and losing their shit after one bad year. Same happened with our basketball program after 14 years of sustained success. Same will happen to our volleyball, soccer, etc when they start to dip.
I see you continue to blame Pitt admin for being cheap in all your posts, including when it is regarding NIL, which shows you are out of touch with reality. NIL is all donor based and is illegal to be run by the school in PA. And Pitt has been spending more on football than every other ACC school outside of Miami, FSU and Clemson, with far less funds.
I said on here a few weeks ago, I've pretty much stopped arguing with people like you when in 2021, during one of the best seasons in 40 years, fans were complaining about $40 tickets for the Clemson game. That is when it truly hit that Pitt will never get over that roadblock. And now seeing people complain about having to donate to NIL, when other school donors are going all in, it just reenforces that.
It is what it is and will never change.
Plus knowing that Pitt also has limited other avenues (ie. companies, rich fans willing to match competing offers) compared to most other schools, you do have to ask if you are throwing good money at bad money! It is great to be a fan and have faith, but at some point, you have to ask, "what is the point of spending it this way?" It is not like giving charity money to an athletic department for a noble cause like improving the weight room or locker room.
It is literally giving money to hire a mercenary, nothing more nothing less. You can pretend that it is still charity but you are only lying to yourself. That is what college sports has gotten too. All these educated, above it all peace, love, and understanding Do-Gooders are hiring mercs left and right now. And if that merc does not perform, they look for the next hired gun to take their place. From one extreme to the next is what the college sports is now.
Lets say I want to change my charity giving and donate it all towards Pitt and the NIL. That would be around $10,500 a year. What does that buy? Absolutely nothing. How does that improve society, giving it to some jagoff because they are good at running a ball, catching a ball, throwing a ball, blocking or tackling? It doesn't. Not at all.
My charity money is much better directed to the causes I support now, than giving to NIL at Pitt or any school for that matter. BTW I was not one complaining about Clemson ticket price. I complain because with Pitt it is always 1 step forward, 2 steps back.
Yeah, $10,500 doesn't do jack in NIL.
If the coach doesn't have a donor on speed dial that can fork over $500K on a day notice, he's screwed
And that is fine if that is where you want to give your money. It's your money. I just think then you always bitching Pitt is cheap, college athletics is hiring mercenaries and it's throwing good money at bad money, and then expecting Pitt to compete with the schools that have donors that do that on a regular basis doesn't make sense to me. Which is the issue with Pitt. They have too many fans like you that want a 4 star meal yet pay McDonalds price.
If it was just a donor or even 3-4, it would be 1 thing. Pitt and other schools like it could compete. But the blue bloods have like 30 donors and millions giving anywhere from $100-5000 now that does add up when there is so many. What does Pitt have giving those small amounts? 10-20K? Doesn't move the needle.
No! There was a time when it was cheap to do business, and Pitt chose not to (not the actual school, but the bagmen schools have). Again, Robert Foster went to Bama for a $30,000 car. If it was still that cheap, my money would actually mean something even if it was only $500 of my $10,500. 60 more people at $500 bought you a 4 star player for 4 years. But the cost today for a Rober Foster level recruit is $200K every year. My money even if it is the whole $10,500 means nothing even though you would need 19 people to match that.
Last edited:
I think they went to 12 games in 06?
Since then Pitt has had 5 yrs regular season at least 8-4.
That's 12 yrs 7-5 or worse.
Those years basically sucked as a fan and that bar too low.
And some of those at least had smaller conf or divisions to theoretically play for something.
That's even all gone now.
Since then Pitt has had 5 yrs regular season at least 8-4.
That's 12 yrs 7-5 or worse.
Those years basically sucked as a fan and that bar too low.
And some of those at least had smaller conf or divisions to theoretically play for something.
That's even all gone now.
I agree we are never going to compete with the Bamas, tOSUs of the world, but then if the mindset is, "well screw it, I'm not donating", then we aren't even going to compete with the Minnesotas, WVUs, Indiana's, ASUs of the world either. Every little bit helps, and those donors at those schools seem to get that. We don't. But those people sure like to complain a lot while giving nothing.
I don't think I made my point, the 8 wins is not the issue. The issue is the eggheads don't really care about the wins. The contract extensions HL gave were bad business, so they are stuck with her bad decision and want the whole thing to turn out in some nice way. Firing the Coach that your popular (yet foolish on some major decisions) is not turning out in a nice way.
I mean, the guy was pretty successful and brought stability over his first 8 years. Won us our first conference outright conference championship and back to back top 25 finishes for the first time in 40 years, you have to extend him. Or we are starting over.
I don't think anyone would get fired for one bad season after what he brought to Pitt his first 8 years. Good luck bringing in someone if you do well for 8 years adn have a bad season, you are gone. Look at our buddy David Tepper down in Carolina on the NFL side, or the Browns and Raiders that just continue to cycle through coaches at the first sign of trouble. It really doesn't help.
Agreed. I am not down on HC PN, (Cignetti bad news from the start, IMO). The OP speaks of the issue , that is "Leadership wants Narduzzi", I was just saying the reason has little to do with wins..... the AD did make a bad business decision with the too long extension....
It has everything to do with the Pitt eggheads who want a nice little football program filled with good eggs. Eight wins gets you fired at Texas A&M, Florida, LSU and a number of other Power 5 programs. Pitt claims to be a Power 5 program at last look.
Pitt IS a Power 5 program as long as they belong to a Power 5 conference. No claims required.
I'm glad that the eggheads want a clean program. Alums that are Pitt fans do, too.
When Pitt has donors step up to cover $76m coaching buyouts and put $30m in an NIL fund, you can drop Texas A&M as a comparison. Otherwise, quit talking stupid
Similar threads
