…there certainly was a LOT of low hanging fruit to go around…for the Old Pitt, that is. However, short of actually winning on the field, which they are not able to do until September, if a recruit doesn’t see a multitude of major and tangible changes then they are either not looking or are gullible enough to believe whatever is fed to them.
The “same ole Pitt” was a well-deserved moniker that applied to the old regime, and by old regime I mean Nordenberg and to a lesser and more recent extent, Pederson. The tone at the top is what guides all athletic programs, specifically football, and although Nordenberg did some great things for the university, I believe his intent was to be competitive in all sports and not necessarily to excel. That tone influenced Pederson’s decisions and ultimately the quality of head coaches and staffs that were hired. I know, regardless of who the chancellor was, Pederson made some bonehead moves with hirings and firings as well as other well publicized decisions. But he worked within the parameters set by Nordenberg, namely a tighter budget and competitive, albeit limited results. Those limitation could have been loosened somewhat had Pederson not alienated much of Pitt’s donor base. But, as expected, Pitt achieved mediocre results that served to reinforce the “same old Pitt” moniker that continues to haunt us in recruiting circles today.
I understand that the moniker will stay with Pitt until dispelled on the field but to those current recruits who are able to see the forest from the trees, a considerable amount of evidence is out there to believe that things WILL be different this time. “Same Ole” tags usually only apply when the powers-to-be remain in place and the same strategies, attitudes and decisions are made and the only thing that possibly changes is the cast that carries them out. I believe this no longer applies to Pitt as a complete house cleaning was made from top to bottom. We now have a chancellor who wants every aspect of his university to function at an elite level and who understands that sports (and specifically football) are included in that expectation. And to that point, he has put his money where his mouth is by opening up the purse strings to hire a head coach and staff that would have never been hired under the old regime. He has also shelled out a few million dollars on facilities deemed needed by his brand new coach.
He also hired an AD who believes that athletics is the front porch of a university and a high tide (football) raises all boats. Sure, those were the right words for the new man on the job but with the tone at the top being one of achieving elite status (not just competitive status) and the AD having a track record of attracting the necessary funding to bring in the required resources to carry out Gallagher’s mission, I believe Barnes is the right man for the job.
Then we have Narduzzi and his staff. How many ways can this group of coaches prove to anyone paying attention that they do things differently than the “same ole Pitt” staffs of the past. From the use of social media to the high energy approach to everything they do and the belief that if you are expected to play good you should also look good and feel good. And the quality of this staff and getting the necessary changes done doesn't become a reality unless the tone at the top allows it to happen. I believe this staff has an edge to them that is a direct result of having prior success at this level and from top to bottom I believe we haven’t had a staff of this quality (Wannstedt’s staff arguably is the only one to come close) since the Majors/Sherrill days, which were the “Glory Days of Pitt” rather than the “same ole Pitt.” We may never know exactly what went down with the Butler recruitment but I believe Narduzzi and company used the right amount of firmness and understanding and in the end made the confident decision of a winner. Attitudes in Oakland are changing and the only question is how much evidence do people and recruits need to jump onboard.
So, yes we haven’t won one game under the new leadership yet but we haven’t lost one either. Unfortunately, the recruiting season is in full swing now and the ONLY thing we haven’t been able to prove yet is that the house cleaning will also have an impact on the field. Verbal commitments are being accepted now and short of winning on the field there is an abundance of evidence to show recruits that the negative recruiting shouldn’t apply anymore. I believe we have exceeded all expectations to-date and have passed each opportunity with flying colors. Next opportunity up…September.
The “same ole Pitt” was a well-deserved moniker that applied to the old regime, and by old regime I mean Nordenberg and to a lesser and more recent extent, Pederson. The tone at the top is what guides all athletic programs, specifically football, and although Nordenberg did some great things for the university, I believe his intent was to be competitive in all sports and not necessarily to excel. That tone influenced Pederson’s decisions and ultimately the quality of head coaches and staffs that were hired. I know, regardless of who the chancellor was, Pederson made some bonehead moves with hirings and firings as well as other well publicized decisions. But he worked within the parameters set by Nordenberg, namely a tighter budget and competitive, albeit limited results. Those limitation could have been loosened somewhat had Pederson not alienated much of Pitt’s donor base. But, as expected, Pitt achieved mediocre results that served to reinforce the “same old Pitt” moniker that continues to haunt us in recruiting circles today.
I understand that the moniker will stay with Pitt until dispelled on the field but to those current recruits who are able to see the forest from the trees, a considerable amount of evidence is out there to believe that things WILL be different this time. “Same Ole” tags usually only apply when the powers-to-be remain in place and the same strategies, attitudes and decisions are made and the only thing that possibly changes is the cast that carries them out. I believe this no longer applies to Pitt as a complete house cleaning was made from top to bottom. We now have a chancellor who wants every aspect of his university to function at an elite level and who understands that sports (and specifically football) are included in that expectation. And to that point, he has put his money where his mouth is by opening up the purse strings to hire a head coach and staff that would have never been hired under the old regime. He has also shelled out a few million dollars on facilities deemed needed by his brand new coach.
He also hired an AD who believes that athletics is the front porch of a university and a high tide (football) raises all boats. Sure, those were the right words for the new man on the job but with the tone at the top being one of achieving elite status (not just competitive status) and the AD having a track record of attracting the necessary funding to bring in the required resources to carry out Gallagher’s mission, I believe Barnes is the right man for the job.
Then we have Narduzzi and his staff. How many ways can this group of coaches prove to anyone paying attention that they do things differently than the “same ole Pitt” staffs of the past. From the use of social media to the high energy approach to everything they do and the belief that if you are expected to play good you should also look good and feel good. And the quality of this staff and getting the necessary changes done doesn't become a reality unless the tone at the top allows it to happen. I believe this staff has an edge to them that is a direct result of having prior success at this level and from top to bottom I believe we haven’t had a staff of this quality (Wannstedt’s staff arguably is the only one to come close) since the Majors/Sherrill days, which were the “Glory Days of Pitt” rather than the “same ole Pitt.” We may never know exactly what went down with the Butler recruitment but I believe Narduzzi and company used the right amount of firmness and understanding and in the end made the confident decision of a winner. Attitudes in Oakland are changing and the only question is how much evidence do people and recruits need to jump onboard.
So, yes we haven’t won one game under the new leadership yet but we haven’t lost one either. Unfortunately, the recruiting season is in full swing now and the ONLY thing we haven’t been able to prove yet is that the house cleaning will also have an impact on the field. Verbal commitments are being accepted now and short of winning on the field there is an abundance of evidence to show recruits that the negative recruiting shouldn’t apply anymore. I believe we have exceeded all expectations to-date and have passed each opportunity with flying colors. Next opportunity up…September.
