Players leave home at 15 or 16. You don't need a recruiting territory. So so sick of this excuse
WVU
TT
Gonzaga
LSU
Creighton
Iowa
etc
Is it fixable?
- Thread starter thebadby2
- Start date
Players leave home at 15 or 16. You don't need a recruiting territory. So so sick of this excuse
WVU
TT
Gonzaga
LSU
Creighton
Iowa
etc
yes, but the longer it leaks and erodes the more expensive it is and the harder its going to be (if).
It's been leaking since end of Jamie.
It's been leaking since end of Jamie.
Good thoughts and generally agree with this. The thing with doing it that way (primarily transfers) will be continuity and sustainability. The HC will need be prepared to be on the constant lookout for the right players because that approach may well impact high school recruiting. And the Portal can limit a player’s development time: not all guys are willing to wait their turn now. But roster turnover beats losing.
IMO, things have changed. Programs have to do what they must to stay competitive and win. The top HS blue chippers are looking to go pro fast anyways. And if they don't get the play and stats they expected where they sign out of HS, they can go in the Portal. The solution can certainly be to get players who are more ready to play immediately - and have proven it in college - through the Portal.
So find a way to get it done. Guys are going to come and go. But in hoops, the right 2 or 3 guys added in any given year can make a HUGE positive difference. There are always going to be good ones available out there. But you have to have a HC and a staff that can find them and GET THEM.
Now, can THIS HC and staff do it at Pitt, and do it quickly? No indications yet that they can. How much more time will Pitt give them? 🤷♂️ Because it’s been so long since Pitt has been decent, it’s difficult to believe the current regime gets much - if any - more? So we’ll see.
Last edited:
Great point.
As much as I liked HCJC at his hire, his staff was underwhelming.
Howland had JD.
Evans had Cal.
Agree, a lot of head scratching when Pitt recruits opted for other programs that didn’t seem to have any connection whatsoever. Given better recruitment I still don’t see the on-court in-game coaching from this staff - unless these players just aren’t listening.
When you play teams with better players they tend to make you look bad and sloppy.
Mostly cause he can’t coach either and either can his 3 other head coaches on staff.
He had his shot. Time to move on.
They had me back on the bus after a few close games and a couple wins but it needs to be over.
He is a great guy and a great rep for the program as an ambassador but he is a terrible coach and that is his #1 job.
Not in disagreement with you , just not convinced Pitt really wants to win enough to incur the costs .
Whomever is the coach here needs to find a formula to attract better players .
I believe Pitt is paying their FB and MBB HC’s and staffs very competitively. So they’re already incurring the costs. But right now in MBB, they aren't getting the required ROI in hoops. They need to get that fixed. There are lots of options.
The answer to your question has many dependencies. First and foremost; what is considered "fixed"? If your definition of fixed is that we're competitive (mostly) in the ACC and we make the tournament most years, then I would say it's fixable. If your definition of "fixed" is that Pitt will challenge for the ACC title and a high seed in the tournament, I'm going with no. All that said, what are the positives and negatives that Pitt has going right now? Also, there one huge unknown.
On the positive side, basketaball is one sport that a few great players can turn things around quickly. In addition, the portal now makes some decent and experienced players available which also could help a quick turnaround. Pitt has a first class facility that should be attractive to recruits. Also, Pitt being a city school should be attractive, since many recruits don't want to spend 3-4 years in a cow pasture. Thirdly, Pitt plays in a historically strong league which is appealing to top recruits (and coaches). Pitt has shown some level of willingness to pay reasonably well for coaches (it's not a stretch to say that Pitt is grossly overpaying for Capel given the performance). Finally, Pitt can clearly offer huge playing time to anyone who can fog a mirror.
On the negative side; the current team is a complete train wreck with virtually no talent. Who wants to play with other guys who stink? We've now hired two consecutive coaches who failed miserably. What up-and-coming coach would be willing to jeopardize their reputation on a reach? We're also on the hook for millions of dollars in contract commitments to Capel which will reduce the amount we have to spend on a new coach. We have a fan base that has been completely turned off for several years. While the ACC is an attractive league to play in, it's also not easy to climb the ladder in this league. Finally, the portal is a two edged sword....you can pick up some good players, but you can also lose significant chunks of your roster at any time.
For me, the big unknown is the long-term impact of NIL. More to the point, how will Pitt react to NIL and will they be willing and able to play the game?
My bottom line (I think) is that we can get the program turned around, but it's going to take a lot of vision, hard work, and some luck to get things moving in the right direction. It certainly isn't going to happen under Capel.
Cruzer
WCC and Missouri Valley are in the same group as A-10, AAC and the Mountain West.
That’s the issue can they or do they want to pay two HCs in bb . JC is under contract till 27 .
Yep. And first they have to decide if HCJC is capable of meeting their expectations in terms of performance. Their decision may not coincide with any of ours.
If they do believe that he is capable - based on whatever the criteria they use to make that decision - then they’ll keep him. (My own thoughts are that they’re leaning towards giving him1 more year).
If they believe they have to make a change, they need to make a business decision. Nobody is obligated to continue with a bad deal. There will be costs associated with early termination. Pitt would have to determine if they are worth it.
I don't think it would be that hard to win here. Just really need a coach who can coach and wants to still coach, our last 3 coaches all had their issues in my opinion :
Jamie had issues with support and the AD that are well documented.
Stallings -- got his golden parachute from Barnes
Capel -- thought this was Duke North since he was here and recruits would just flock here because of him and when they didn't -- he couldn't' coach the talent he had and here we sit.
We haven't had a coach who was hungry to be a big winner and properly supported by the AD in a long time - Howland / Dixon were the last hungry coaches.
Now we have support like never before and need the hungry coach and we can win again.
I would say the hallmark of the program under Capel has been instability. There is no foundation for anything, no identity at all, and it’s been a re-shuffled deck of cards each year. In short, he hasn’t built anything.
You could make that argument. But when BYU leaves, the WCC goes back to being just Gonzaga, SMC and 8 mid-majors. I don't think any WCC team has made the NCAAT besides those 2 + BYU in the last 20 years.
Definitely not. He was the smartest hire Pitt could have made. He was Howland II and continued what Howland started. The last thing the team needed at the time was a new coaching style and philosophy. Howland/Dixon ball put Pitt basketball back on the map.
I remember San Diego making it one year about a decade ago and upsetting UCONN, but don’t recall the circumstances about how they made the tourney. Obviously, Gonzaga must have been knocked off in the WCC tourney. Your point is valid though.
I’m sure publicly they’ll say they want to seriously compete with the big boys in the conference, but I’m sure they’d be ecstatic with anything close to .500 and a half filled Pete .
I thought that was longer ago but SD made in 2003 and 2008 but that's it in the last 20 years.
We’ll ultimately have to wait and see what the results are. You may be right about what they’d be satisfied with in MBB.
But the MBBHC is being paid a LOT of $$$$ if their expectations are that meager. I always try to pay more attention to tangible things like that than I do any comments. See linked article. If that’s what Pitt is paying their MBBHC, they are WAY overpaying compared to results.
https://www.dukebasketballreport.co...y-bennett-jim-boeheim-mike-young-josh-pastner
Barnes really did a lot of damage in a short time here. He did about as much damage to MBB as Ed Bozik did to the FB program. When a program is driven off the rails, it can be very hard to get it back on. It can take a lot more than just spending $$$$ to get the right HC’s in charge.
Whatever Pitt decides to do right now w/r/t the MBB program, they really need it to be the right one. It has been left to go downhill far too long.
Their fan base , what’s left of it , is aging and they are alienating the future STH , they need to turn this around soon .
They do. Agree. Doesn’t make sense to be paying the MBBHC the 5th highest salary in the ACC (23rd highest in D-1 per the article linked above), just slightly below what Bennett is making at UVA, for the results they’re getting.
That’s a BAD business decision currently. But it also tells me Pitt is NOT operating on the cheap.
If we became a consistent 10-12 win conference team along with a 11-2 10-3 OOC team -- that is the recipe for NCAAT bids 4/5 years -- the Pete would be packed again.
It was 25% empty for conference gamez during Dixon II and 50% to 75% empyy for Nov/Dec cupcakes.
The Pete will ONLY be packed if we have an extreme winning period like the Howland/Dixon I era. The arena is too big. We should have ripped it down, built a football stadium and an 8K seat arena somewhere else. Texas's new arena is going to sit 8K. College basketball isnt a big draw anymore
Bringing in a new, competent, decent head coach AND STAFF is just the start. The culture has to change. It started getting bad under Stallings and has gotten progressively worse under Capel. If it doesn't change in the next few months, a lot of the fanbase will be gone and tune this whole debacle out. Lyke has to take notice of that.
Yeah if Capel only wins 1-2 games the rest of the way and stays it will speak volumes about what the university thinks of mens basketball.
The fan base IS gone. I counted less than 1000 fans for the UMBC game. I was at Louisville and didn't count but there definitely weren't more than 3000 and probably not over 2000. It literally can't get worse than that. We cant draw negative fans.
For the next few yrs they’d be close to the highest if you count in JC salary and hire anyone of note .
So the only thing positive you agree with is Capel staying ?
They are still selling 7800 tickets per game right now. If the team was worth watching people would actually use those and you would have an active walk up crowd too and get 8-10k for every conference game and sell outs for Duke / UNC
We need to hire a good coach, get the Zoo excited again, lower season ticket prices to get people enticed to buy, and then most importantly win games. If we do these things, then in 2-3 years we will get 6-9k for non conference games, and 9-12 for conference games. It’s been done before and will happen again if the right hire is made.
I'm still part of the fanbase and I'm still here. I may regret it, but I'm still a fan.
If Capel and this team can only win 1 or 2 more ACC games the rest of the year, and that has a high probability of happening, I wouldn't be surprised to see 500 - 800 at the last couple of home games. So it can get worse.
You can't blame that on the fans. We all know who is responsible for that erosion of the fanbase.
Definitely LOWER season's ticket prices. For the product being put on the floor, they are way out of line. I know it conceivably decreases revenue, but putting more fans in the seats increases it. And you don't pay these prices for a piss poor product.
Do you really believe that over 6800 of those people just buy those tickets and stay home ! ( zoo excluded and those seats are unfilled )
For years I have said they need to reprice everything and start at bargain basement pricing. $150/season (no donation) for upper season tickets. $300 for lower non-clubs.
Yes I have tried to fill a bunch of seats with free tickets from my company and no one is interested.
Maybe there is some fluff (10%) in those #s but you have a lot of alumni and companies who will keep there tickets through thick and thin but won’t go when the product is bad.
