Is Narduzzi at the press conference?
- Thread starter Pitt Law '04
- Start date
Quote from Narduzzi saying it was great being involved first hand on the hiring and that she is a "coach's ad" that works very hard to meet their needs
He just wanted someone to say no so that he could say narduzzi didn't like the hire and the admin is incompetent.
Hopefully after all those years at tO$U she learned how to cultivate and cover-up the bagmen.
I think it's pretty clear the administration is incompetent whether Narduzzi attended or not.
It would be pretty remarkable if he wasn't there--that's why I asked as I expected him to attend.
It's also pretty remarkable that she never used his name once during her remarks and entire press conference, considering he's without a doubt the most important athletic department employee at Pitt.
In fact, when she was asked about the importance of football, her response was to say that she wanted "comprehensive excellence" for the entire athletic department.
Maybe some of these Chicken Littles on here will shut up and give her a chance.
As long as she schedules D1AA and MAC teams OOC for every Pitt FB game, Pitt Law 04 will be happy.
So you believe that the new AD should have singled out Coach Narduzzi and ignored the other coaches under her?
As for her comment regarding the importance of football, I think she gave a totally appropriate response given her overall responsibilities.
Absolutely. She was asked specific questions by reporters about the football program and no other sport. She should have addressed Narduzzi in particular because he's the most important coach.
As to your second point, you're entitled to your opinion. I disagree.
This entire post is bullshit.... didn't mention his name? So? ....comprehensive excellence? So? ...I see no problem with either thing you posted for a new hire AD? ..... none... I do see typical Pitt fan bitching with a side of possible misogyny thrown in....
And what's the basis for the claim of misogyny? What did I say in the post about her being a woman or women in general?
Calling someone a bigot is a convenient way to shut down debate and avoids having to deal with the hire on the merits. Don't agree with me or can't defend the hire? Just call me a misogynist or a sexist.
It's a neat little trick, but I'm not fooled. If I attacked her for her sex, then I guess you could make the allegation. But I didn't. You're just name calling.
I said possible right? .....
This board has gotten so bad with negativity and most fail to even realize it.
So what discussion was shut down? The new AD not mentioning Narduzzi by name? LOL.... comprehensive excellence? I'm sorry but I can't find a point there worth debating.... it's absurd complaining...
This board has gotten so bad with negativity and most fail to even realize it.
So what discussion was shut down? The new AD not mentioning Narduzzi by name? LOL.... comprehensive excellence? I'm sorry but I can't find a point there worth debating.... it's absurd complaining...
Is that your way of making an accusation without having to really own it? Just say "possible"?
I'm just waiting for you to make an actual point worth debating.... Ofer so far though....
Your AD rants over the past day have to be somewhere in the PantherLair's Top 25 "Hysterical Tantrum" list. You are taking on all comers, I've got to hand it to you - its entertaining, but jeeeeeeeze.
No that's the subject actually and was the vast majority of my original post... you've decided to harp on one word... ? I'm not running and you haven't substantiated what was wrong with the new ADs remarks... I thought you don't like unsubstantiated platitudes?
It actually passed his Pitt football scheduling tantrum.
He is entertaining to a certain point, but may be going on ignore.
It's approaching SMF's hysterical rants about Pitt being left out of the major conferences and left for dead.
Here's the reality- if she came directly from tO$U he would be complaining about her not having "executive" experience on the resume.
Here's the reality- if she came directly from tO$U he would be complaining about her not having "executive" experience on the resume.
So it had to be a unanimous vote to hire her? It's not possible for him to consistently against her in discussions, but the others to be heavily in her favor?
Not saying he was or wasn't against her, but I highly doubt every member of the selection committee is thrilled with her hiring.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Womens team will be one and done today..how long do we- Latest: LeftCoastPanther
-
-
