OT: Pitt football

[HailToPitt725]

In your opinion, what is one good event and one bad event that shaped what Pitt football is today? Can be from any time period. I’ll start,

Good: the recruitment of Tony Dorsett in 1973

Bad: Hiring Foge Fazio instead of Jimmy Johnson to replace Jackie Sherrill in 1982

A few honorable mentions: Hiring Steve Pederson (first time and second), Kenny Pickett returning for 5th year in 2021, and Chancellor John Bowman de-emphasizing football in 1938

What say you?

 

[Las Panteras]

Pat Bostick never panned out. Had he lived up to the billing Wannstedt may have been our Nick Saban.

 

[PITT 76]

Bad: Letting Jackie Sherrill leave in the first place.

Good: winning the ACC championship. The recruit pool appears to be better than normal this year, If we can follow that up with another good season, the future will be bright.

 

[Jakey_John]

“OT: Pitt Football” will never be clever.

 

[LeftCoastPanther]

Great question.

The attitude of the university looking down at athletics were set in motion in 1938 by Bowman, so I’ll say there is the bad.

The good was hiring Majors to get the wheels moving toward a great run for the program. Those days gave the program credibility that lasted for quite some time, even when it was undeserving.

Honorable mention bad: the 1990s. Missed out big here when television was taking over and Gottfried was a good recruiter and the region still produced many good players.

Honorable mention good: Posvar and Nordy both giving football a chance again in 1973 and 1997, respectively. Both though would knock down what they built, bizarrely.

 

[HailToPitt725]

“OT: Pitt Football” will never be clever.

 

[HailToPitt725]

Great question.

The attitude of the university looking down at athletics were set in motion in 1938 by Bowman, so I’ll say there is the bad.

The good was hiring Majors to get the wheels moving toward a great run for the program. Those days gave the program credibility that lasted for quite some time, even when it was undeserving.

Honorable mention bad: the 1990s. Missed out big here when television was taking over and Gottfried was a good recruiter and the region still produced many good players.

Honorable mention good: Posvar and Nordy both giving football a chance again in 1973 and 1997, respectively. Both though would knock down what they built, bizarrely.

Lots of good points, particularly the 1990s. Ironically, this was something they (and the Big East) did take advantage of in basketball. Just happened to be the “wrong” sport.

 

[kma0043]

Bad: 1997 intro of dinocat.
Good: 2015 initial reintro of script Pitt.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

In my lifetime.
Bad - The administration in 1989-90 that hired Hackett and tried to hold back athletics. Not locking up Sherrill and hiring Foge. If we maintained winning at a high level and had a good administration, then we would have started fundraising to update Pitt Stadium at that time before waiting too long.

Good - Hiring Walt and turning around a moribund program. Pickett staying and winning the ACC Championship. The program is in the best shape it has been in since 1982.

 

[RaleighPittFan]

In my lifetime.
Bad - The administration in 1989-90 that hired Hackett and tried to hold back athletics. Not locking up Sherrill and hiring Foge. If we maintained winning at a high level and had a good administration, then we would have started fundraising to update Pitt Stadium at that time before waiting too long.

Good - Hiring Walt and turning around a moribund program. Pickett staying and winning the ACC Championship. The program is in the best shape it has been in since 1982.

Hiring Walt = very good thing

Hamstringing Walt with next to nothing to pay assistant coaches = very bad thing

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

The self-inflicted wounds in the late 80's probably take the cake for the bad thing. But I was on the younger side back then, so I'll stick to more recent events:

Good:

1) Walt Freaking Harris. He took a team that had been winning 3.43 games per year in the 90's and carried us to respectability. In his last five seasons, we averaged 7.8 wins per and had a winning record in each. He created the floor that we have even today. Pitt has never won less than five games in a season since he left. He was completely underappreciated here. Perhaps a victim of his own success.

2) The extra Covid year. Funny how thin the line can be. Narduzzi is the king of the castle right now and probably a lifer here. Take away Kenny Pickett's historic season last year, and there's a very real chance he gets fired after the season. We were 6-5 in 2020, and we simply were not getting over the hump. I'm sure plenty of people will deny it, but the sentiment at that time was not good. Even after the Western Michigan game people were turning/tightening the screws on him. But we had a huge advantage last season in the form of experience.

And then a runner-up here might be the losses to BC and NC State in 2020, because there's a chance Pickett walks away feeling satisfied if we got 8-3 (8-1 with him as a starter) that year. I know he mostly came back to bolster his draft positioning, but you just never know. In that case (8-3), I don't think Narduzzi would have been on the hot seat, but I also don't think we go 11-3 and win the ACC last year.


Bad:

I mean, it has to be firing Wannstedt. Honestly, I don't even think he was that great of a coach. But we needed to look at the big picture: He won 27 games in his final three seasons and was recruiting at a level that was going to keep having a breakout year in the realm of possibilities. Losing to Cincy and Uconn in consecutive seasons when both would have given us the conference sucked. But, like I said, it's all about the bigger picture. And if that SI article had any influence on them, well then shame on the board. I won't pretend to guess how much or how long that set us back. But we averaged 6.7 wins/year in the ten years after Wannstedt was here. I'm willing to be that would be closer to 8.7/year had we kept him.

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

The self-inflicted wounds in the late 80's probably take the cake for the bad thing. But I was on the younger side back then, so I'll stick to more recent events:

Good:

1) Walt Freaking Harris. He took a team that had been winning 3.43 games per year in the 90's and carried us to respectability. In his last five seasons, we averaged 7.8 wins per and had a winning record in each. He created the floor that we have even today. Pitt has never won less than five games in a season since he left. He was completely underappreciated here. Perhaps a victim of his own success.

2) The extra Covid year. Funny how thin the line can be. Narduzzi is the king of the castle right now and probably a lifer here. Take away Kenny Pickett's historic season last year, and there's a very real chance he gets fired after the season. We were 6-5 in 2020, and we simply were not getting over the hump. I'm sure plenty of people will deny it, but the sentiment at that time was not good. Even after the Western Michigan game people were turning/tightening the screws on him. But we had a huge advantage last season in the form of experience.

And then a runner-up here might be the losses to BC and NC State in 2020, because there's a chance Pickett walks away feeling satisfied if we got 8-3 (8-1 with him as a starter) that year. I know he mostly came back to bolster his draft positioning, but you just never know. In that case (8-3), I don't think Narduzzi would have been on the hot seat, but I also don't think we go 11-3 and win the ACC last year.


Bad:

I mean, it has to be firing Wannstedt. Honestly, I don't even think he was that great of a coach. But we needed to look at the big picture: He won 27 games in his final three seasons and was recruiting at a level that was going to keep having a breakout year in the realm of possibilities. Losing to Cincy and Uconn in consecutive seasons when both would have given us the conference sucked. But, like I said, it's all about the bigger picture. And if that SI article had any influence on them, well then shame on the board. I won't pretend to guess how much or how long that set us back. But we averaged 6.7 wins/year in the ten years after Wannstedt was here. I'm willing to be that would be closer to 8.7/year had we kept him.

Good points all. The losses of 2020 that diminished Pickett’s season are a particularly good observation. Pickett wouldn’t have come back of those go differently.

Many here diminish Wannstedt because of petty personal issues with other posters, which is unfortunate. However anyone with half a brain and any integrity has to look back and acknowledge how misguided and abysmally handled all of his final season was, but especially the firing of DW (then letting him rant with the frustrated players in a presser); bad enough judgement, but then having absolutely no intent to improve on him with his replacement. Clearly the administration had everything BUT winning prioritized at that time. Haywood, then Graham and Chryst were really painful stretches that really cast doubt on the competency on Pitt leadership.

It wasn’t the first time and unfortunately wouldn’t be the last (Dixon/Barnes Stallings/Capel), but whether simply good luck, or whatever else needs credited, hiring and then sticking with (and supporting) Narduzzi has finally seen dividends. It has helped redeem Pitt brass to an extent (though basketball is still a disaster).

 

[recruitsreadtheseboards]

Bad. As many have said, not just Sherrill leaving, but you had Jimmy Johnson waiting and wanting the job. We win the Natty in 1982 with him.

Good. I dunno, having guys like Fitz, AD, Revis still matriculate through here on their way to HOF greatness.

 

[HailToPitt725]

The self-inflicted wounds in the late 80's probably take the cake for the bad thing. But I was on the younger side back then, so I'll stick to more recent events:

Good:

1) Walt Freaking Harris. He took a team that had been winning 3.43 games per year in the 90's and carried us to respectability. In his last five seasons, we averaged 7.8 wins per and had a winning record in each. He created the floor that we have even today. Pitt has never won less than five games in a season since he left. He was completely underappreciated here. Perhaps a victim of his own success.

2) The extra Covid year. Funny how thin the line can be. Narduzzi is the king of the castle right now and probably a lifer here. Take away Kenny Pickett's historic season last year, and there's a very real chance he gets fired after the season. We were 6-5 in 2020, and we simply were not getting over the hump. I'm sure plenty of people will deny it, but the sentiment at that time was not good. Even after the Western Michigan game people were turning/tightening the screws on him. But we had a huge advantage last season in the form of experience.

And then a runner-up here might be the losses to BC and NC State in 2020, because there's a chance Pickett walks away feeling satisfied if we got 8-3 (8-1 with him as a starter) that year. I know he mostly came back to bolster his draft positioning, but you just never know. In that case (8-3), I don't think Narduzzi would have been on the hot seat, but I also don't think we go 11-3 and win the ACC last year.


Bad:

I mean, it has to be firing Wannstedt. Honestly, I don't even think he was that great of a coach. But we needed to look at the big picture: He won 27 games in his final three seasons and was recruiting at a level that was going to keep having a breakout year in the realm of possibilities. Losing to Cincy and Uconn in consecutive seasons when both would have given us the conference sucked. But, like I said, it's all about the bigger picture. And if that SI article had any influence on them, well then shame on the board. I won't pretend to guess how much or how long that set us back. But we averaged 6.7 wins/year in the ten years after Wannstedt was here. I'm willing to be that would be closer to 8.7/year had we kept him.

The Wanny years (figuratively) killed me. I wanted him to succeed so bad, and he was *this* close to breaking through and winning the Big East his final three years here. Too bad we couldn’t have gone from him to Narduzzi without the four-year coaching carousel in between.

 

[LeftCoastPanther]

The Wanny years (figuratively) killed me. I wanted him to succeed so bad, and he was *this* close to breaking through and winning the Big East his final three years here. Too bad we couldn’t have gone from him to Narduzzi without the four-year coaching carousel in between.

It should have transitioned from Wanny to Narduzzi, but being smart isn't Pitt's M.O.

Dave was everything the school wanted: cheap pay, cheap staff, slice your recruiting budget and not complain about it, and a Pitt Guy.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

The Wanny years (figuratively) killed me. I wanted him to succeed so bad, and he was *this* close to breaking through and winning the Big East his final three years here. Too bad we couldn’t have gone from him to Narduzzi without the four-year coaching carousel in between.

If Wannstedt had Narduzzi's recruiting and assistant coaches budgets, there's a chance he might even still be here. I don't think Narduzzi was necessarily an obvious upgrade, although I think he is very likely the better coach. But Wannstedt could have masked his coaching flaws with better assistants and players (which isn't to say he didn't recruit well, because he did; but he could have done even better with the recruiting budget we now have).

 

[The Ole Six-Fiver]

It should have transitioned from Wanny to Narduzzi, but being smart isn't Pitt's M.O.

Dave was everything the school wanted: cheap pay, cheap staff, slice your recruiting budget and not complain about it, and a Pitt Guy.

DW had shortcomings for sure, but having him coaching at Pitt was a great story for Pitt football for so many reasons, and Pitt needed to do whatever it could to try to make him successful. But let’s deny reality and say Pitt DID do so and that all of the failings were on DW. If they teach that conclusion that parting ways was absolutely no choice, then given the stakes, they had the obligation to seek nothing less than an assured upgrade to him. (This is true for the Dixon replacement as well).

in both cases they did not, and many, many years of futility have been the result (we’re still suffering through the fallout of their poor intentions for basketball).

Hey, I know admin hates being even involved in revenue sports, it’s “dirty” and “demeaning” (and only getting more so), I get all that. But if you are going to be in it, you have to treat it professionally. You have to accept that football and basketball are one of the top 3 or 4 aspects associated with the university and need the appropriate priority. Failing at them is simply too ugly and costly.

 

[TempleBAPittMPA]

Bad: T-Mobile. Eventually, he got what he had coming to him.