Pitt's place in the bball world

[UPitt129]

I hear a lot on here that Jamie didn't do enough lf get to the next level, and that the last 5 years are unacceptable.

Objectively though, let's look around the country. You have the true blue bloods. Duke, UNC, Kansas, kentucky, michigan state, uconn and Syracuse. The first 5 I mentioned almost never have true down periods, and are generally in consideration for top 5 seeds every year, or if they aren't still make deep runs. Uconn has been more up and down lately but still made deep runs and win as lower seeds. Cuse also has been up and down as well but is mainly consistent.

Then you have really everyone else. There are very consistent programs like Wisconsin, Xavier, gonzaga, and butler, who are always there, make runs at times, butler in particular, but are mostly known for their consistency.

Then you really have everyone else. You have programs that rise up and have great runs. Virginia right now. Pitt did it for ten years. Florida did it but fell back.villanova, Maryland, Michigan, osu are good examples also.

Now some of those teams had deep postseason success and won titles, but the point is they also all had Down periods, and some that lasted extended timeframes.

The point is, to expect pitt to essentially add itself as a blue blood is unrealistic. Pitt should aim to get back to the Wisconsin/gonzaga level, but even that is not easy to do.

The point is, what seems to be the expectation at pitt isn't as easy as it is made out to be.

 

[Cap pitt]

I hear a lot on here that Jamie didn't do enough lf get to the next level, and that the last 5 years are unacceptable.

Objectively though, let's look around the country. You have the true blue bloods. Duke, UNC, Kansas, kentucky, michigan state, uconn and Syracuse. The first 5 I mentioned almost never have true down periods, and are generally in consideration for top 5 seeds every year, or if they aren't still make deep runs. Uconn has been more up and down lately but still made deep runs and win as lower seeds. Cuse also has been up and down as well but is mainly consistent.

Then you have really everyone else. There are very consistent programs like Wisconsin, Xavier, gonzaga, and butler, who are always there, make runs at times, butler in particular, but are mostly known for their consistency.

Then you really have everyone else. You have programs that rise up and have great runs. Virginia right now. Pitt did it for ten years. Florida did it but fell back.villanova, Maryland, Michigan, osu are good examples also.

Now some of those teams had deep postseason success and won titles, but the point is they also all had Down periods, and some that lasted extended timeframes.

The point is, to expect pitt to essentially add itself as a blue blood is unrealistic. Pitt should aim to get back to the Wisconsin/gonzaga level, but even that is not easy to do.

The point is, what seems to be the expectation at pitt isn't as easy as it is made out to be.

You aim to low and think small

 

[PittPoker]

I hear a lot on here that Jamie didn't do enough lf get to the next level, and that the last 5 years are unacceptable.

Objectively though, let's look around the country. You have the true blue bloods. Duke, UNC, Kansas, kentucky, michigan state, uconn and Syracuse. The first 5 I mentioned almost never have true down periods, and are generally in consideration for top 5 seeds every year, or if they aren't still make deep runs. Uconn has been more up and down lately but still made deep runs and win as lower seeds. Cuse also has been up and down as well but is mainly consistent.

Then you have really everyone else. There are very consistent programs like Wisconsin, Xavier, gonzaga, and butler, who are always there, make runs at times, butler in particular, but are mostly known for their consistency.

Then you really have everyone else. You have programs that rise up and have great runs. Virginia right now. Pitt did it for ten years. Florida did it but fell back.villanova, Maryland, Michigan, osu are good examples also.

Now some of those teams had deep postseason success and won titles, but the point is they also all had Down periods, and some that lasted extended timeframes.

The point is, to expect pitt to essentially add itself as a blue blood is unrealistic. Pitt should aim to get back to the Wisconsin/gonzaga level, but even that is not easy to do.

The point is, what seems to be the expectation at pitt isn't as easy as it is made out to be.

How do I dislike a post?

 

[UPitt129]

How do I dislike a post?

Instead of doing that, why don't you tell us what your true expectations for the program are. No hyperbole, what are your set goals?

 

[Cavalier Panther]

This is the cold hard truth that no one seems to understand. We all want the best for Pitt and the team, but constantly sacrificing the good to pursue the perfect will get us nowhere. We are not Duke or Kansas, it will take decades of success for us to get to that level. And other programs are trying to do the same thing, like Cinci and Maryland. What separates us from those programs? Why are we destined for more success than them?

 

[UPitt129]

This is the cold hard truth that no one seems to understand. We all want the best for Pitt and the team, but constantly sacrificing the good to pursue the perfect will get us nowhere. We are not Duke or Kansas, it will take decades of success for us to get to that level. And other programs are trying to do the same thing, like Cinci and Maryland. What separates us from those programs? Why are we destined for more success than them?

Yep. Poker came in with a flippant response...I asked him to define his idea of a succcessful program, and he doesn't of course.

Most people won't, because in the end they know it is ridiculous to expect Pitt to make the tourney every year, and be a final four contender every 3 years.

 

[Cavalier Panther]

Right, making the tourney every year is not a given. Making the tourney 4 years out of 5 is great success. Even Kentucky and UNC miss it once, maybe twice a decade. It's very hard for a program to do that and missing it for even two years in a row is not the end of the world.

The basketball Gods owe us nothing, the world will keep turning if Pitt misses the tournament. Hell, in football, Notre Dame had a decade of mediocrity and Michigan was flat out bad for a few years. Those are programs far more established in their sport than Pitt is in basketball. No reasonable person thinks we MUST succeed where they failed.

This is all about setting expectations at a reasonable level. I agree we should look to maintain our previous success and be a consistent conference presence with deep NCAA tournament runs. But demanding 25+ wins a year and multiple Elite 8 trips is too much, and chasing a coach who can deliver that year in and year out is going to lead to massive turnover and instability.

 

[PITT92DOG]

Cap and poker typical nothing post and showing their immaturity and small mindedness.

 

[Cap pitt]

Cap and poker typical nothing post and showing their immaturity and small mindedness.

Why? Because I don't agree with you

Cap and poker typical nothing post and showing their immaturity and small mindedness.

why? Because I don't agree with you and your basketball expertise, your posts are mindless

 

[Cap pitt]

Right, making the tourney every year is not a given. Making the tourney 4 years out of 5 is great success. Even Kentucky and UNC miss it once, maybe twice a decade. It's very hard for a program to do that and missing it for even two years in a row is not the end of the world.

The basketball Gods owe us nothing, the world will keep turning if Pitt misses the tournament. Hell, in football, Notre Dame had a decade of mediocrity and Michigan was flat out bad for a few years. Those are programs far more established in their sport than Pitt is in basketball. No reasonable person thinks we MUST succeed where they failed.

This is all about setting expectations at a reasonable level. I agree we should look to maintain our previous success and be a consistent conference presence with deep NCAA tournament runs. But demanding 25+ wins a year and multiple Elite 8 trips is too much, and chasing a coach who can deliver that year in and year out is going to lead to massive turnover and instability.

You bring up Kentucky and UNC not making tourney every year, and that's fine, but they have been in several final 4s and won national championships, what's your next argument?

 

[Piranha]

Yep. Poker came in with a flippant response...I asked him to define his idea of a succcessful program, and he doesn't of course.

Most people won't, because in the end they know it is ridiculous to expect Pitt to make the tourney every year, and be a final four contender every 3 years.

Top 20 program, Make a legit run at the Final 4 once every 5 years. Along the lines of where we were from 2002-2010. Where Wisky, Nova are right now.

 

[pittman71]

Right, making the tourney every year is not a given. Making the tourney 4 years out of 5 is great success. Even Kentucky and UNC miss it once, maybe twice a decade. It's very hard for a program to do that and missing it for even two years in a row is not the end of the world.

The basketball Gods owe us nothing, the world will keep turning if Pitt misses the tournament. Hell, in football, Notre Dame had a decade of mediocrity and Michigan was flat out bad for a few years. Those are programs far more established in their sport than Pitt is in basketball. No reasonable person thinks we MUST succeed where they failed.

This is all about setting expectations at a reasonable level. I agree we should look to maintain our previous success and be a consistent conference presence with deep NCAA tournament runs. But demanding 25+ wins a year and multiple Elite 8 trips is too much, and chasing a coach who can deliver that year in and year out is going to lead to massive turnover and instability.

Notre Dame and Michigan made coaching changes too.

Is it a fact that Pitt has won just two NCAA tournament games the last 6 seasons? I am legitimately asking, I know they won a game in 2011 before the Butler loss, and then they beat Colorado a few years ago.

Any other wins?

 

[UPitt129]

Top 20 program, Make a legit run at the Final 4 once every 5 years. Along the lines of where we were from 2002-2010. Where Wisky, Nova are right now.

And you would fire any coach that doesn't accomplish that?

 

[QuitCallingMeWanny]

Instead of doing that, why don't you tell us what your true expectations for the program are. No hyperbole, what are your set goals?

it's obvious, random dunks by Sam Young with no bearing on the actual game

 

[Cavalier Panther]

And you would fire any coach that doesn't accomplish that?

I agree, there' s few coaches who can accomplish this especially at schools that aren't traditional basketball powers.

You bring up Kentucky and UNC not making tourney every year, and that's fine, but they have been in several final 4s and won national championships, what's your next argument?

That's a fair point, their high end has been much higher. The difference for me is these are blue blood programs in places where basketball is king. Michael Jordan played at UNC, Kentucky has had unparalleled success for decades. We are not at that level, we need to build to get there. I think Pitt can become a destination and consistent performer, but if we insist on skipping 50 years of reputation-building we're going to flounder.

Notre Dame and Michigan made coaching changes too.

Is it a fact that Pitt has won just two NCAA tournament games the last 6 seasons? I am legitimately asking, I know they won a game in 2011 before the Butler loss, and then they beat Colorado a few years ago.

Any other wins?

Um, the CBI? Seriously, our tournament run has been bad. The team has been middling. I attribute most of this to our 2011-2012 recruiting classes where we tried to build on our success and it went sideways on us. We had some 5 stars - Khem, Dante Taylor, Adams. One left, one was a solid contributor but never a star, the other plays significant minutes for an NBA title contender. We are still recovering from missing out on the top end guys and the middle tier guys like John Johnson.

But, I think our team is looking better now and don't expect the same amount of turnover. I think Jamie put us in the hole and is now digging us out with guys like Ryan and Cam, who look to be 3-stars that flew under the radar. Firing Dixon destabilizes us again and could lead to more roster turnover. I know UM and ND did it through coaching changes, I don't think that's our path to success.

 

[thebadby2]

Notre Dame and Michigan made coaching changes too.

Is it a fact that Pitt has won just two NCAA tournament games the last 6 seasons? I am legitimately asking, I know they won a game in 2011 before the Butler loss, and then they beat Colorado a few years ago.

Any other wins?

Coaching changes are great--as long as you hire a better coach than the one you let go. Not always easy to do.

That;s where Michigan and ND foundered in football for a few years there. In both of those cases, until the most recent hires, they were not getting their first, second or even third choices for the job.

If you're going to let go of a coach, you need to do it on the right terms--with the deal for the right replacement all but done before you pull the cord on the existing guy.

 

[thebadby2]

I agree, there' s few coaches who can accomplish this especially at schools that aren't traditional basketball powers.



That's a fair point, their high end has been much higher. The difference for me is these are blue blood programs in places where basketball is king. Michael Jordan played at UNC, Kentucky has had unparalleled success for decades. We are not at that level, we need to build to get there. I think Pitt can become a destination and consistent performer, but if we insist on skipping 50 years of reputation-building we're going to flounder.



Um, the CBI? Seriously, our tournament run has been bad. The team has been middling. I attribute most of this to our 2011-2012 recruiting classes where we tried to build on our success and it went sideways on us. We had some 5 stars - Khem, Dante Taylor, Adams. One left, one was a solid contributor but never a star, the other plays significant minutes for an NBA title contender. We are still recovering from missing out on the top end guys and the middle tier guys like John Johnson.

But, I think our team is looking better now and don't expect the same amount of turnover. I think Jamie put us in the hole and is now digging us out with guys like Ryan and Cam, who look to be 3-stars that flew under the radar. Firing Dixon destabilizes us again and could lead to more roster turnover. I know UM and ND did it through coaching changes, I don't think that's our path to success.

I'll be honest I don't think Cam has proven anything. Shot the bottom out of it over top of the Cuse zone in one game, so what?

Luther definitely has proven to be a player, but IMO, one who would be best suited to a complimentary role like 6th man.

That said, hope JD stays and build on what he has.

 

[Piranha]

And you would fire any coach that doesn't accomplish that?

Is the program stagnant?

 

[UPitt129]

Is the program stagnant?

Right now, I would say it is a little above average. I would say stagnant, but not horrible by any means.

 

[Cavalier Panther]

I'll be honest I don't think Cam has proven anything. Shot the bottom out of it over top of the Cuse zone in one game, so what?

Luther definitely has proven to be a player, but IMO, one who would be best suited to a complimentary role like 6th man.

That said, hope JD stays and build on what he has.

Cam made some very athletic plays to get to the rim in the ACC tourney. He needs to be older and stronger to finish them, but he's got a high ceiling. I think his length creates problems on defense and that lets him guard a few positions, including smaller quicker guards that he can give more space to because of his reach. On the other end, he's a tough cover for guards who are 6' 2" because he goes over them. He doesn't have an NBA future and he won't be all conference first team, but he can start and be a good player for us.

 

[pittgoat]

You act like it is us or Pitt making this decision. Anyone is entitled to an opinion if they like Dixon or not. The fact remains Jamie is seeking this path. Doubling his salary is not a reasonable option.