IMO, it would be an unbelievablly reckless move at this point for Lyke to fire Stallings and hire anyone else. With the report out today from Thamel at YahooSports, it's clear that heads are going to roll in college hoops and the landscape could be permanently altered.
There's one thing Lyke confidently knows about Stallings: He's clean. There's nothing unseemly behind the curtain. But if reports, which estimate that 36 to 50 P5 schools are tainted by this scandal, Pitt could come out the other side looking really good.
At this point, I think Lyke has to give Stallings '18-'19 and let this play out. She'll save $ on the buyout, Stallings will bring more stability to program next year (highly likely the team gets close to or slightly above .500) and gets a CBI or NIT bid, and if Pitt's recruiting for '19-'20 doesn't see a significant uptick as a result of the scandal, she'll know who's radioactive and who she can pluck from the mid-major ranks. At that point, Pitt would be an attractive option, potentially to some very good coaches, because there would be no sanctions or pending sanctions.
On the other hand, if she hires this spring, she risks burying the PItt program permanently. A, she'd be firing a clean guy and potentially a coach who has been heavily criticized by this board for his lack of recruiting success precisely because of the scandal (that is, he couldn't recruit because he and, by extension, Pitt, didn't cheat), and B, she'd run the risk of potentially hiring a coach who could wind up either tainted, at best, or with a show cause, at worst. If that were to happen, Pitt's done. If you think this year's been bad, imagine it being like this for a decade. Because that's precisely what would happen.
But at this point, there's almost no downside risk to keeping Stallings. We could see men like Bill Self and Coach K having to retire as a result of what's coming, and the assistants won't be spared, either. Lyke can credibly say Pitt needs to give Stallings more time, in part because, well, he needs more time. But in addition, because of the buyout and the uncertain NCAA landscape and the risk inherent in hiring a new coach in this environment.
The only coaches in this environment she could plausibly hire without considerable concern that they'd be caught up in this mess are Tom Crean and Thad Matta. I'm on record as saying I think Matta would be a cataclysmic mistake. And if I'm Crean watching all this, I'm smiling because when the dust settles, I'm going to get my pick of a Blue Blood coaching job. I might have to deal with a year or two of sanctions, but I'll pay that cost to coach at Kansas, UNC, Michigan State, or another perennial college hoops power.
Someone will say she could hire a mid-major coach and be OK, but why do that? The right long-term play now, unquestionably, is to wait. Why gamble on a mid-major hire who may be Ben Howland, but could also be John Groce? Especially when you may well have a top 10 pick next spring when the shooting stops in the scandal-to-come.
While you wait, Stallings stabilizes the program (yes, haters, he will; this team's going .500ish next season no matter how much you guys hate him), which provides Lyke with options after the '18-'19 season. She can stick with Stallings, who could come out of all this looking like a rose (imagine some of the recruiting battles we're currently in if the cheaters against whom we're competing are exposed; guess who wins those battles?), or she could thank him for helping get the program back on track, pay a reduced buyout, then hire a coach who suddenly sees Pitt as a very attractive option. And if the current NCAA proposal to allow transfers to play immediately passes, as expected, that new coach would have the immediate ability to stock the cupboards with talent (or Stallings could as well).
