To those firing Dixon....
- Thread starter drunkinoakland
- Start date
Not following? I don't think either need canned. But Hugs lost 7 games in a year they were allegedly a top 10 team. Also whiffed on the tournament in 2 of the past 4 years.
Firing Dixon would relegate Pitt to 40 years of obscurity.
Well by the time Huggins, Dixon, Martin, S. Miller, Painter, and Scott Drew are fired there won't be many coaches left.
Well with 7!years left on his contract we're guaranteed 7 years of 1950's style mediocre BB. I'll roll the dice and take my chances. The guy lost it tonight. Horrid coaching. To make substitutions like he did tonight, he must have been on drugs!
Actually I just had a scary thought - Dixon feels underappreciated, leaves for another job and Brandon Knight gets hired!!!
OH NO!!!
OH NO!!!
Well their recruiting base is even worse than ours, but I think we would have to all agree that their basketball history is better than ours.
Now I would agree that most kids today don't care about that, but West Virginia actually does have a decent basketball history.
Tournament loss not defensible...but their losses this year: vs Virginia, @ Oklahoma, Texas, @Florida, @ Kansas, @ Texas, Oklahoma again, and Kansas in the Big 12 Tourney. Hardly any losses in there (until tonight) that anyone should be upset about
Huggins has been to 2 Final Fours, Pitt will never get there with Jamie
The chances of that are the same that either Miller, Mack, Marshall, etc comes here. Zero. Point. Zero.
The only way Dixon isn't here is if he decides to leave. And at that point they'll be looking at guys like VCU's coach, Keatts and those types. Not that it's a bad thing. But they're not getting a big name coach here.
How the hell do you know we can't get a big name coach.... just another self-loathing no respect for Pitt fan!
When you notice these no name programs stepping up and beating the P5 teams you realize how many good players are out there. My thought is why hasn't Pitt been able to find guards there everywhere but here.
Well of course I don't know. I didn't state it as such but it's my opinion. However I stand by it. It's a decent job in the P5 but don't think it's attractive enough for a big name unless they pay an absolutely outrageous salary. Which I also don't think is likely.
So you believe that the state of Pitt BB is today where Pitt FB was the last time Pitt sought a new FB coach? If that's the case, then Dixon has done an even shittier job than I thought you and most others believed and we're in pretty bad shape. There's nothing second rate about the fundamental assets Pitt has to sell to a prospective BB coach except for a self-loathing fan base that perceives itself as eternally destined to be mediocre because that's the way it has to be, as well as the only way to justify the retention of its beloved underperforming HC(aside from the length of his contract).
Why? You're watching the same tournament as everyone else. Teams lose - and apparently a number of higher seeded teams (which, for the record, Pitt wasn't). Coming into the season who here predicted anything for Pitt beyond an NIT contender? Let me answer - very few. All I read from last spring till January was the demise of Pitt basketball. FACT. Should/Could they be better? Yes! That Pitt made the tournament over what - 350-68=292 other teams - means something. I'm as disappointed as everyone else, but given what we expected pre-season we need some perspective here. Sure - let's fire Dixon. I've said it before - if there was some "magic formula" to picking the "right" coach, everyone would win. But they don't. You want to roll the dice - go for it.
I don't think there's a snowball chance of that happening. If it does then Barnes is not the man I thought he was. I look for Brandon (and possibly a few others) to "move on to another university" within the next few weeks.
I am getting tired, and that is way too many words. We are probably better than I think, and worse than you expect. How's that?
Why don't you respond as if you actually watched the game instead of lecturing us on what was predicted in the pre-season. Pure drivel!
LOL. I watched the game and was as disappointed as everyone else here. I give up. If you think that what was expected this year vs. the actual results was a disappointment than you are in small minority.
It's hyperbole at it's finest to suggest that losing Jamie Dixon would relegate Pitt to the desert for 40 years and that no other coach would or could take them to the same or better results.
I did not suggest replacing Jamie Dixon, nor do I think it's going to happen any time soon.
People let their emotions get the best of them at times like this both good and bad. I'm not one of those. Jamie was a gamble when he was hired. It worked well, and might yet again. But to think that the University of Pittsburgh couldn't attract a great coach if Jamie leaves for another job tomorrow is utterly wrong.
That is where my frustration with the people on here really comes from. The people who are loudest in their ranting like del, poker, etc are the ones who said pitt would go 6-12 this year. Are the ones that said pitt would lose their last 8 ACC games. Are the ones who insisted even after the third cuse win that pitt would miss the field.
Then, after pitt exceeds all their expectations, they are the ones screaming the loudest.
I was angry watching the game. Like so many times in the past, pitt went ice cold in the tourney. I still think this year met expectations though.
Yes, it is hyperbole to say that pitt will lose for 40 years if they fire Dixon.
What isn't hyperbole is voicing concerns over the program being worse off if they do fire him and try to fire a new coach. What also isn't hyperbole is stating pitt probably isn't getting one of top tier candidates, and that trying to find a diamond is a big crap shoot. It also isn't hyperbole to state the many disadvantages pitt deals with compared to other programs it is compared to.
However, those points are often screamed down on here. Much like the pitt stadium argument where people simply say it can happen if the school wants it to, that simply isn't how it works.
There's nothing I can do right now as I'm saddled with a contract that makes it impossible to do anything for at least four years save forcing changes in assistants. But that isn't my point and wasn't the original point of my comment.
The point is that it's silly to assume that Pitt would fade in to obscurity and become Wake Forest or Boston College if Jamie Dixon wasn't the head coach tomorrow morning. I'm pretty sure that this Chancellor and this A.D. are pretty capable human beings.
That's what the original point was, and what my comment was about.
Glad to be of help. Care to argue a different point some more? Or do you think that Pitt is such a black hole of basketball and obscurity that no man not named Jamie Dixon could ever be successful as their head basketball coach? 40 years of obscurity because Jamie Dixon wasn't on the sideline?
And this is EXACTLY what I mean. You completely ignored the rest of the post because it doesn't fit your narrative. Yes, Pitt may not go into obscurity. They may get better and go from a program that is to 25-40 to top 15...but the chances are a hell of a lot better that they go down hill or stay the same at best.
And it's silly to assume that they wouldn't. Ask UCLA.
She didn't say that at any point.
What is more silly is to think that replacing Dixon and hiring a new coach would lead Pitt to being a top 15 program, and one that goes to FF's.
And if the new coach isn't going to do that, then why even bother replacing Dixon??
