Tons of Transition, but 1 Constant

[DiehardPanther]

I will just cover the last 7 years. Pitt is absolutely toxic. The take from outsiders.

1) Wanny - He had Pitt on the right track. He was a loyal, Pitt guy. Pitt nudges him out. Makes no sense.

2) Graham - He leaves after 1 year. Bizarre, but he is a job hopper and left for a better job.

3) Chryst - He left for his alma mater. Understandable.

4) Dixon - A good coach who won a lot of games. Highly respected. Pitt opens the door for him to leave. Alarm bells are going off for other coaches. WTF is going on at Pitt.

5) Barnes - He is here for 1 year and bolts. He goes to a school that is near the bottom of the Power 5.

6) Narduzzi - Wins 8 games his first 2 years, and is starting to build the program. Still receives little support from fans, and some of them want a change.

Pitt has a small, apathetic, and unrealistic fanbase. Combine that with a holier than thou administration that would prefer Pitt to be more like an Ivy League school.

 

[Jpripper88]

If you think Wanny was the answer or had the program on the right track, you are clueless. He is a loser. He couldn't win an awful BE.

I lost faith in HCPN last night. The recruiting is not good and 4 wins in year 3 show the program is going the wrong way, not being built up.

 

[Mikefln]

1) agree
2) Graham was a bad fit and I don't think ASU is a better job
3)agree
4) I don't follow basketball at all so no opinion
5) Never understood the hire, really never understood him leaving.
6) I want change not in him being fired but in him making staff changes.

Pitt has that small apathetic unrealistic fan base because of the administration.

 

[DiehardPanther]

If you think Wanny was the answer or had the program on the right track, you are clueless. He is a loser. He couldn't win an awful BE.

I lost faith in HCPN last night. The recruiting is not good and 4 wins in year 3 show the program is going the wrong way, not being built up.

Options......
1) Support PN and his staff, and let him continue building the program. We will probably get similar results to Walt.

2) Try to catch lightning in a bottle. Another roll of the dice. More transition. If he does well he is gone after 2 years.

The correct answer is #1.

 

[PittHOFs]

Letting Wanny go was the absolute worst. The guy never leaves & takes advantage of PSU's sanctions. Yes his game day coaching lacked in areas but his recruiting was pretty good and gaining momentum. At some point the talent would have overshadowed some bad game day coaching.

 

[BuffetParrothead]

Letting Wanny go was the absolute worst. The guy never leaves & takes advantage of PSU's sanctions. Yes his game day coaching lacked in areas but his recruiting was pretty good and gaining momentum. At some point the talent would have overshadowed some bad game day coaching.

It's hard to believe that some posters argue that the program after how many 5 coaches, 3 AD's is further ahead????????

If Wanny had stayed things wouldnt have been great but certainly by this time better than what we're experiencing today!

 

[Pittfan85]

If you think Wanny was the answer or had the program on the right track, you are clueless. He is a loser. He couldn't win an awful BE.

I lost faith in HCPN last night. The recruiting is not good and 4 wins in year 3 show the program is going the wrong way, not being built up.

I’m as outspoken as anyone about narduzzi, but he needs one more year. If he goes 4-8 or in general misses a bowl you part ways.

Anyone that wants to extend him is clueless. Also, the wanny comment is laughable. He blew his chance.

 

[Pittfan85]

Letting Wanny go was the absolute worst. The guy never leaves & takes advantage of PSU's sanctions. Yes his game day coaching lacked in areas but his recruiting was pretty good and gaining momentum. At some point the talent would have overshadowed some bad game day coaching.

Our talent already did completely outclass anyone in the big east. Honestly, it wasn’t close.

If he couldn’t win the AAC (I’m sorry, big east) he was going to get slaughtered in the ACC.

 

[DiehardPanther]

Pitt was Top 20 in football and basketball in 2009. Those 2 men should have continued as our HC for years to come. Only an idiot would refute this. Wanny could have gradually moved into a fundraising role at some point down the line, and the reigns could have been passed on.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

It's hard to believe that some posters argue that the program after how many 5 coaches, 3 AD's is further ahead????????

If Wanny had stayed things wouldnt have been great but certainly by this time better than what we're experiencing today!

In wanny’s 6th year he went 7-5 in an awful conference...


Never mind needing to year 4 to actually make a bowl game.

Yeah- if only he would have stayed .

 

[DiehardPanther]

In wanny’s 6th year he went 7-5 in an awful conference...


Never mind needing to year 4 to actually make a bowl game.

Yeah- if only he would have stayed .

Keeping Wanny for 5 more years would have been a hell of a lot better than what transpired with Haywood, Graham, and Chryst.

 

[Cavalier Panther]

Barnes left because letting Dixon walk and hiring Stallings as a replacement was a massive screw up and he saw the writing on the wall. Don't take that as a shot at Stallings, I'm not calling for him to be fired this year or next even. But the stats were clear. Dixon won more games in a more difficult conference, did better in the conference tournaments and went to more NCAA tournaments. We traded a veteran coach in his 50s for an objectively worse veteran coach in his 50s. There's no explanation for that other than Barnes utterly bungling the hiring and search process.

 

[HailtoPitt]

The problem wasn't letting Wanny go, it was the execution of it because of... Steve!

It would have been better to keep him then go through the cluster or Haywood, Graham and Chryst.

 

[pittman71]

Pitt basketball did nothing in Dixon's last 5 seasons. When you are average/mediocre for 5 years what do you do? Dixon didn't want to go to the ACC and Pitt's play in the ACC proved him correct.

People point to Pitt being a number 1 seed but wont mention what happened in the tourney in 2011

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Keeping Wanny for 5 more years would have been a hell of a lot better than what transpired with Haywood, Graham, and Chryst.

Or it’s no different at all.
It’s a hypothetical.

Hell, Haywood literally didn’t even have a practice.

Chryst have wanny like results as did Haywood.
As is narduzzi.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

Pitt basketball did nothing in Dixon's last 5 seasons. When you are average/mediocre for 5 years what do you do? Dixon didn't want to go to the ACC and Pitt's play in the ACC proved him correct.

Making the dance 3out of 5 years isn’t nothing.

 

[pittman71]

Making the dance 3out of 5 years isn’t nothing.

8, 9, and 10 seed. Which means they were holding their breath on selection Sunday.

 

[DiehardPanther]

8, 9, and 10 seed. Which means they were holding their breath on selection Sunday.

Are you serious? We are holding our breath to win 10 games the entire year. Thanks for the good laugh.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

8, 9, and 10 seed. Which means they were holding their breath on selection Sunday.

Which isn’t nothing.
I repeat.

We won’t be post season eligible for years .
That’s nothing

 

[pittman71]

Are you serious? We are holding our breath to win 10 games the entire year. Thanks for the good laugh.

if you are a very low seed for the tourney i.e. waiting with your fingers crossed on selection Sunday then you are a mediocre/average program. Now if Pitt fans are satisfied with that then Dixon should have stayed.

Changes needed to be made.

 

[pittman71]

Which isn’t nothing.
I repeat.

We won’t be post season eligible for years .
That’s nothing

unlike in football one good recruiting class can quickly turn things around in basketball

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

if being a very low seed for the tourney i.e. waiting with your fingers crossed on selection Sunday then you are a mediocre/average program. Now if Pitt fans are satisfied with that then Dixon should have stayed.

Changes needed to be made.

You’re wrong .

Making the tournament means you’re well above average .

 

[pittman71]

You’re wrong .

Making the tournament means you’re well above average .

lol 68 teams make the tournament. If you are a 9 and 10 seed you are very average, Pitt only got the benefit of the doubt for playing in the ACC.

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

lol 68 teams make the tournament. If you are a 9 and 10 seed you are very average, Pitt only got the benefit of the doubt for playing in the ACC.

You’re either Math impaired or don’t understand what average means .

If you are a 9 seed it means you’re among the top 36 teams .
Out of 317.

That’s not average.

 

[DiehardPanther]

if you are a very low seed for the tourney i.e. waiting with your fingers crossed on selection Sunday then you are a mediocre/average program. Now if Pitt fans are satisfied with that then Dixon should have stayed.

Changes needed to be made.

At Dixon’s best we were a Top 10 team. At his worst we were somewhere in the 40-50 range. We are now in the 250 range.

Pitt should have gone to Dixon and asked him what he needed to improve the situation. Instead, they took out a stick of dynamite and blew it up.

 

[pittman71]

You’re either Math impaired or don’t understand what average means .

If you are a 9 seed it means you’re among the top 36 teams .
Out of 317.

That’s not average.

a 9 seed means you were on the bubble for making the tourney at all. Above average do not have these types of concerns

 

[SoufOaklin4Life]

a 9 seed means you were on the bubble for making the tourney at all. Above average do not have these types of concerns

So both

 

[HailtoPitt]

Not sure why we are debating Dixon's accomplishment in this thread?

Anyway, there are two things to look at when making a change.

1. The need for the change itself.
2. How the change is executed.

I think Pitt has been extremely weak with the second part, not so much the first. Sometimes the first part is not even within Pitt's control, but the second part usually is.. unless it's Barry Alverez's choice, then it isn't.

 

[pittman71]

At Dixon’s best we were a Top 10 team. At his worst we were somewhere in the 40-50 range. We are now in the 250 range.

Pitt should have gone to Dixon and asked him what he needed to improve the situation. Instead, they took out a stick of dynamite and blew it up.

you do realize that Dixon wasn't fired but he left to go to his alma mater, right?

 

[cashisking884]

There really is no evidence PN is "building" the program. It's possible to go 8-5 in back to back seasons, and still not be "building" anything. We've seen coaches have lots of success their first years at a program, and it all still be built on a foundation of sand. Florida just fired such a coach.

 

[DiehardPanther]

There really is no evidence PN is "building" the program. It's possible to go 8-5 in back to back seasons, and still not be "building" anything. We've seen coaches have lots of success their first years at a program, and it all still be built on a foundation of sand. Florida just fired such a coach.

Pitt is an 8-5 type program. You are a good coach if you accomplish that at Pitt. Florida is easily one of the Top 10 jobs in the country. No comparison.

 

[DiehardPanther]

you do realize that Dixon wasn't fired but he left to go to his alma mater, right?

Attendance dropped, big money boosters thought Pitt could do better and spoke out, Barnes started meddling, and the door was opened.

 

[Pittx9]

Yeah good thing wanny is gone. I don't know what I'd do if pitt could only win between 7-10 games a year right now. We've really gotten to the next level.

 

[Seneca_Valley]

Or it’s no different at all.
It’s a hypothetical.

Hell, Haywood literally didn’t even have a practice.

Chryst have wanny like results as did Haywood.
As is narduzzi.

I know you love to argue. I can't envision any scenario retaining Wanny that would have been worse than this:

Four losing seasons. None of the winning seasons win count exceeding the count that got him fired.
National laughingstocks for AD eff ups.
Four coaches and half the fanbase itching for coach number five.
Attendance that reeks.
1-5 post season record in shitty bowls.
Mindnumbing WTF losses that are approaching double digits.
Uninspired recruiting.
Nothing at this point to believe the program is trending up. 6-6 probably is the ceiling for next year.

Seven years and this is where we are. Only in your world would anyone think that is mediocrity. Enjoying the ride?

 

[DiehardPanther]

Ironic that getting rid of Pederson and adding Pitt script was supposed to help. Who or what is the next boogeyman or women?

 

[cashisking884]

Pitt is an 8-5 type program. You are a good coach if you accomplish that at Pitt. Florida is easily one of the Top 10 jobs in the country. No comparison.

Huh? I'm not comparing the two programs, I'm using it as an example of a coach accomplishing what you think should be the standard, but not actually building a foundation for that standard. In no way is my post comparing the two standards, and claiming they should be the same.
You're saying that Pitt's standard should be 8-5. Fine. And PN went 8-5 his first two years. So from there you argue, "he's building the standard." But it can be true a coach accomplishes the standard in his first few years, but still isn't building the foundation for the program to be that standard. We see that in college football.
What is it exactly that we have any evidence PN is building? Do you have any idea what Pitt's identity is going to be under him? I don't. I see no evidence of one being instilled. Defensive team? Offensive team? Is Pitt recruiting at a level that is going to allow it to out talent many teams on the schedule? No. So we aren't really going to be one of those type of programs. Do you see any evidence that this is going to be a blue collar, fundamental type team that is scrappy and doesn't beat itself and schemes and outcoaches the more talented team? I sure don't. Horrible mismanaging of a redshirt. Horrible coordinators across the board. Horrible fundamentals. This team can't even tackle.
There simply is no evidence that PN is actually building anything, because no foundation has been established in terms of what Pitt is going to be under him. Which is why everybody looks at the team, even after two 8-5 seasons, and isn't convinced Pitt will be an 8-5 type program under him.

 

[DiehardPanther]

Huh? I'm not comparing the two programs, I'm using it as an example of a coach accomplishing what you think should be the standard, but not actually building a foundation for that standard. In no way is my post comparing the two standards, and claiming they should be the same.
You're saying that Pitt's standard should be 8-5. Fine. And PN went 8-5 his first two years. So from there you argue, "he's building the standard." But it can be true a coach accomplishes the standard in his first few years, but still isn't building the foundation for the program to be that standard. We see that in college football.
What is it exactly that we have any evidence PN is building? Do you have any idea what Pitt's identity is going to be under him? I don't. I see no evidence of one being instilled. Defensive team? Offensive team? Is Pitt recruiting at a level that is going to allow it to out talent many teams on the schedule? No. So we aren't really going to be one of those type of programs. Do you see any evidence that this is going to be a blue collar, fundamental type team that is scrappy and doesn't beat itself and schemes and outcoaches the more talented team? I sure don't. Horrible mismanaging of a redshirt. Horrible coordinators across the board. Horrible fundamentals. This team can't even tackle.
There simply is no evidence that PN is actually building anything, because no foundation has been establishes in terms of what Pitt is going to be under him. Which is why everybody looks at the team, even after two 8-5 seasons, and isn't convinced Pitt will be an 8-5 type program under him.

In 3 years, there is 1 regular season game we were favored to win and lost. It happened last night. PC has shown that he is a good coach with practically the same staff at Wisky. He lost to Akron while he was here. The dumbest move Pitt could make is to stop supporting PN or open the door to leave. If after year five we are 5-7, then a discussion would make sense.

 

[Pittfan85]

if you are a very low seed for the tourney i.e. waiting with your fingers crossed on selection Sunday then you are a mediocre/average program. Now if Pitt fans are satisfied with that then Dixon should have stayed.

Changes needed to be made.

The clear answer was running off Dixon and bringing in an older, and less accomplished coach.

 

[cashisking884]

In 3 years, there is 1 regular season game we were favored to win and lost. It happened last night. PC has shown that he is a good coach with practically the same staff at Wisky. He lost to Akron while he was here. The dumbest move Pitt could make is to stop supporting PN or open the door to leave. If after year five we are 5-7, then a discussion would make sense.

Okay? I didn't call for him to be fired anywhere in my post, so I'm not sure why you are arguing he shouldn't be fired?
It's possible he is building something. He could possibly be laying the foundation for this 8-5 era. There's just no evidence either way, so making the statement, "He's building something" is just wrong. There's no way to tell in year 3 what Pitt will be under PN. Which, at the very least, is odd. But, I agree. You give him another season or two to show you some kind of answer.

 

[pittman71]

The clear answer was running off Dixon and bringing in an older, and less accomplished coach.

basically the time had come for Dixon and Pitt to part ways.