Can turn around a D1 team: He took over a completely unknown FGCU that was 10-20, and two years later they were 26-11, had a clear identity, and were the only 15-seed ever to advance to the Sweet 16. He then took over a bottomed-out USC team with 20 total wins over their previous 2 seasons (and on probation), and in his 3rd season had them in the tourney at 21-12 and making late-season appearances in the rankings. They lost by 1 in the first round on a last-second brain fart to a team with a top-5 draft pick.
Can recruit: USC '16: 3* G (top-150), 3* PF, 4* G (top-100). USC '15: 4* SF (top-60), 4* PF (top-45). USC '14: 4* PG (top-50), 4* SG (top-70), 3* PF (top-110), 3* SF. That's all for a team coming off a really low bottom, in the same city as UCLA, who have been winning 19 to 28 games each year during USC's recent down time.
Can play a more exciting style -- will maintain excitement when we're not great: FGCU's Dunk City took over the nation 3 years ago, thriving off steals and fast-break baskets. That team was only 51st with 73 pts/gm, but they were 5th in steals (lead to fast breaks) and 18th in defensive rebounds (lead to fast breaks), so they were opportunistic about running and ended up with the 24th best 2FG%. This past year's USC team was the first to take on this up-tempo identity, finishing 19th in scoring (81 pts/gm) even though their steals (110th) and defensive rebounds (44th) were nothing special (DReb still pretty good, though), but they were 20th in 3FG% (.387).
I still think Enfield will turn Pitt down since he's chosen to coach in Florida (FSU assistant, FGCU) and LA the past 10 years, so Pittsburgh doesn't seem like a lifestyle fit for him, but he did leave a super-cushy gig at FGCU with no expectations to take on a bigger challenge, so he might be willing to leave the Pac-12 to take on bigger fish in the ACC. Regarding the "he's obscenely rich and won't be swayed to Pitt by money" discussion, I just did a little research and he is worth around $10m (that's TEN), not $100m. Huge difference when you're talking about making $1.5m/year (his USC salary) vs. $2.5-3m/year (probably what Pitt would offer). It's also worth noting that USC is going through a change of AD, which can often cause personality/loyalty issues with coaches hired under the previous regime. We might be able to sway him after all with money and a bigger challenge.
Can recruit: USC '16: 3* G (top-150), 3* PF, 4* G (top-100). USC '15: 4* SF (top-60), 4* PF (top-45). USC '14: 4* PG (top-50), 4* SG (top-70), 3* PF (top-110), 3* SF. That's all for a team coming off a really low bottom, in the same city as UCLA, who have been winning 19 to 28 games each year during USC's recent down time.
Can play a more exciting style -- will maintain excitement when we're not great: FGCU's Dunk City took over the nation 3 years ago, thriving off steals and fast-break baskets. That team was only 51st with 73 pts/gm, but they were 5th in steals (lead to fast breaks) and 18th in defensive rebounds (lead to fast breaks), so they were opportunistic about running and ended up with the 24th best 2FG%. This past year's USC team was the first to take on this up-tempo identity, finishing 19th in scoring (81 pts/gm) even though their steals (110th) and defensive rebounds (44th) were nothing special (DReb still pretty good, though), but they were 20th in 3FG% (.387).
I still think Enfield will turn Pitt down since he's chosen to coach in Florida (FSU assistant, FGCU) and LA the past 10 years, so Pittsburgh doesn't seem like a lifestyle fit for him, but he did leave a super-cushy gig at FGCU with no expectations to take on a bigger challenge, so he might be willing to leave the Pac-12 to take on bigger fish in the ACC. Regarding the "he's obscenely rich and won't be swayed to Pitt by money" discussion, I just did a little research and he is worth around $10m (that's TEN), not $100m. Huge difference when you're talking about making $1.5m/year (his USC salary) vs. $2.5-3m/year (probably what Pitt would offer). It's also worth noting that USC is going through a change of AD, which can often cause personality/loyalty issues with coaches hired under the previous regime. We might be able to sway him after all with money and a bigger challenge.
Last edited: