We entice bad coaches to stay here.

[CrazyPaco]

Dixon also didn't have to contend with NIL at Pitt. At the end of the day, I think we would be a bubble team most years if he were still here. We took the scenic route, but here we are anyway.

I completely acknowledge that we wouldn't have had the 6-year bottoming out that we did, but we also have to acknowledge that Dixon's recruiting fell off a cliff and he got the hell out of here before he had to rely on guys like Justice Kithcart and company.

The "scenic" route, which has been more like a nighmare route, destroyed the reputation of Pitt's basketball program and left it with 8 of 9 seasons with absolute zip to show for it and a depleted fan base.

No on knows for sure how Dixon would have done at Pitt, but given the starting point and other comparables at TCU, it is hard to argue Pitt would have had less success over the past decade or currently be in a worse place than that program.

This isn't even worth arguing. Anyone that thinks Pitt is better off for Dixon having left isn't really worth having a conversation with. There is no possible evaluation of actual real information that could lead any honest analysis to that conclusion. While it will go down as one of the biggest mistakes in Pitt sports history, those years and that era aren't coming back and everyone just has to move on and hope for the best in this new brave era of college sports. What worked before, even if it could magically be recaptured, by no means may work going forward.

 

[TD_6082]

Oh, okay, I see what you are saying now, didn't get it at first. There is probably some truth to that to a degree, but there are also natural cycles. It is almost impossible to sustain the level Pitt had for the 15-year Howland-Dixon stretch. You don't take that for granted. It is mostly an unprecedented stretch.

However, I think there are plenty of examples where people do take that next step. Took Jim Boeheim 26 years to win a Nattie.

In my opinion, the primary reason for the dip in the early ACC years was Dixon's change in recruiting strategy to try to fit into the conference by recruiting more skill and whiffing on some high profile recruits in an attempt to take that next step, not to mention some unexpected departures. Pitt also lost some identity, including the linkage at leaderships and guard positions that started with Brandon. And the natural pipeline to NYC area that had been established was altered with the move to the ACC, plus NYC prep talent began to fall off. That didn't have time to get the recruiting corrected before he was shoved out. Everything was and could have been correctable without blowing things up.

Based on the players he had in the pipeline coming to Pitt, the recruiting problem wasn't getting corrected. It was getting much worse.

I'm not saying Pitt should have forced him out. However, it was obvious that had he stayed, it wasn't going to end well. He's done nothing at TCU to prove otherwise.

 

[Upg bobcat]

The "scenic" route, which has been more like a nighmare route, destroyed the reputation of Pitt's basketball program and left it with 8 of 9 seasons with absolute zip to show for it and a depleted fan base.

No on knows for sure how Dixon would have done at Pitt, but given the starting point and other comparables at TCU, it is hard to argue Pitt would have had less success over the past decade or currently be in a worse place than that program.

This isn't even worth arguing. Anyone that thinks Pitt is better off for Dixon having left isn't really worth having a conversation with. There is no possible evaluation of actual real information that could lead any honest analysis to that conclusion. While it will go down as one of the biggest mistakes in Pitt sports history, those years and that era aren't coming back and everyone just has to move on and hope for the best in this new brave era of college sports. What worked before, even if it could magically be recaptured, by no means may work going forward.

I am with you with respect to where the program currently is versus where it likely would have been if Dixon stayed. That's the same argument to keep Narduzzi. By keeping Narduzzi, you are most likely looking at 6-8 win seasons, maybe get lucky and win a 9th one, or even get really lucky and win 10 and sneak into a playoff. But we aren't a threat to go far there if we somehow get in. So if that's not good enough, we could fire Narduzzi, but then next coach could be the football version of Kevin Stallings. Or he could be Johnny Majors I, who knows.

It was same deal with Dixon. If we kept him and Dixon II continued, we could keep making the tourney most years, likely being seeded somewhere from 7 to 10. Maybe we win a first round game. Maybe even make a sweet sixteen. But that was pretty much it. We had no realistic possibility of doing more than that.

 

[12162022]

Based on the players he had in the pipeline coming to Pitt, the recruiting problem wasn't getting corrected. It was getting much worse.

I'm not saying Pitt should have forced him out. However, it was obvious that had he stayed, it wasn't going to end well. He's done nothing at TCU to prove otherwise.

His first 5 years or so were better than Stallings or Capel at that time. Looks like he's headed for retirement.