Welcome to reality!
- Thread starter CMUandPitt
- Start date
CMUandPitt is probably the biggest sky is falling poster around. He had Hamlin pegged for ND after he saw the photos of him wearing the ND hoodie in a game. And if "pushing out" means not caving in like Pederson did so often and actually holding Dixon accountable for poor recruiting by changing the staff, then I'll gladly call it that.
Yes.
Dixon was not going to be told by anyone, including his BOSS, how to run HIS program.
He was spoiled by the total freedom given him by the previous regime.
I'm with Harve and CMU here. Exhiled made the point elsewhere. As did tuckshop, NTOP, and a large bunch of knowledgeable posters.
When Dixon's departure was all speculation a few days ago, theChair questioned the logic of the move by pointing out that TCU has been the doormat of its conference. He noted that the move made sense only if Dixon wanted to leave. What did Dixon himself say? The only substantive point he talked about was how comfortable he was, notably, with the administration at TCU.
Barnes seems pretty arrogant to me. According to his press conference and other reports, he was pressuring one of the most successful coaches in history not just to change his schedule and also to change what he tells recruits, but more than that, to change the way he plays.
Dixon is a competitor, and I'm sure he was not afraid of the challenge of the ACC. His recent recruits were at the same standard as his early recruits. The difference is that the recent players have not performed up to expectations. He got them the open shots, but he couldn't get them to make the shots. The main change that was necessary is built into the college system: old players go and new players come. What really happened is that the administration at Pitt had a great coach and didn't let him run his program.
When Dixon's departure was all speculation a few days ago, theChair questioned the logic of the move by pointing out that TCU has been the doormat of its conference. He noted that the move made sense only if Dixon wanted to leave. What did Dixon himself say? The only substantive point he talked about was how comfortable he was, notably, with the administration at TCU.
Barnes seems pretty arrogant to me. According to his press conference and other reports, he was pressuring one of the most successful coaches in history not just to change his schedule and also to change what he tells recruits, but more than that, to change the way he plays.
Dixon is a competitor, and I'm sure he was not afraid of the challenge of the ACC. His recent recruits were at the same standard as his early recruits. The difference is that the recent players have not performed up to expectations. He got them the open shots, but he couldn't get them to make the shots. The main change that was necessary is built into the college system: old players go and new players come. What really happened is that the administration at Pitt had a great coach and didn't let him run his program.
Last edited:
knowledgeable posters? Yes, but that group might as well be nicknamed the Jamie Dixon fanboy club.
Whether or not one is a Dixon fan, amid all the projected mind-reading and fantasy on the Boards, there is evidence that in deciding to leave, Dixon was looking less at the challenges of the conference and more at the new administration and Barnes in particular.
Again I didn't want JD to leave but............lets get some things straight.
Yes JD had a great run but the program was trending down hill. In the last five years they missed the NCAA's twice and got in this year by the skin of their teeth. Attendance at the Pete is falling off greatly. When your performance is in a decline, you should expect your boss to step in and suggest and even demand some changes. There are very few coaches who are above reproach and JD is not one of those. Barnes had every right to look at the product, the faltering ticket sales and suggest those things to JD. He would be abdicating his job responsibilities if he didn't. Had the program not declined, the criticism of Barnes would have been legitimate. If you want to be left alone perform at a level where no one can question your approach.
The same people who are whining about Barnes meddling are likely the same one who had no problem with the village idiot meddling with the football program and rejecting requests to simply upgrade the carpeting in the locker room.
No doubt JD's decision to leave was at least in part because he could once again be King at TCU and have complete autonomy. He's taking over a crap program where just making the NCAA will make him a hero. The same is not true at Pitt and it doesn't make Barnes wrong for requesting changes.
Yes JD had a great run but the program was trending down hill. In the last five years they missed the NCAA's twice and got in this year by the skin of their teeth. Attendance at the Pete is falling off greatly. When your performance is in a decline, you should expect your boss to step in and suggest and even demand some changes. There are very few coaches who are above reproach and JD is not one of those. Barnes had every right to look at the product, the faltering ticket sales and suggest those things to JD. He would be abdicating his job responsibilities if he didn't. Had the program not declined, the criticism of Barnes would have been legitimate. If you want to be left alone perform at a level where no one can question your approach.
The same people who are whining about Barnes meddling are likely the same one who had no problem with the village idiot meddling with the football program and rejecting requests to simply upgrade the carpeting in the locker room.
No doubt JD's decision to leave was at least in part because he could once again be King at TCU and have complete autonomy. He's taking over a crap program where just making the NCAA will make him a hero. The same is not true at Pitt and it doesn't make Barnes wrong for requesting changes.
you do realize its been a couple of days. give barnes 10 to 14 days vthen judge the hire
Yeah God forbid Pitt hire a guy like Dixon or Howland who were unkown coaches at the time.......
I find it amusing that many of the same people who made excuses for the village idiot when he hired the haymaker are expecting Barnes to make a splash hire............
Hey, my post was in response to pittzap stating Dixon was not pushed out, not whether or not Pitt was justified in pushing him out.
It's pretty obvious to everyone, there is a lot of stuff out there that indcates Dixon WAS being pushed, and almost identically to how Pederson pushed Wanny. It's difficult to argue against that conclusion, which was my point.
Fans' gut feelings about and opinions of the two coaches' departures SHOULD logically be similar. But, my feeling is the departures are viewed very differently by many people. Pederson was widely criticized for pushing out Wanny. Up until the Miller slap in Pitt's face, an awful lot of posters who have criticized Pederson for the Wanny departure were praising Barnes for squiring Dixon out the door.
Justification of the move is an entirely different issue.
Soneone, and I apologize because I can't remember which poster to credit, had an excellent post saying basically an AD in 2016 has a LOT more justification in dictating to or at least strongly advising to the Dixon of 2016 to make changes to his program.
But, an AD of say, 2009, would probably lack the justification and even the power to dictate to the Dixon of 2009.
Times , circumstances and people change. The program 5-7 years go was in a different, stronger place than it was last week. Today it is in a different, weaker place than even last week.
Sports isn't just a hierarchical business with defined org charts. People and their power level change over time based a number of ill-defined, flexible factors. It's about relative power or authority, a bit like situational ethics. VERY few AD's actually have power over a top coach. As the tOSU AD famously said when asked if he would fire Jim Tressel during the Pryor tattoo snafu: "I'm more worried Coach Tressel will decide to fire me!"
Dixon was the unquestioned star of the Pitt athletic world in 2009. In April 2016, he no longer was. So, yes, Barnes could reasonably give him orders. And, it is just as logical that a guy who was the university's highest paid emplyee would bristle and choose to walk away.
Ultimately, success of the next hire will determine whether Barnes was justified in , if not actively pushing, at least aiding and abetting Dixon's departure. That can't be judged today, snd maybe not next year.
I'm on record in several threads as saying the move was the right move FOR DIXON.
Time will tell whether it was the right move for Pitt.
I will add one small fact for consideration: given we had the #27 overall SOS this past season, why do so many people keep wanting to improve our OOC? Is it possible that John Miller's words about how tough Pitt's situation is are pretty much dead on?
It's pretty obvious to everyone, there is a lot of stuff out there that indcates Dixon WAS being pushed, and almost identically to how Pederson pushed Wanny. It's difficult to argue against that conclusion, which was my point.
Fans' gut feelings about and opinions of the two coaches' departures SHOULD logically be similar. But, my feeling is the departures are viewed very differently by many people. Pederson was widely criticized for pushing out Wanny. Up until the Miller slap in Pitt's face, an awful lot of posters who have criticized Pederson for the Wanny departure were praising Barnes for squiring Dixon out the door.
Justification of the move is an entirely different issue.
Soneone, and I apologize because I can't remember which poster to credit, had an excellent post saying basically an AD in 2016 has a LOT more justification in dictating to or at least strongly advising to the Dixon of 2016 to make changes to his program.
But, an AD of say, 2009, would probably lack the justification and even the power to dictate to the Dixon of 2009.
Times , circumstances and people change. The program 5-7 years go was in a different, stronger place than it was last week. Today it is in a different, weaker place than even last week.
Sports isn't just a hierarchical business with defined org charts. People and their power level change over time based a number of ill-defined, flexible factors. It's about relative power or authority, a bit like situational ethics. VERY few AD's actually have power over a top coach. As the tOSU AD famously said when asked if he would fire Jim Tressel during the Pryor tattoo snafu: "I'm more worried Coach Tressel will decide to fire me!"
Dixon was the unquestioned star of the Pitt athletic world in 2009. In April 2016, he no longer was. So, yes, Barnes could reasonably give him orders. And, it is just as logical that a guy who was the university's highest paid emplyee would bristle and choose to walk away.
Ultimately, success of the next hire will determine whether Barnes was justified in , if not actively pushing, at least aiding and abetting Dixon's departure. That can't be judged today, snd maybe not next year.
I'm on record in several threads as saying the move was the right move FOR DIXON.
Time will tell whether it was the right move for Pitt.
I will add one small fact for consideration: given we had the #27 overall SOS this past season, why do so many people keep wanting to improve our OOC? Is it possible that John Miller's words about how tough Pitt's situation is are pretty much dead on?
He was so competitive that we have 3 guys total in our current Fr and So class. PLEASE!
Wanny and Dixon are vastly different. Pederson flat forced change. Wanny went to Nordy and got over ridden.
At best JD was asked to evaluate some things. Pitt didn't make the greatest effort to keep JD but he was not forced out. JD saw his contract was hindrance with the new administration and new if he didn't get things going he would be out once the contract was less cumbersome. I was a huge JD support and didn't want to see him but if you can see he had some issues you are just being intentionally blind. If JD didn't see or want to makes changes then it was probably time for him to go.
You're wrong. There aren't that similar. One coach was constantly flirting with other jobs.
Let me ask a question. If TCU wasn't hiring do you think Dixon would have been our coach next season or not?
He would have been.
So Pederson had no idea Wannstedt would resign while Barnes knew that Dixon had other options.
He didn't force him out he didn't beg him to stay.
Which is why I don't see why anyone is harping on this. The anti-dixons or the jigs.....he chose to leave.
Again, what's odd is that I'm actually the opposite on the football side.
I'm just being realistic. The facts are we got turned down by the current coaches at Dayton and Mississippi State, which would imply that both of those jobs are seen as preferable to ours. When you add on to that the report circulated that most current coaches see Pitt as a "top 60" job, it doesn't inspire me with confidence.
The recurring theme on here is that the fans seem to think that we're a top 20-25 job, and that we had a legitimate chance to pull Sean Miller out of Arizona. When that didn't happen for obvious reasons, the tide then turned to Penn State-ish excuses of him not being good enough, him being a underachiever, and so on. It's laughable.
I'm relatively convinced at this point that very few of you live or travel outside of Pittsburgh, or else you'd have a better sense of what the national perception of Pitt is. Let's put it this way - national college basketball writers don't list Herb Sendek as possible options for a top 25 destination.
Top 25 jobs often don't end up with TOP coaches. Who did Florida end up with? OSU is a good job but they ended with Stephen F. Austins Coach........
The argument is not whether or not Pitt is a top job. Most rational Pitt fans would not put Pitt in the same class with a UF. The argument is that Pitt is a pretty darn good job that pays well, plays in a great conference, is a place you can win at, and has pretty good fan support and facilities. There's no excuses for not getting a pretty good coach. That doesn't mean he'll be a splash hire but just solid coach who will give the program a chance for future success.
A reminder....UCLA is the bluest of blue bloods and hired Steve friggin Alford who is such a re-tread that Pep-Boys couldn't add new traction to him. So what does that say about perception?
I'd probably agree with everything you said, except on the facilities part, just on the basis of our budget and our geographic profile. I think you're also highlighting the positives and ignoring some of the negatives, such as being in a pro town with pro expectations, and a weak local recruiting base - although I think for sure that one is overblown by most.
Either way, it's irrelevant what you or I think. The fact that the current consensus among coaches is that Pitt isn't a destination job is worrisome. Barnes hit a home run with PN and I'd definitely give the benefit of the doubt to whomever he decides to hire. I don't think that however means it's incorrect or imprudent to feel like the current administration, boosters, and fans are and were operating in a universe where their perception of Pitt is quite different than the external perception.
Big time program gets it wrong. Happens all the time. That doesn't mean that when they do their next hiring search that they wouldn't absolutely have access to a higher caliber of coaches than we would. I'd be shocked if you were actually taking that argument.
Think of it like baseball. We're the Pirates. Other schools, like UCLA and Arizona, are the Yankees. Our margin for error is a lot less.
The previous coach considered it a destination job. A perfect storm of events changed things however.
My aren't you a Debbi downer. I agree that this would be a horrible mistake in 2009 . Hell he probably negotiated a raise that year. In 2016 you had a coach struggling to play .500 ball in his conference. If your approaching this from a business perspective you have a highly compensated employee whose division is regressing who is resisting any intervention . Revenue is down and probably will be worse next year. Guess what in the real world that employee is fired. Now what's next no one knows ,but the bar isn't set as high as it was in 09. If Jamie really wanted to stay at Pitt he'd have gone to Barnes and said what ideas do you have to get this program back on track instead he took the first bus out of town. TCU is not an upgrade and if he plays by his rules in Texas his career winning percentage will go down fast. He'll have himself some 20+ loss seasons and you know everything's bigger and better in Texas and that includes the pressure to succeed .
Archie Miller has a plan and Pitt isn't in it for him . Coming here and not being successful would only damage his brand. He's got a pretty good gig where's he's at . Holland has a recruiting structure that allowed him somehow to get highly ranked players and that's how you win. Could he get those type of players to Pitt not unless there's big changes.
Ps to Harv Pitts SOS is due to the ACC and that starts in Jan. ,but they start playing in Oct. All anyone wants is one or two good games at the most ,not an unreasonable request.
Fine. Go look at Zeise's list, and you tell me those are the options available to a true destination job. I don't see it, but hey, I guess that's on me.
I think Drew and a few others would have a puncher's chance at doing good work here and advancing from Jamie's status quo. I will of course support for the team just as hard if not harder, because believe me there's no subset of fans I hate more than the "ex-coach was better" crowd, which we dealt with for like a friggin' decade with DW ballwashers.
I do agree that having a local recruiting base is irrelevant in hoops. There is no doubt Pitt is NOT a destination job or a plumb job. Theres only a handful of those in the country. Heck Im not sure I'd call UF a destination job for that matter. I do think that PItt is a pretty good job that should be attractive to some really good candidates.
Again if VT can land Buzz WIlliams, Pitt should be able to land a good coach. Keep in mind timing is everything in these types of situations and a lot of factors are considered outside of "being a Destination job". TCU is by no means a destination job BUT it is a great fit for JD..........very few coaches of his stature, if any, would even consider TCU. I have to think VT was lucky in that Buzz wanted out of Marquette due to the Big East issues and wanted an ACC Job. VT happened to be open at the time.
I'd like to have kept JD. However he chose to move on. Pitt will likely survive and there is a high probability they will thrive. Theres also a chance they'll be looking for a coach in another three years as well. Its the nature of the beast.
It was clear then that he was not going to continue growing as a coach here, and it was best we parted ways.
There are quite a few names that would produce the same or better results we have seen over the last 5 years. 22-13, .500 play in conference, and hardly any wins in the Dance. He was not evolving as a coach, so THAT is the bar that is set.
Not sure anyone thought JD would do as well as he did through 2010 and hes resume when hired by Pitt was far less impressive than many of the more attractive "up and comers" being discussed. Coaching searches are always a crap shoot and often times the fit is as important as the resume.
Lots of points to rebut.
1) Similarities Dixon and Wanny departures : Still overall awfully similar. AD orders coach to make changes to staff among other things. Coach walks.
Wanny fans, Pederson haters and Dixon fans think AD overstepped.
Wanny haters, Dixon haters and Barnes fans think it's fine.
Mostly depends on whose ox is being gored. But, you can throw a blanket over it. It's basically the same show.
Throw in a top booster actively trying to get Dixon fired and unlike Wanny, Dixon still being offered jobs and, yes, Dixon was given a push. Could he have returned at least one more year, CERTAINLY, but maybe not without the big buyout.
2) Barnes DIDN'T hire Narduzzi. That was Randy Juhl. Barnes can still pull something not too bad off, but has egg on his face right now. I see no path to an upgrade.
3) SOS ranking came from Purdue, too and would have been higher if Gonzaga wasn't cancelled halfway through. One new H&H seemed acceptable to Dixon and would have brought us in line with most schools. Lately there has been talk of MORE games with Eastern rivals. One or more additional losses takes us from the bubble to the NIT. Are the people who want this really Pitt fans? Or masochists?
1) Similarities Dixon and Wanny departures : Still overall awfully similar. AD orders coach to make changes to staff among other things. Coach walks.
Wanny fans, Pederson haters and Dixon fans think AD overstepped.
Wanny haters, Dixon haters and Barnes fans think it's fine.
Mostly depends on whose ox is being gored. But, you can throw a blanket over it. It's basically the same show.
Throw in a top booster actively trying to get Dixon fired and unlike Wanny, Dixon still being offered jobs and, yes, Dixon was given a push. Could he have returned at least one more year, CERTAINLY, but maybe not without the big buyout.
2) Barnes DIDN'T hire Narduzzi. That was Randy Juhl. Barnes can still pull something not too bad off, but has egg on his face right now. I see no path to an upgrade.
3) SOS ranking came from Purdue, too and would have been higher if Gonzaga wasn't cancelled halfway through. One new H&H seemed acceptable to Dixon and would have brought us in line with most schools. Lately there has been talk of MORE games with Eastern rivals. One or more additional losses takes us from the bubble to the NIT. Are the people who want this really Pitt fans? Or masochists?
"Barnes hit a home run with PN and I'd definitely give the benefit of the doubt to whomever he decides to hire. "
Except Barnes didn't hire Narduzzi. But go on........
We'll have to agree to disagree on the "egg on his face" comment. What did you expect Barnes to do to keep JD? Renegotiate what amounted to a life time contract and fail his fiduciary responsibilities in doing so?
The ONLY way Barnes ends up looking bad in this case is if his hire is a complete failure. I think Barnes is a huge upgrade to anyone we've had in the past and I wouldn't bet against him to make a really good hire that gets the program back on track.
How do YOU know where Howland and Archie stand on our list? Because some hack reported it. Herb Sendek - LOL. What sources do u have know-it-all?
Pretty good argument can be made that Barnes got publicly b****-slapped yesterday by the Millers. Egg on his face is mild.
If he had "several days to work on this" and "Any AD worth his salt ALWAYS has a list" , the results so far are underwhelming. "
I don't want him to fail. But, it certainly seems there is no quick upgrade so far. Which, given our history, is not particularly surprising. The things I've heard privately are not encouraging and I'm not going to share them.
We'll sign someone. It's not going to be a Miller and it's not going to be Khem Birch. We probably drop some before we recover.
What it said about perception is that when you fire a good coach who everyone except for you thinks has been doing a good job that other good coaches go running away screaming when you call them because they perceive that you are an idiot.
When UCLA fired Howland their AD (and their fans) would have never guessed they were going to get all the way down to Steve Alford on their list before they could find someone to say yes.
With a nice push in the back by Barnes. Make no mistake, you're wrong.
See how that works.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Pittsburgh Sports Now Mike Vukovcan - "Time for Big Changes at Pitt"- Latest: AvonBarksdale
-
