The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-08-2018 10:06 AM)eroc Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 07:56 AM)jarr Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 06:52 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Looks like Pitt is going to fire Kevin Stallings with cause today. I read yesterday they offered him a negotiated amount of his $9.4M buyout which he rejected. I imagine a lawsuit will follow shortly after his termination.

Andrew Fillipponi‏Verified account @ThePoniExpress · 11h11 hours ago

BREAKING: Pitt AD Heather Lyke, Kevin Stallings and attorneys from both sides will meet tomorrow morning to discuss the terms of Stallings departure. Sources says it could get messy, including the possibility that Stallings is fired with cause

Such a bad hire.

And now gone...

http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/Pitt/...1803070022

I did not know being a bad coach met the typical definition of cause?

Cause normally includes being arrested and convicted, NCAA violations, moral turpitude, absence without reason, insubordination, etc.

(03-08-2018 09:57 AM)apoe Wrote:  Winning an average of 22 games a year in the ACC? He made the NCAA 2/3 years. Not bad considering that's the 9/10 best job in the ACC.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/sch...ittsburgh/

Last time I'm bringing this up: Last 7 years at Pitt he never made it to the second weekend, last 5 years he was a combined 112 and 63, last 2 years he was 40 and 27. He was paid a lot, brought in very good classes, and performed like ****.

I really don't get why people think that was a good fit. Dude road the success of Howland's kids early on and never really did much with what he had after.

(03-08-2018 10:28 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 09:57 AM)apoe Wrote:  Winning an average of 22 games a year in the ACC? He made the NCAA 2/3 years. Not bad considering that's the 9/10 best job in the ACC.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/sch...ittsburgh/

Last time I'm bringing this up: Last 7 years at Pitt he never made it to the second weekend, last 5 years he was a combined 112 and 63, last 2 years he was 40 and 27. He was paid a lot, brought in very good classes, and performed like ****.

I really don't get why people think that was a good fit. Dude road the success of Howland's kids early on and never really did much with what he had after.

Agreed, these guys get paid a lot of money to win games. Just because they made a terrible hire after pushing Dixon out dosen't Dixons time hadn't run out.

(03-08-2018 10:28 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  I really don't get why people think that was a good fit. Dude road the success of Howland's kids early on and never really did much with what he had after.

After Howland's recruits were long gone he won the Big East and finished 2nd multiple times. Then after Pitt helped usher him out he goes to basketball wasteland TCU and gets them into the tournament in year 2. I'm sure Pitt's next hire will have much more success.

Quote:Gary Parrish
‏
Verified account

@GaryParrishCBS
Following Following @GaryParrishCBS
More
Pitt lowering the buyout of Jamie Dixon — who had made 11 NCAA Tournaments in 13 years — to encourage him to leave for TCU remains one of the worst decisions in recent memory. In two years, Dixon took TCU from nothing to the NCAA Tournament. Pitt is now ranked 227th at KenPom.

(03-08-2018 11:11 AM)apoe Wrote:  After Howland's recruits were long gone he won the Big East
and finished 2nd multiple times.
Then after Pitt helped usher him out he goes to basketball wasteland TCU and gets them into the tournament in year 2.

Doesn't make up for a lack of tournament success or several years straight of garbage performance.
He took over a basketball power in Pitt and turned them to dookie by the time he left. If conference play is so important, his last 5 years there they were 45-35 in conference(both Big East and ACC). 45 and 35 isn't good no matter how many conference titles he may have won and in all honesty, if you can't win in the dance, I'm not sure why you deserve the kind of scratch they were paying him.

He isn't the worst coach on earth, but to pretend he's something special when he's a chronic underperformer...

Quote: I'm sure Pitt's next hire will have much more success.

Not setting a high bar with that one.

(03-08-2018 10:38 AM)jarr Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 10:28 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 09:57 AM)apoe Wrote:  Winning an average of 22 games a year in the ACC? He made the NCAA 2/3 years. Not bad considering that's the 9/10 best job in the ACC.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/sch...ittsburgh/

Last time I'm bringing this up: Last 7 years at Pitt he never made it to the second weekend, last 5 years he was a combined 112 and 63, last 2 years he was 40 and 27. He was paid a lot, brought in very good classes, and performed like ****.

I really don't get why people think that was a good fit. Dude road the success of Howland's kids early on and never really did much with what he had after.

Agreed, these guys get paid a lot of money to win games. Just because they made a terrible hire after pushing Dixon out dosen't Dixons time hadn't run out.

You two are both insane sometimes. Jamie Dixon is a great coach. I think he suffered his last couple years at Pitt because they wanted to run him out, but even then they were good numbers for Pitt Historically.

Dixon spent 13 years at Pitt. He won two Big East regular season titles and one tournament title. The last regular season was in 2011. However, in those 13 years he finished in the top 25 kenpom 9 times, including 3 top 5 finishes. This program isn't Duke/UK/UNC....he had sustained success over a decade.

BTW in the 15 years at TCU prior to Dixon's arrival, TCU finished better than 97 kenpom 1 time. In 10 of those 15 years TCU was between 125-199 kenpom. In 3 of those seasons TCU was below 200 kenpom. In fact the highest they ever finished in kenpom was 56.

In his first year at TCU Dixon's team finished with a kenpom of 29 and made the NIT semi finals. They had rough stretch in a loaded Big 12, but beat Oklahoma and Kansas in last years Big 12 tournament. This year they will be in the NCAA tournament, something that didn't happen once in the 15 years preceding Dixon and are currently 20th in kenpom. Dixon is a great coach. I don't think there is a reasonable argument otherwise.

(03-08-2018 11:31 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:11 AM)apoe Wrote:  After Howland's recruits were long gone he won the Big East
and finished 2nd multiple times.
Then after Pitt helped usher him out he goes to basketball wasteland TCU and gets them into the tournament in year 2.

Doesn't make up for a lack of tournament success or several years straight of garbage performance.
He took over a basketball power in Pitt and turned them to dookie by the time he left. If conference play is so important, his last 5 years there they were 45-35 in conference(both Big East and ACC). 45 and 35 isn't good no matter how many conference titles he may have won and in all honesty, if you can't win in the dance, I'm not sure why you deserve the kind of scratch they were paying him.

He isn't the worst coach on earth, but to pretend he's something special when he's a chronic underperformer...

Quote: I'm sure Pitt's next hire will have much more success.

Not setting a high bar with that one.

LMFAO at Pitt ever being a basketball power.

(03-08-2018 11:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:31 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:11 AM)apoe Wrote:  After Howland's recruits were long gone he won the Big East
and finished 2nd multiple times.
Then after Pitt helped usher him out he goes to basketball wasteland TCU and gets them into the tournament in year 2.

Doesn't make up for a lack of tournament success or several years straight of garbage performance.
He took over a basketball power in Pitt and turned them to dookie by the time he left. If conference play is so important, his last 5 years there they were 45-35 in conference(both Big East and ACC). 45 and 35 isn't good no matter how many conference titles he may have won and in all honesty, if you can't win in the dance, I'm not sure why you deserve the kind of scratch they were paying him.

He isn't the worst coach on earth, but to pretend he's something special when he's a chronic underperformer...

Quote: I'm sure Pitt's next hire will have much more success.

Not setting a high bar with that one.

LMFAO at Pitt ever being a basketball power.

...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:31 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:11 AM)apoe Wrote:  After Howland's recruits were long gone he won the Big East
and finished 2nd multiple times.
Then after Pitt helped usher him out he goes to basketball wasteland TCU and gets them into the tournament in year 2.

Doesn't make up for a lack of tournament success or several years straight of garbage performance.
He took over a basketball power in Pitt and turned them to dookie by the time he left. If conference play is so important, his last 5 years there they were 45-35 in conference(both Big East and ACC). 45 and 35 isn't good no matter how many conference titles he may have won and in all honesty, if you can't win in the dance, I'm not sure why you deserve the kind of scratch they were paying him.

He isn't the worst coach on earth, but to pretend he's something special when he's a chronic underperformer...

Quote: I'm sure Pitt's next hire will have much more success.

Not setting a high bar with that one.

LMFAO at Pitt ever being a basketball power.

...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Elite 8's and 2 more in 07 and 09. 5 elite 8's in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.

Nope.

Before Jamie Dixon their last elite 8 was 1974. Dixon did get them to an elite 8 in 2009 though.

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:34 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:31 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:11 AM)apoe Wrote:  After Howland's recruits were long gone he won the Big East
and finished 2nd multiple times.
Then after Pitt helped usher him out he goes to basketball wasteland TCU and gets them into the tournament in year 2.

Doesn't make up for a lack of tournament success or several years straight of garbage performance.
He took over a basketball power in Pitt and turned them to dookie by the time he left. If conference play is so important, his last 5 years there they were 45-35 in conference(both Big East and ACC). 45 and 35 isn't good no matter how many conference titles he may have won and in all honesty, if you can't win in the dance, I'm not sure why you deserve the kind of scratch they were paying him.

He isn't the worst coach on earth, but to pretend he's something special when he's a chronic underperformer...

Quote: I'm sure Pitt's next hire will have much more success.

Not setting a high bar with that one.

LMFAO at Pitt ever being a basketball power.

...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

There have only been 8 schools EVER that had that. Pitt was a friggin juggernaut int he early 00's.

(03-08-2018 11:51 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  ...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

There have only been 8 schools EVER that had that. Pitt was a friggin juggernaut int he early 00's.

It was a great stretch...largely because of Jamie Dixon. Dixon was on the staff at Pitt the entire run and head coach for 2 of those sweet 16 teams and the elite eight team. That stretch is a selling point for Jamie Dixon. He didn't inherit a national power... he helped build the program to the point it was competing at the level of national powers.

(03-08-2018 11:56 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:51 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  ...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

There have only been 8 schools EVER that had that. Pitt was a friggin juggernaut int he early 00's.

It was a great stretch...largely because of Jamie Dixon.

Horse ****. The first two happened under Howland and Dixon parlayed that into further success.
If he were actually that good they wouldn't have dipped the way they did in the first place.
I'm sorry but talent/ability doesn't disappear for nearly a decade like that. Dude didn't just have an off season here or there, he was consistently mediocre toward the end of his tenure.

(03-08-2018 12:43 PM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:56 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:51 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  ...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

There have only been 8 schools EVER that had that. Pitt was a friggin juggernaut int he early 00's.

It was a great stretch...largely because of Jamie Dixon.

Horse ****. The first two happened under Howland and Dixon parlayed that into further success.
If he were actually that good they wouldn't have dipped the way they did in the first place.
I'm sorry but talent/ability doesn't disappear for nearly a decade like that. Dude didn't just have an off season here or there, he was consistently mediocre toward the end of his tenure.

I suppose TCU going from 100-200 level program to top 30 program overnight with Jamie Dixon wasn't **** either. I can't take anyone seriously that doesn't believe Dixon is a really good to great coach. You've seen life after him at Pitt and life before him at TCU. Dude gets it done.

Also know... The second sweet 16 and the elite 8 were both all Dixon's players. Look at Ollie for what happens a few years in when he didn't have Calhoun's guys. The idea that a mediocre coach is going to coast for a decade because of the guy before him is silly. Dixon achieved more than Howland at Pitt and was successfully well beyond the time Howland's guys were gone.

Count me as a believer in Jamie Dixon and what he brought to the Pitt program. The proof is in the pudding. Pitt's downward trajectory and TCU's sudden rise is no fluke. Pitt realizes what a horrible hire they did after Dixon left and they are now cutting their losses. Problem for them is, everyone else is passing them by in the ACC.

FWIW, the last time TCU made the NCAAT - 1998 (20 freegin' years ago).

(03-08-2018 01:04 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Count me as a believer in Jamie Dixon and what he brought to the Pitt program. The proof is in the pudding. Pitt's downward trajectory and TCU's sudden rise is no fluke. Pitt realizes what a horrible hire they did after Dixon left and they are now cutting their losses. Problem for them is, everyone else is passing them by in the ACC.

FWIW, the last time TCU made the NCAAT - 1998 (20 freegin' years ago).

I've become so tuned out to CBB that i didn't even realize that Dixon was at TCU. However, i have routinely checked rankings despite not following anyone other than UC, and was thoroughly wonder WTF was happening with TCU being ranked.

All that to say that even a casual observer can put 1 & 1 together to see the effect Dixon has. TCU as a hoops program semi-power was a laughable thought. I recall when they were going to join the Big East hoops snobs were bemoaning having to take them on as a basketball school. They were hawt garbage.




mc

(03-08-2018 12:49 PM)bearcatmark Wrote:  I suppose TCU going from 100-200 level program to top 30 program overnight with Jamie Dixon wasn't **** either.
I can't take anyone seriously that doesn't believe Dixon is a really good to great coach. You've seen life after him at Pitt and life before him at TCU. Dude gets it done.

You saw Pitt decline under him and yet you have no problem dismissing that.
It's harder to be consistently bad than occasionally good on a long enough time line.
TCU is having a good year... So what? Long Beach State had a good year. Once upon a time...

Quote:Also know... The second sweet 16 and the elite 8 were both all Dixon's players.

And the notoriety of what happened previously had no effect on recruiting? Sorry, I don't believe recruiting classes come out of some mysterious ether. It takes success.

Quote:Look at Ollie for what happens a few years in when he didn't have Calhoun's guys.

I think Dixon is better than Ollie. I'd also prefer to eat some old people/church candy as opposed to Cyanide. That doesn't mean that those caramel butter-scotch things aren't still "bleh". Certainly I wouldn't want to break the bank for them.

Quote:The idea that a mediocre coach is going to coast for a decade because of the guy before him is silly.

The idea that a great coach is going to decline for 7-8 years for no good reason is silly.
It's not Howland's kids alone that are the issue, it's the success they started and what continued to burn for a time.
Eventually it cooled and things fell off. Tournament success and kids going to the next level breeds further success. It's obtuse to say "Howland's immediate classes are gone, therefor his influence and their success + the public perception of it/him ceased to have an impact on future recruiting."

Sorry, I don't agree.

I'm not sure why Pitt's AD isn't under fire either for creating all this mess, assuming it's the same AD who hired Stallings in the first place. He was a horrible hire from the get go IMO. He had some success at Vandy but he had a horrendous reputation among the coaching fraternity for being a grade a a$$hole and almost impossible for support staff to work with. This was never going to end up anything but a disaster.

(03-08-2018 12:43 PM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:56 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:51 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  ...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

There have only been 8 schools EVER that had that. Pitt was a friggin juggernaut int he early 00's.

It was a great stretch...largely because of Jamie Dixon.

Horse ****. The first two happened under Howland and Dixon parlayed that into further success.
If he were actually that good they wouldn't have dipped the way they did in the first place.
I'm sorry but talent/ability doesn't disappear for nearly a decade like that. Dude didn't just have an off season here or there, he was consistently mediocre toward the end of his tenure.

Dixon had enough success at Pitt that one can't just say he did it on Howland's back, but coaching is a "what have you done for me lately" business. Everyone who goes into it understands that. When a team is towards the back of the conference pack for a few years, attendance is starting to sag, and booster donations are drying up, it's time for a change.

(03-08-2018 01:40 PM)Marcus Wrote:  I'm not sure why Pitt's AD isn't under fire either for creating all this mess, assuming it's the same AD who hired Stallings in the first place. He was a horrible hire from the get go IMO. He had some success at Vandy but he had a horrendous reputation among the coaching fraternity for being a grade a a$$hole and almost impossible for support staff to work with. This was never going to end up anything but a disaster.

i don't know if that person is still there but i believe i read that the AD who hired Stallings is taking the oregon state job

(03-08-2018 02:48 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 12:43 PM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:56 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:51 AM)BearcatMan Wrote:  

(03-08-2018 11:41 AM)Recluse1 Wrote:  ...2002-2004 hey had back to back to back Sweet 16's and 2 more in 07 and an elite 8 in 2009. 4 Sweet 16's and an elite 8 in 7 years.... Wake me up when we have that.


EDIT: sorry, I misread what I was looking at earlier. point remains though, they were very good in the 00's

There have only been 8 schools EVER that had that. Pitt was a friggin juggernaut int he early 00's.

It was a great stretch...largely because of Jamie Dixon.

Horse ****. The first two happened under Howland and Dixon parlayed that into further success.
If he were actually that good they wouldn't have dipped the way they did in the first place.
I'm sorry but talent/ability doesn't disappear for nearly a decade like that. Dude didn't just have an off season here or there, he was consistently mediocre toward the end of his tenure.

Dixon had enough success at Pitt that one can't just say he did it on Howland's back, but coaching is a "what have you done for me lately" business. Everyone who goes into it understands that. When a team is towards the back of the conference pack for a few years, attendance is starting to sag, and booster donations are drying up, it's time for a change.

Yeah, I think that it might have been time for a change is about the worst you can actually say about Dixon as a coach. Because he's clearly a really good to great coach as mark in in particular noted. TCU has got to feel like they hit a HR with him. Kind of a similar phenomenon going on with Rick Barnes at Tennessee after a long stint at Texas.