Seeing as how the blather about football, coaching, and searches shall no doubt march on for at least this next week, I though it would be nice to take a break from all of that fear & loathing and take a look a what Pitt’s been doing right in its sporting endeavors.

While we’ve come to take Chevy Troutman as fixture ’round these parts, some Penn Staters view him as the one that got away. Or, rather, one of many that got away.

Specifically, David Jones of the Patriot-News sees Chevy’s recruiting trip during Coach Dunn’s tenure as emblematic of a program that has been less than adequate in its recruiting. To wit:

Hardly a warm welcome for a hot prospect, no?

Essentially, Jones points to this as a way of defending current coach Ed DeChellis from the slings and arrows of criticism launched at him after another slow start (Penn State Men’s BB is currently 5-4.). He asserts that his predecessor’s incompetence is a thing of the past.

“DeChellis and assistants Kurt Kanaskie, James Johnson and Hilliary Scott might fail to lure to PSU the players necessary to win at the major-conference level. After all, it’s yet to be proven that anyone can consistently do it. But it won’t be for lack of effort and organization.

Talk to recruitniks around the Northeast and Midwest as much as I do and you hear stories. You no longer hear stories like the Troutman debacle in connection with PSU.”

Jones then wraps up his point by reminding everyone that PSU still has four scholarships left to give. He then finishes the column by naming two recruits that they Nits are chasing. (Do you really need me to read between the lines for you at this point?)

Spin, you say? Certainly. But Pitt fans should read this article for more than some (immensely gratifying) schadenfreude. It should also serve as a reminder of how lucky we are, especially after a disastrously handled coaching search, to be in such a strong position when it comes to hoops recruiting. Thanksgiving may be past, but a little gratitude is still in order, I think.

Just a quick look to see how Stanford is seeing their new man. He was the guy Stanford wanted — experienced, affordable, scandal free, and blessed by St. Bill Walsh. The other aspect is discussion of just how good Cal is, not to mention other coaches in the PAC-10. You have Carroll at USC, Tedford at Cal, Willingham taking over at Washington, Belotti in Oregon and the other Stoops down in the desert. A bit of a higher rent district as far as coaching names. Then, there is playing up the local angle. Even finding a local high school coach who Harris once recruited to play QB at OSU.

Meanwhile in Akron, J.D. Brookhart claims not to be interested in the Pitt job.

“Naw,” he said when asked if he was interested in returning to Pitt. “I’m thrilled to be here (in Akron). We did some good things this year and I think we have a great thing going.”

Roughly translated to, “I know I don’t have a shot at the job.”

Meanwhile, in the Nittany Nation, they have noticed what happened at ND with some feeling it could someday be their turn. Not to mention making their blood run cold at another thought:

And that brings us to why Penn State fans should care.

In essence, they are conditioned to cackle at Notre Dame’s woes. But this nightmare soon could be coming to a university north of you.

When Paterno retires, Penn State administrators are going to face a similar situation.

They are Penn State, after all. So they’ll expect candidates to line up for the privilege of coaching the Nittany Lions. They’ll expect to conduct the interview process on their terms and at their pace.

But that’s not how it works anymore. Very few schools have full control over hiring. There are too many outside factors, too many competitors, too many recruits waiting for information.

It may be painful to admit, but Penn State — like Notre Dame — is no longer one of those go-at-any-cost programs.

Yet Paterno is still going to pick when he retires, that much became crystal clear this season.
…
Defensive coordinator Tom Bradley is likely the heir apparent to Paterno. At one time, though, so was Jerry Sandusky and Fran Ganter. Now, one is retired and the other has been pushed out of the public eye.

Bradley, who has been with the program since he played for the Lions in 1975-79, has proven his mettle as a coordinator and top recruiter. But he probably won’t stick around forever.

Don’t be surprised if his name gets thrown around as the next head coach or the No.1 assistant at the University of Pittsburgh now that Walt Harris has moved on. Maybe Bradley is the right guy to lead Penn State post-Paterno. Maybe he’s not. Maybe there’s an Urban Meyer type who is waiting in the wings and will be primed and ready by the time Paterno lets go.

That thought made another blogger start to worry. Of course, even another PSU blogger believes there is another plan for Paterno’s succession: Rick Neuheisal. The reasoning is amusing enough. I can only hope it to be true.

I forgot to mention it yesterday, but Pitt moved up to #10 in both the coaches and writers polls in basketball. I didn’t think Pitt would, but UConn’s unexplected and shocking loss to UMass allowed Pitt entry.

Pitt not missing a beat so far this season, has caught the eye of at least on reporter up in Connecticut.

Through the first seven games of the season, nothing much has changed. Pitt improved to 7-0 for the third consecutive season with an 84-71 victory over Penn State Saturday. The Panthers, ranked No. 10, might not win their first 18 games as they did last season, but there’s no doubt the NCAA Tournament is in their future again.

The steady influence of coach Jamie Dixon, in his second season of replacing Ben Howland, is a major reason.

“We really look at every game as the same,” Dixon said before the Penn State game, which was built up by the Nittany Lions as a big rivalry game. “We prepare every game the same, and I think that’s why we’ve been so consistent last year and this year. We look at every game as the most important on our schedule.”
…
Pitt’s offense doesn’t get much praise, but the Panthers are shooting 50 percent from the field.

“Last year we led the Big East in field goal percentage offense [46.9] and we were near the top in [fewest] turnovers,” Dixon said. “Those generally are the things that indicate offense efficiency. We were very good on the offensive end last year.

“I think the way we play defense, make it tough for teams to run their stuff, and force teams to use a lot of clock before they do take up a shot … that has a lot to do with the score of our games. We’ve executed pretty well in the offensive end. We’re trying to get better. I hope we continue to improve like we did last year.”
…
UConn was the first team to beat Pitt last season, snapping that 18-0 start on Jan. 19 at the Civic Center with a 68-65 victory. The Panthers might not go that long without a loss this season, but they are headed in the right direction.

The writer is the regular on UConn’s b-ball beat. Looks like he is already taking Pitt seriously again as a rival for the Big East.

We’ll start in Pittsburgh where AD Jeff Long had the first statements. Joe Bendel helps explain AD Long’s reason for claiming not to have finished an evaluation on Harris after this season. They were waiting until after the Fiesta Bowl. Right. One of Long’s main point during the press conference, is that Pitt needs a head coach that can recruit. Especially in Western PA. An issue, Shelly Anderson also noted in her article.

Anderson’s piece is a little more detailed, I recommend reading all of it. Long admitted that Defensive Coordinator (and popular target for abuse on this blog) Paul Rhoads will be a candidate for the job. Long also admitted his legacy/how people will view his tenure will essentially be defined in the next month:

Long, who became Pitt AD a few months before the 2003 football season, called this the most significant and important hire of his career. He said he would conduct the coaching search himself, although he will consult with [Chancellor] Nordenberg. He said he already had a mental short list of coaches he would be interested in and he has received many inquiries.

Other than that, no pressure.

The players were on hand, to make sure everyone knew they want Paul Rhoads to get the job. That’s great, but I don’t care. Everyone may like him, but if we are going to criticize and complain about the job by Harris in coaching and preparation, then Rhoads is definitely deserving of as much criticism for the defense. Spare me the — the D stopped them when they needed to — line. They didn’t against Syracuse. ND came down to who had the ball last. Furman was just worn out. WVU and BC was as much coaching and player implosion on the other side. No, I’m not a fan. Why do you ask?

Naturally, just about every Pitt recruit who has verballed is back in play. This should be no surprise. Some are sticking with their verbals — for now.

Coach Harris issued a statement through the Pitt Athletic Department. Everyone noted that he thanked the Chancellor and especially the players, but not AD Long (or even Pederson). Why should he? He didn’t insult them either.

Then there was the Stanford press conference to introduce Walt Harris as their new coach. The original “offensive genius,” Bill Walsh was there to welcome Walt. While Harris used the word “excited,” to describe his feelings, Paul Zeise was at the press conference and didn’t see it.

But his body language told a different story. He barely cracked a smile throughout the entire news conference, he lacked a certain enthusiasm that is usually a part of these events and he politely, but firmly declined to answer questions about a very sore subject — Pitt, and the circumstances surrounding his exit.

“I’m not going to talk about Pitt,” Harris said several times when asked about his relationship with his former employer. “I’m here to talk about Stanford. What’s in the past is in the past, let’s focus on this great university and what we’re going to do in the future. This is about what’s in front, not what’s in back.”

Harris would not discuss Pitt because he’s still very hurt because of the lack of respect and appreciation he feels he has received. He refused to discuss his strained relationship with Pitt athletic director Jeff Long or that members of the administration did not support him — for a number of reasons beyond football — or the fact that despite taking the Panthers to a Bowl Championship Series game, he was not offered a contract extension.

This story really suggests that Zeise believes Harris really wanted to stay at Pitt, but was boxed in to a corner by AD Long either lowballing or saying no to an extension. Time for me to give the Post-Gazette some credit. They have done a great job in covering this story. I’m surprised and impressed they flew Zeise out the California for the press conference rather than simply have him report on it after watching it on video.

Now we have the columns. Joe Starkey of the Trib. decides to back AD Long and the view that Harris couldn’t take Pitt any higher and that Harris didn’t believe Pitt could go higher.

All that matters is that Pitt’s highest-level administrators did not believe in Harris enough to try to retain him, although Long would not admit that.

Instead, Long tried to leave the impression that Harris spurned Pitt, which is why he was asked if he was “disappointed” in Harris’ departure.

“Oh, I don’t know if disappointed would be a term I would use,” Long said.

OK, how about elated?

This couldn’t have worked out better for Pitt, which does not have to pay the final two years of Harris’ contract and can now conduct a search with clean hands.
…
Clearly, Pitt needs a man with more tact, vivacity and vision. School administrators decided months ago they would seek one.

Can you blame them?

Even the people who support losing Harris, admit that this was not Harris bailing on the school. At best it was a sad divorce.

Well, most do. Ron Cook doesn’t believe Harris wanted to stay at Pitt, despite all reports and what reporters at his own paper were saying.

I’m convinced, despite published reports, that he had no interest in staying at Pitt beyond this season. That was clear in June when he was publicly critical of his own football camps, which have become an important recruiting tool for all major-college programs. It sounded a lot like an excuse. If the camps aren’t attracting enough of the blue-chip kids, whose fault is that?

I just have to ask again. Where were all the stories about Harris complaining about the camps in the papers back in June? Were they video and media stories only? Could someone tell me when the newspapers actually treated it as news, not as reasons why Harris would be fired? And it was my understanding about the criticisms, that it was the lack of support/money from the athletic department/administration that was the crux of his complaint. A common thread, really considering the complaints about the way the school didn’t like to pay much for Harris’ coaching staff.

Actually, the thrust of Cook’s column is to complain about letting Harris (and Urban Meyer of Utah) stay on to coach in the bowl game. I have mixed feelings on the issue, but I’m supporting it here because otherwise, it would likely be Paul Rhoads doing the interim job — and while I want Pitt to win — I don’t want to give the Rhoads camp anything else to point to for why he should become head coach.

The Cook column is truly bizarre for another reason. He invokes Michigan’s basketball team in the late ’80s early ’90s. On getting rid of a coach taking another job but wanting to finish out the season. Yeah, Michigan won the National Championship in ’89,but considering the rest of Steve Fisher’s tenure at Michigan, is not something anyone cares to talk about (and to the NCAA and Michigan mostly doesn’t exist any longer); you might not want to make that kind of comparison.