6pm, ESPNU.
You know things are bad, when the Pitt quick notes, includes this.
Pitt has dropped 14 consecutive games, the longest streak in program history. The Panthers have dropped 18 consecutive regular season league contests.
Those are notes from Pitt. The part where they try and spin as positive as possible. Yet, there is no hiding from this reality.
A little unintentional fun from the ACC schedule makers. The last time Pitt won a regular season ACC game was exactly a year ago, against the same team they face today. That’s right, Pitt whipped up on FSU 80-66 on February 18, 2017.
And that was it other then beating GT in the opening game of the ACC Tournament. Pitt hasn’t won a regular season ACC game in exactly a year.
You’ve probably noticed in the open threads that I haven’t bothered talking much about the opponent or the match-ups as the season continues to plummet further down the drain (we’re long past circling). That’s because there is no point. To note the talent disparity? To note the match-ups? Experience? Those are given at this point.
I deeply sympathize with the players. Beyond not being used to losing after successful high school careers, beyond having to do far more then they should. They are in the impossible position of having to defend their coaches, the choices they made to choose a program in this condition and themselves.
It’s rough, and I think most people get it. The attacks on the players’ performances in the games have been mostly muted. There’s an understanding of how overmatched they are. There’s frustration at their lack of progression in the season — but the ire is being properly directed at the coaching.
seems about right… 247Sports
6hrs ago
Blllaaahhhhhaaaaaa!! HoHoHOOO!!
My message to Mr. Gallagher is that if you don’t want to make the financial commitment that it takes for our programs to be successful in big time college sports, then just shut the whole thing down. Think of the money you’ll save!
The Athletic Dept. at Pitt, like Chas mentioned in the last post, is fiscally conservative by design.
Directing your ire at Gallagher is a fruitless endeavor.
Please see below for a good explanation of how Pitt works and definitions of the different titles.
“Administration:
The University’s administration is led by Chancellor Patrick Gallagher and overseen by a Board of Trustees with input from faculty, staff, and student shared-governance organizations and support from various offices.”
“Board of Trustees:
Okay, so these guys and gals are a little confusing. A board of trustees is a corporate body that has complete responsibility for the government and welfare of a university. The board is made up of advisors who, in almost all cases, don’t hold any positions at the school itself (this, of course, doesn’t include key constituents such as the university president, and occasionally deans and faculty). The board will often include well-known alumni and state politicians, especially for state schools. This group—which ranges in size depending on school population, public or private affiliation, etc.—does such duties as selecting the president, determining major goals of the university, approving policies and procedures, reviewing the budget, and other related tasks.”
“Provost:
A provost is, in essence, the vice president of a university. Most often, this position is considered to be the senior academic administrator in charge of curricular and research tasks. The provost may sometimes act as president during a vacancy, such as the time between a president leaving and a new one being hired. Almost always, provosts are selected from tenured faculty (see “faculty” below). Provost is similar to chancellor in that it may refer to the title of the leader at a particular branch campus within a university system. Some other titles used for this same position include chief academic officer or vice president for academic affairs. Titles such as assistant provost, associate provost, vice provost, or deputy provost will report to and work directly with this position.”
*** This is what Pitt does NOT have, and the reason Gallagher is just a pawn and not really worth your time athletically ***
“President
This is the most obvious position, but the president is, in the simplest terms, the leader of the entire institution. The president of a college is the equivalent to the CEO of a company, so his/her role is to lead the overall strategic planning for and sustained performance of an institution. In other countries, this position is called the chancellor, but sometimes when there are several campuses within a university system, the leader of each campus is called the chancellor, who reports to a president of the overall university. (This takes place at the University of California, for example—UC Berekely’s chancellor is Robert J. Birgeneau and UC Riverside’s chancellor is Timothy P. White.)”
In a statement, University of Pittsburgh Chancellor Patrick Gallagher said: “For 17 years, 13 as head coach, Jamie Dixon has been a remarkable ambassador for the University of Pittsburgh. He was a great leader who cared deeply for our student-athletes and our entire basketball program. I can appreciate that the rare chance of coaching for your alma mater does not come up very often and is hard to pass up, but we will miss him here at Pitt. We wish him the best and we now turn our attention to advancing our program, building on the solid foundation Jamie left us.”
Sounds like he does have a voice. My point is that KS was a terrible hire for Pitt. Directing your anger at him gives the University’s leadership a pass on this debacle.
What decision making is exemplified by that quote? It’s just a farewell note. He makes recommendations to the board just like the AD makes recommendations to him, but the board gives the yay or nay and decides how much money to invest.
To Reed’s point, that list he provided is the real power. Academics is the priority at Pitt. The Athletic Dept gets a budget but it will have to be self-sustainable to be successful. Alumni, donations, ticket sales … It’s why the AD at Pitt is so important.
If you recall, Gallagher formed a committee to hire Barnes. Barnes was the recommendation from that committee. It wasn’t even a person Gallagher hand picked. He in-turn recommended that recommendation to the BoT. It’s hard to even pin that hire on Gallagher.
Even further, Pitt has one of the largest endowments yet almost all of it is earmarked for academia and medicine. Pitt can’t even access it to buy-out a coach.
The BoT is in lieu of a President at Pitt.
None of this means Pitt can’t win but they need special coaches with a special AD that can generate a self-sustaining revenue. I, personably, like Heather so I’m hopeful she’s the one. I think Stallings has to go now though.
Local media, national media and fan criticism lends me to believe he’s done after the season.
BTW, we’re #2 on Forde’s list of hot seat coaches.
At Pitt, the Chancellor “calls the shots” and runs the university and all operations. He is not a Vice President.
He made the final decisions for the Athletic Director, Football and basketball coach.
REALLY GUYS, THERE IS NO ONE “BEHIND THE CURTAIN” MAKING HIRING DECISIONS.
Alabama: After losing defensive line coach Karl Dunbar to the Steelers, Nick Saban will reportedly replace him with Miami’s Craig Kuligowski.
Charlie Partridge remains a Pitt guy for another day.
H2P!
“7 college basketball coaches on the hot seat (and 4 others to watch)”
“USC (10). Andy Enfield has the Trojans tracking toward their third straight NCAA bid, something that last happened from 2007-09. But Enfield lacks Miller’s established pattern of success and may have bigger problems — in addition to fired assistant Tony Bland, the school suspended guard De’Anthony Melton for the season. If/when this gets bad, Enfield is expendable with a minimum of lamentation.”
Maybe Pitt can get a do-over and this time cut Enfield the check he wants…
“The Board of Trustees delegates GENERAL administrative, academic, and management authority to the Chancellor of the University. The Board retains ULTIMATE responsibility for all University affairs, however, and reserves its authority directly in at least three areas: selection of a Chancellor; approval of major institutional policies, particularly those related to the fiduciary responsibilities of the Board; and definition of the mission and goals of the University.”
Obviously, the Chancellor is not a figurehead. I’m not implying that. He has important responsibilities, but he’s a VP in Pitt’s system and chooses to focus on the academia side.
Based on how he’s hired both AD’s (Committee’s), he has a very hands off approach to the athletic department. The AD is running that show.
Remember, Gallagher comes from the federal government … bureaucracy is in his blood.
NCAA denies Louisville’s appeal, rules Cardinals must vacate 2013 national title
H2P!!!
The chancellor is not a VP and the Board of Trustees did not hire any coach. (That’s a fact Jack! ) LOL.
He’s a VP in the branch campus system for Pitt. He’s responsible for Pitt’s largest branch, and reports directly to the BoT, who has final say on all matters.
I don’t know how Pitt was run previously, but since Nordenberg first took his position, it’s been this way.
Gallagher is a VP so he has clout, and a lot of it … he does manage Pitt’s main campus after all, but he doesn’t have as much power as you seem to think he does. He’s a high level administrator. Which his federal government job prepared him for.
I never said the BoT hired the coach, I said the AD did. The Chancellor approved it and BoT signed off on it.
Gallagher, like Nordenberg before him, has given the Athletic Director a lot of autonomy. Gallagher didn’t even directly hire the AD himself. He assembled a committee of 12 people to make the hire. He assembled a committee of 14 people to hire Barnes before that.
In both cases he put Randy Juhl in charge of the committee, so Julh is actually the one who made the hires. With the Heather hire, he even had a BoT member on the committee, John Pelusi: university board of trustees, chair of Trustees Athletic Committee, former Pitt football athlete, executive managing director HHF
OMG, are you on crack or something.
Get over it, the man is the boss. He makes the final decision.
He is the final authority period. IN the professional world there are times when a candidate is interviewed by several people . A joint consensus is made but the final responsibility is made by one person. When it does not work, that person is responsible to remove said employee and is more than likely blamed for the hire.
Our Chancellor hired Pat Narduzzi because we did not have an AD at the time. Once an AD was hired, she had responsibility to hire a coach but sure as hell checks in with the Chancellor
Of course Gallagher approved the recommendations to him from the committees he formed. Why have a committee if you won’t accept their recommendation? He handed the final decisions off to the BoT for final approval.
A point about endowment.
Endowments are made up of gifts, contributions from anyone and anywhere. If a contributor wants his or her contribution assigned to Athletics it is.
Pitt’s endowment has an allocation for Athletics. Most endowments are invested in annuities, stocks and other investment instruments. The gains from those investments are used by universities to fund a whole host of projects, endowed chairs, expansions, contributor assigned spend, general operating etc.
Your point about the University of California organization.
They are governed by Chancellors, University of California Los Angeles(UCLA) is a “chief executive officer” CEO. All chancellors in this UC system report to one board of regents in the state.
Our Chancellor is the CEO of Pitt also.
Find that same statement about Cal in regards to Pitt’s organization and post the link to it.
I’ll wait.
No matter what, a chancellor at UC or Pitt are not vice presidents. The chancellors report to either a board trustees or regents and are not considered vice presidents but CEO’s. . .
Have a good week!
