The Panther-Lair.com 3-2-1 Column: Hoops, schedules and recruiting

MORE HEADLINES - PODCAST: Habakkuk Baldonado shares his story of how he got to Pitt from Italy | Recruiting review: How has Pat Narduzzi done recruiting safeties? | Film review: Noah Palmer | What does Marquis Williams bring to Pitt? | Stallings: "Coaches live on the hot seat"

In the Panther-Lair.com 3-2-1 Column, we look at three things we know, two questions we have an one prediction.

Today, we’re talking hoops, football schedules and recruiting.

THREE THINGS WE KNOW

The end certainly seems to be near
No one knows what the future holds, but with every passing day, the next few weeks look more and more like they will bring change for Pitt basketball.

Of course, I’m talking about Kevin Stallings and the decision Pitt Athletic Director Heather Lyke has to make (or, in all likelihood, has already made). And as January has turned to February and the end of the regular season draws near, it seems like the decision to replace Stallings with a new head basketball coach will likely come to pass.

Whether that would be the right decision is a debate that will play out long after the decision is made (conversely, if Lyke ultimately decides to go with Stallings for one more season, that decision will also be debated at length). Every Pitt fan and media member and administrator and donor and anyone else who has a connection to the basketball team has an opinion on the matter, but some of the tangible results of the season are pretty evident.

For starters - and this is a big one - there is the attendance, which has sunk to the lowest depths we’ve ever seen at the Petersen Events Center. I said on a podcast recently that my lasting memory of the 2017-18 basketball season won’t be the losing. It won’t be the blowouts or the blown leads. It won’t be the in-over-their-heads freshmen and newcomers who never seemed to get better while playing in the ACC.

No, my lasting memory of this season will be sitting in the press area at the Petersen Events Center, looking up at rows and sections of empty seats. It will be the lack of atmosphere created by the few fans who did show up. It will be the half-empty Oakland Zoo, whose support for the program waned in concert with that of the general fan population.

Jamie Dixon used to bemoan the Zoo’s tradition of yelling “sucks!” after each opposing player was introduced and even addressed the matter with Zoo leadership. Turns out, all he had to do to stop that chant was get shut out in the conference schedule and drop a half-dozen 20-point losses along the way.

(Although, in a rather cynical turn of tradition, some Zoo members have transferred the “he sucks, too” chant from the opposing coach’s introduction to Stallings’ intro - a move that was negated by the decision to stop prominently introducing Stallings altogether.)

Such is the way times have changed. It’s simply a toxic situation right now. I believe Stallings and his staff are trying. I believe they believe in the players they have brought to Pitt and the future potential of those players. I believe that they believe Malik Ellison joining Marcus Carr and Parker Stewart and the rest as sophomores will give Pitt a competitive roster.

I believe they’re coaching them to play better than they have, only to see their teaching undone on the court when things get live. I believe the players are trying, too. I believe there are a few guys in there who can, in fact, play in the ACC in due time.

And most of all, I believe they have not quit, which is a credit to the coaches and the players. This season could have easily broken a group of coaches and a group of players who have been beaten down every time they stepped on the court in the ACC.

The constant losing hasn’t broken the players; I think it’s easy to see that. But I don’t think it’s hard to imagine Heather Lyke seeing the program as being broken. This is, without question, the worst season in the history of Pitt basketball. Is that all Kevin Stallings’ fault? No. But he is the head coach who was hired just two years ago by a different Athletic Director in a process that has brought more questions than answers, and the temptation to hit the reset button is pretty undeniable.

There are some excuses
While it seems like a strong consensus that Stallings will not be back next season, there is something to be said for the hand he was dealt. He inherited a roster that had a double dose of complicating factors:

Not only were there players in Stallings’ first season who didn’t always seem to share the larger goals of the team, but he was also inevitably going to have to weather a healthy amount of attrition after that season ended.

I’m not just talking about the transfers and dismissal; there was plenty of “natural” attrition that was going to happen, what with four seniors on the roster when Stallings arrived. So he walked into a difficult situation that got even more challenging when those first four departures more than doubled with additional transfers.

Then, of course, the transfer of Cam Johnson made a challenging situation that had already gotten worse into a full-blown disaster, relatively speaking. And lest Stallings and company had anything left to build on, any morsel of hope or stability, Ryan Luther got hurt - and that little bit of stability was ripped away.

Would Ryan Luther have made Pitt competitive in the ACC? No, probably not. But he probably could have made some contributions that would have led to a win or two along the way. We’ve all seen the scoring droughts that Pitt has struggled through in virtually every game this season; I don’t think it’s crazy to imagine that Luther could have dropped in a soft layup or maybe grabbed an offensive rebound or two with a put-back to break up one of those droughts.

And maybe that would have been the difference. Maybe he could have swung the momentum against Georgia Tech or N.C. State or Boston College or Syracuse. Pitt didn’t need someone to take over those games in some heroic fashion. The Panthers didn’t even need some great defensive stopper. They just needed somebody to make a shot. One shot to stem the tide a little and keep Pitt in the game rather than watching as an opponent - and another and another and another - made off with a long scoring run.

But would that have turned 0-16 into 11-5 or even 8-8? No, probably not. At best, it’s probably a 3-13 record or a 4-12 mark that, at best, keeps the program on the same track it was last season. It’s wouldn’t be improvement - at least not in terms of comparing records year-to-year - but at least it wouldn’t be getting worse.

And what’s more, if Pitt could have matched last season’s 4-14 ACC record, you could make a case that it would have been almost an endorsement of Stallings’ coaching. Getting this team, with seven freshmen and 11 newcomers, to match the ACC record of a team that featured four seniors, including two of the more talented players in recent Pitt history, would be a successful accomplishment, a feather in Stallings’ cap and one of the more compelling cases for keeping him in Oakland.

But there are a lot of hypotheticals in there. Too many, really. And the overall lack of improvement from those freshmen and newcomers, who seem no better equipped to compete in the ACC than they were three months ago, probably overshadows any what-might-have-been’s from the Luther injury.

There has to be commitment
So if this all comes to pass, if Pitt decides to move on from Kevin Stallings after two seasons and enters the all-too-familiar coaching market next month, one thing seems to be crystal clear:

The Athletic Department - as well as the University at large - is going to have to show serious commitment. That probably can’t be overstated. As was the case when Pat Narduzzi was hired, Chancellor Patrick Gallagher is going to have to be closely involved in the next hiring process - not because Heather Lyke can’t run the search, but rather because the next coach is going to have to be convinced that everyone involved is committed to the future of the program.

Let’s face it: a program that ran off Jamie Dixon and then fired his replacement after two seasons is going to have some questions to answer from the next coach who considers the job. If Pitt is going to make the kind of hire it needs to make and get someone who can legitimately rebuild the program, then that coach is probably going to need more than a few reassurances that Pitt actually wants that kind of rebuild.

That starts with money, of course. Pitt is going to have to put together a rather robust compensation package, probably one that puts the next coach in the top half of the ACC. And with that, naturally, will be money for assistant coaches.

Beyond that, though, Pitt will need to show its next coach that there is support for the program - support from the Athletic Department, support from the University administration and support from a base of donors.

That last part is key, too: Pitt’s fan base probably doesn’t have the best reputation right now. I don’t know how heavily a fan base weighs on a coach’s decision to take a job, but I suspect that within the coaching ranks, Pitt’s fans probably have earned reputation of thinking that what Jamie Dixon did wasn’t good enough, which they then followed by simply not showing up to watch Kevin Stallings’ teams.

Fan support is important on the broader “Who’s coming to the games?” level and the more acute and more impactful “Who’s donating to the program?” level. Pitt will have to show its next coach that there is ample support in all regards. Continued facilities improvements - which are always needed - propelled by private donations will be important for the new coach to see, not just for him to have good facilities but for him to know the support is there.

Mostly, though, it just comes back to convincing a potential candidate that there is appropriate desire and will to make Pitt a big-time basketball program that can regularly compete in the ACC. The Athletic Department and the University administration and the donor base seem to have stepped up when it comes to football; that same commitment needs to be present in basketball.

TWO QUESTIONS

Does anybody really need anybody?
We’ve had some interesting discussions lately regarding the matter of Penn State being an annual non-conference opponent and the fact that the interest doesn’t seem to be there in State College.

This discussion came up because Penn State recently finalized its 2020 schedule with games against Nevada and San Jose State - a pair of non-conference games whose scheduling assured that the Pitt-PSU series will not extend beyond 2019.

This was a disappointment, of course, to Pitt fans who hoped the four-year series from 2016-19 would turn into an annual meeting beyond those years. And, I suspect, it was a disappointment to a fair number of Penn State fans who, perhaps secretly, also hoped the series would extend for the simple fact that the last two games in the series have been quite fun.

Last year’s game was the second-biggest attendance for a PSU home game in 2017. And two years ago, as we all know, Pitt-PSU at Heinz Field drew that largest crowd for a sporting event in Pittsburgh history.

Few would deny that both of those games were pretty great atmospheres, and I think that’s at the crux of the disappointment: it’s not that anyone needs the game to be played - it’s that people want the game to be played.

Sure, Pitt is well-served to have marquee opponents at Heinz Field to draw big crowds, and Penn State is the marquee of the marquee (in a select group with Notre Dame, who will come to Heinz Field in 2020, and West Virginia, who is scheduled to be here in 2022 and 2024). To that end, Pitt benefits from having Penn State on the schedule because those game draw fans.

But I’d still contend that Pitt’s desire to have Penn State on the schedule is a “want” more than a “need.” Pitt fans want this game to happen. Penn State fans do, too, I believe.

Alas, college football in 2018 (or 2020) makes it difficult for that kind of game to happen with any kind of regularity. Penn State plays nine conference games in the Big Ten, leaving just three spots in the non-conference - at least two of which have to be at home in order for the Nittany Lions to meet their budget expectations.

So you get the schedules that PSU has for the foreseeable future: Appalachian State and Kent State in 2018, Idaho and Buffalo in 2019, Nevada and San Jose State in 2020. Getting two home games against should-be-beatable opponents every year makes an annual series with Pitt an untenable proposition if PSU wants to face different Power Five teams. There’s only room for one Power Five team on that kind of schedule, and unless PSU wants Pitt to be it every year, then the series has to go on hold.

Considering that the Nittany Lions have a Power Five non-conference opponent lined up for every season through 2025, it’s unlikely Pitt will see Penn State again anytime soon.

So enjoy it this year and next year. Beyond that, pine for it, desire it, complain about not having it - but don’t mistake that for needing it. The 2019 schedule - Delaware, Ohio, UCF - isn’t much to write home about, but 2020 and 2025 have Notre Dame coming to Heinz Field and West Virginia will be here in 2022 and 2024 (plus Tennessee will come to town in 2022).

What should Pitt do about scheduling?
Speaking of scheduling, Pitt finalized its 2020 schedule this week with a game against Miami (Oh.). Pitt will reportedly pay Miami $1.1 million for the game, but such is the cost of doing business if you don’t want to go on the road against non-Power Five opponents.

Scott Barnes was a big opponent of that concept, bemoaning the home-and-home arrangements Pitt had scheduled with Marshall and UCF before he arrived (although there was a series scheduled with Cincinnati in June 2015, shortly before Barnes officially took the position of Athletic Director but after he had been hired).

I don’t know how it would have played out if Barnes had stayed at Pitt, but I suspect he eventually would have concluded that as long as the ACC plays eight conference games, the Panthers were going to have to take some home-and-home deals with schools outside the Power Five conferences.

It simply becomes cost-prohibitive to only bring teams to Heinz Field without any return trips. Take that Miami (OH) deal, for instance: paying that team more than a million dollars is fine in a pinch; Pitt seemed to be scrambling to fill out the 2020 schedule and bought a game with the Redhawks.

The rest of the schedule features a game at Marshall (finishing the home-and-home series that started in 2016), a home game against Notre Dame and an FCS opponent (Richmond) who is also getting paid.

Paying an FCS team and one Group of Five team is probably the cap on what Pitt can and should pay in a given year; for the other two spots on the non-conference schedule, the Panthers will likely do what they are doing in 2019 and 2020 - playing one home-and-home series against a Power Five team and one home-and-home series against a G5 team.

Some people would probably like to see those two spots filled with two Power Five teams, but quite frankly, there’s no reason for Pitt to do that. I’ve said this in the past, but the only reason to play teams like Oklahoma State is to either get butts in the seats or to pad your CFP resume.

As we saw last year, fans aren’t all that interested in Big 12 teams (other than one Big 12 team, in particular) and if you actually are in the hunt for the CFP, resumes don’t matter all that much.

So keep it at one Power Five team each year. But for the other spot in the non-conference, you’re probably going to have to go on the road in a home-and-home series, simply from a financial perspective.

The situation would resolve itself if the ACC went to nine conference games; then Pitt could schedule like Penn State, ideally with some combination of West Virginia, Notre Dame and Penn State filling the Power Five spot on the calendar next to an FCS team and a G5 team. But until that happens, Pitt has to deal with the realities of the situation, and that means occasionally going to Akron.

While we’re on the subject of scheduling, there’s one thing I’ll say for Scott Barnes:

When he got to Pitt, he made it a priority to get Penn State on the schedule beyond 2019. But when he got some resistance - or maybe reluctance - from the other side, he moved quickly and got a four-game series set up with West Virginia. I mean, within two months of being on the job, Barnes had a deal with WVU.

Of course, the Mountaineers never wanted the series to end in the first place, so it didn’t exactly take tough negotiations. But Barnes saw the tenor of the discussions he was having with PSU, saw an opportunity to put a marquee opponent on the schedule from 2022-25 and got it done.

ONE PREDICTION

This spring will be better than this Saturday for recruiting visits
Pat Narduzzi and the football staff are holding a Junior Day on Saturday, hoping to draw some of their top 2019 targets to Pittsburgh for what may be a first look at Pitt and what it has to offer.

Thus far, the list isn’t shaping up to be star-studded, with just a handful of offered targets confirmed as coming and most of our current expected crop of visitors looking like recruits who will probably have to camp for an offer.

The reasons for Pitt’s top prospects not coming to the Junior Day are varied, from seven-on-seven tournaments to high school basketball playoffs, but one common theme has emerged from the recruits who aren’t making it into town:

They won’t be here on Saturday, but they’ll be here in the spring.

Taisun Phommachanh, Davis Beville and Connor Bazelak all said that’s their plan, and those are three of Pitt’s top quarterback targets in the 2019 class. Local standout Jayvon Thrift and new linebacker offer Jestin Jacobs said the same thing. And there were more like them who said this weekend doesn’t work for their schedules, but they’ll find time during spring camp to visit.

Certainly, it would be more exciting to have a huge, impressive list of four and five-star targets - or even just a bunch of offered recruits - planning to descend on Pittsburgh for the Junior Day, but sometimes things don’t work out that way. The fact that there’s interest enough to have an eye on visiting in the spring is a positive, and in some ways, those spring camp visits can accomplish even more than a typical Junior Day.

When a recruit visits this spring, he’s going to see the coaches in action, both during meetings and during practice; that’s a pretty valuable experience and one that can spike a recruit’s interest in a school. He may know he has a good relationship with the staff, but seeing them actually on the field coaching can create a positive impression.

Conversely, when a recruit visits for a Junior Day - specifically this Saturday - they’re going to get tours of campus and the facilities and probably an academic/Life Skills presentation (which they could get in the spring), presumably build around the afternoon basketball game against No. 1 Virginia, which may or may not be a selling point for the Athletic Department right now; remember, Narduzzi and company opted to skip the basketball game altogether in the middle of an official visit weekend last month.

I’m not saying it’s better that some of those recruits are waiting until spring to visit; I’m just saying that those spring visits can have a lot of value and potentially make more of a positive impact than the Junior Days. Ultimately, any time you can get a recruit on campus, it’s a win.