The Stallings Era May Be Ending Soon, But Should It?
As I sat through an Adult Civics Happy Hour discussing the complications of building residences in Tacoma, I kept glancing at my phone. Anyone who knows me well can tell you that I was probably looking at scores, which I was. Pitt basketball was hanging in there with the next-to-last team in the ACC, Wake Forest. It would ultimately be their 16th conference loss (0–16 on the season) with much less than a bright spot ahead in #1 Virginia and Notre Dame left on the schedule. To say the season has been dismal would be an understatement.
The future of Pitt basketball has been a hot topic and one about which I have plenty of opinions. I’ve talked about it with anyone I know who still pays attention (mostly my dad) and wanted to put my thoughts to paper before the next steps become clearer for the program.
First, some context.
Pitt and their most successful coach in team history, Jamie Dixon, parted ways in 2016. Pitt had tons of regular season and conference success during Dixon’s 13-year tenure, but never quite delivered on expectations in the NCAA tournament. They reached the Elite Eight only once and were a defensive stop away from the Final Four that year to go along with several losses to lower-seeded teams. By the end of Dixon’s tenure, it became clear that he was a very good developer of talent, but wasn’t able to recruit the NBA-caliber players needed to compete for national championships in that era. The school joined the ACC in 2013, which further confirmed that Dixon’s type of players (raw talent, defensive-minded, under-recruited) were not going to cut it for Pitt basketball moving forward.
Upon Dixon’s departure, Pitt’s fanbase was excited for what might come next; a hot-shot new coach that would take Pitt to the next level.
After a fairly uninspiring search, AD Scott Barnes announced the hiring of Kevin Stallings; a good coach who had above average success with an academically-focused SEC school at Vanderbilt. One SEC title, two Sweet Sixteens, and above average regular season success in an average Power-5 conference were on Stallings’ resume. Pitt fans weren’t stoked.
Stallings had a rough go in Year One; 16–17 in Pitt’s first losing season since Ben Howland’s first year, 1999–2000. His top two players, Jamel Artis and Michael Young, were constantly at odds with Stallings’ style, at one point earning a disciplinary spot on the bench for the first half of an important late season road match-up at #23 Virginia (they lost big, 67–42).
At the end of the season, an exodus. Following a number of transfers, Pitt entered the 2017–18 season with 11 newcomers and only 3 players with NCAA experience.
The season was expected to be rough and has been. The team is 8–21 to this point with an 0–16 record in the ACC. Rumblings are creeping around Pittsburgh sports media about what comes next for Stallings and Pitt basketball.
At this point, I do not expect Stallings to return. I also disagree with firing him. Here are my thoughts:
Pitt’s current AD did not hire Stallings.
Let’s start with why Stallings won’t return. When Scott Barnes shoved off for a “dream job” at Oregon State University in December, he left a vacancy that would be filled by Heather Lyke 3 months later. Lyke did not hire Stallings. Stallings isn’t finding success in arguably the school’s marquee sport. Attendance is diminishing from regular sell-outs to just over 2,000 a night. Lyke will want to fix that before long. She’s got no attachment to this coach and hasn’t given much public support during this rebuilding process.
Stallings wasn’t given much to work with.
Some Pitt fans won’t agree with this given that one of the players Stallings could have convinced to stay has been Cameron Johnson, a solid-shooting 6'8" SF from nearby Moon Township, PA, who is averaging 29 minutes and 12.7 points a game for 10th-ranked North Carolina. Aside from Johnson, though, it was hard to tell who the stars might be from Dixon’s set of recruits. Once Artis and Young graduated and Johnson was granted a transfer, the stars were few and far between.
Stallings had rough patches with these players and Sheldon Jeter, another strong scorer from Dixon’s roster (who happened to have been recruited to Vanderbilt by Stallings and was almost blocked by Stallings from transferring to Pitt in the first place under Dixon). It was never quite clear what the issue was as these players were respectful in their words for their coach during interviews while being constantly disciplined and carrying a neutral if not negative attitude through games.
In the end, Dixon’s lack of recruiting clout led to some fairly bare cabinets for the next coach.
A rebuild is a process.
I’ve been more patient than most with Stallings’ lack of success. The roster almost completely turned-over and a new coach deserves a few years to establish what the program will look like moving forward.
Whatever the philosophical differences were between Dixon and Stallings led to a wave of transfers, which I didn’t necessarily peg as a bad thing. Typically players leave when things get hard, not easy, so my impression has always been that the players found they didn’t fit or weren’t willing to change and hit the road.
Stallings has been known as a strong recruiter, putting 2 players in the NBA from his last Vanderbilt team. Almost the entire Pitt roster is new and playing together for the first time, which is going to require time to improve upon. Four freshmen and a junior college transfer in the starting lineup is tough spot to be in, but if Stallings is a quality recruiter then you’ve got to believe the roster will continue to get better as the years progress. There’s been growth from some of these players, although it hasn’t been consistent. One has to believe that an offseason together and an additional season would give this team more confidence and synergy on the court, which I’m willing to wait for.
Firing Stallings would cost a lot of time.
On the other side of Stallings being fired during a rebuild would be another rebuild. One has to believe that you’d see another exodus of players who believe that Stallings is the right coach for them and that Pitt is a school committed to this rebuild. Ending Stallings’ tenure would prove to these players and many fans that patience isn’t a virtue the school has with regard to men’s basketball.
What does this mean for the next coach? What type of coach would be attracted to a job that has been vacated after the last coach was fired following only 2 years of service? Sounds like a tall task for a program that isn’t considered to be an elite and attractive program nationwide.
Pitt is not a big time program.
This has been the toughest pill for many to swallow. Yes, Pitt has sold out games in Pittsburgh over the last 10 or so years as the program has worked its way into a consistent spot in the top-25, if not top-10. As the team has slipped, though, the attendance has disappeared pretty quickly.
The reason for this? Pittsburgh is not a basketball town. It never has been and never will be. Pittsburghers like success, so they showed up for a successful team. The casual sports fan in Pittsburgh watches the Steelers and Penguins, shows up to a few Pirates games a year, and couldn’t draw you up a 2–3 zone defense.
Pitt basketball fans who fall into this category have been lulled into a false sense of entitlement with regard to what type of coach the program can draw. Andy Enfield, Bryce Drew, Sean Miller, Archie Miller; these are coaches that Pitt fans wanted but didn’t get. And why would they? Pitt isn’t USC, Arizona, or Indiana. Pitt might not even be Vanderbilt at this point.
Pitt fans were given a taste of what type of coach their school could attract when they fired Dave Wannstedt and attracted a revolving door of coaches until Pat Narduzzi (who most people hadn’t heard of ) showed up with something to prove. Why would anyone believe the basketball team would draw anyone more elite than Stallings? At a time when the cheating and money being thrown around college basketball is being laid on the table, it’s clear that Pitt hasn’t been committed enough to success to be among that rule bending/breaking group. I think it’s a good thing that Pitt doesn’t appear to cheat, but it does show what they’re willing to do (or not willing to do) to win.
Firing Stallings would cost a lot of money.
Stallings’ buyout is $10 million. That’s a lot of money for a school that doesn’t pay on the same level as their competitors in the ACC and around the country. The question, though, is the return on the investment. Is Stallings’ tenure doomed to lose an additional $10 million in tickets and other revenue? Or is it worth keeping him around one more year to see what progress can be made? The decision is ultimately Lyke’s. We’ll see what decision she makes soon.
