Skip to main content

Pitt still isn't it in the tournament (and Dixon, too)

I've always had this theory that Pitt athletics will break your heart.

This year's basketball team lived up to that saying once again.

By all accounts, the Panthers overachieved this season. They reached the top 10 in the polls at one point, they finished second in the Big East and they received a No. 3 seed in the NCAA tournament.

All great accomplishments.

Yet it means nothing when you lose in the second round of the NCAA tournament against a team your supposed to beat.

But that's Pitt basketball. It seems every season they fall about one round short of what they're supposed to do.

Here's their recent history:
  • 2009: 3-1: They lost to Villanova in the regional final.
  • 2008: 1-1. They lost to Michigan State in the second round.
  • 2006: 1-1. They lost to Bradley in the second round.
  • 2005: 0-1. They lost to Pacific in the first round.
The Villanova loss last season was a tough one to take. But as a No. 1 seed, Pitt was a better team than Villanova and should have earned a Final Four berth.

Ah ... woulda, coulda, shoulda.

That applies to the losses in 2008, 2006 and 2005. All winnable games. Only the loss to UCLA in 2007 was acceptable. And in five of the past six tournaments Pitt underachieved.

It gets hard to accept that record when you see teams practically every season overachieving in the tournament.

Why can't Pitt?

Being built to win in the Big East in January instead of winning in mid-March might have something to do with it.

Jamie Dixon's teams are schooled on defense first. It's very admirable.

That's great when you face Rutgers and there's three inches of snow on the ground.

When you have a tournament game and need to find some offense, well, that's where Pitt comes up short.

I picked Xavier to beat Pitt this season. I didn't want to be right. Pitt barely beat Xavier last year when it had two future NBA players on its roster. This season it was an easy choice.

This season's Pitt team lacked an offensive threat, and it usually has lacked that threat through the years. What usually happens, and happened Sunday, is when Pitt needed a basket, it usually missed because of a rushed shot or had a turnover.

Does that mean Dixon needs to go?

Well it depends upon what you want from your college basketball team.

If tournament appearances are your criteria, he's your guy. If you want someone who gets more out of his players, he's also your guy.

If you want your coach to routinely beat lower seeds in the NCAA tournament, Dixon hasn't met that standard.

He's not on thin ice. He's not in danger of losing his job. But let's not overlook the shortcomings when it  matters the most. We shouldn't bestow the great coach label upon him any time soon.

A great coach would know how to win those tournament games he seems to lose.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Scary news from Antwaan Randle El

Embed from Getty Images

Every Steelers fan knows Antwaan Randle El.

His pass in Super Bowl XL helped clinch the Steelers' fifth Lombardi.

Now people might know Randle El for another reason: He's having trouble remembering things and having trouble walking down stairs.

The Post-Gazette's story was a grabber, with Randle El saying he wouldn't play football if he could do it over again.

Here's a quote:

The kids are getting bigger and faster, so the concussions, the severe spinal cord injuries, are only going to get worse. It’s a tough pill to swallow because I love the game of football. But I tell parents, you can have the right helmet, the perfect pads on, and still end up with a paraplegic kid. There’s no correcting it. There’s no helmet that’s going to correct it. There’s no teaching that’s going to correct it. It just comes down to it’s a physically violent game. Football players are in a car wreck every week.
He played football for nine seasons. Now he worries ab…

Baseball and poker similar in how action unfolds

The game of poker has received a bad rap for years for being too boring. Due to longperiods of inactivity in a game, players tend to tune out of the game. The funny thing
is, Baseball is also one that many of these same people happen to like even though
sometimes it also has has similar long periods of inactivity, even if those long periods are
not shown on TV.

In big poker tournaments, such as the highlights we see in the World Series of Poker, has
skewed the reality of how long of a process that the game can really be. Sometimes even
in baseball, during the World Series there are long period of innings where there isn’t
much going on, like in poker except one person raising and others folding.

That can change quickly and sometimes just as dramatically as a big solo shot homer. A
player can make a raise, followed by a three-bet from another player. The original raiser
then moves all-in and gets called. Now, all the people watching the event are on their
feet cheering and screaming fo…