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.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pirates opener: A lot to like

I'm a sucker for opening day. I've been going to Three Rivers/PNC Park many years now to kick off the start to Pirates' season in good times and bad. I enjoy the crowds, the ceremonies and all of trimmings that come with the opener. Monday at PNC Park was no different. Except if you're looking at the Pirates' record at PNC. Zach Duke looked like an all-star, the offense looked like the Lumber Company of old and the crowd had one heck of a time celebrating the Bucs' 7-0 win. It was just the Pirates third win at a PNC Park opener. The game was one to remember. Adam LaRoche (!) and Ryan Doumit hit home runs, Freddy Sanchez looked like a former batting champion and the fans actually had "the wave" going around the park. But it was Duke's day. It was his third career shutout and the first shutout in a home opener since 1978. Yeah, it was a good day. It all came together for the Pirates. Maybe there's more down the road this year.
2 comments
Read more

Didn't Antonio Brown just get paid?

Didn't Antonio Brown just get paid? That was the first question that popped into my mind when I heard he wanted a new deal from the Steelers. I remember the details: Mike Wallace wanted more money than the Steelers wanted to offer, so the Steelers turned around and signed Brown to a $43 million deal over six years. That was 2012. Today, we learned that Brown will skip offseason workouts in the hope of getting a new deal. Honor your contract. It's that simple. Brown signed a deal that caused some people to scratch their heads at the time. It looked like a great deal for Brown. And after two seasons, it looked like the Steelers made a terrific call with the long-term deal. Brown had almost 1,700 yards receiving last year to go with 13 TD catches. That's a heck of a season. However, in exchange for long-term security, Brown looks like a bargain today. That's how it works. Or, at least that's how it's supposed to work. Now Brown wanted paid e...
2 comments
Read more