Bear Down Wildcats

Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

http://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2018/03/ ... n-to-pitt/" target="_blank

Arizona head coach Sean Miller has some interest in returning to Pittsburgh, multiple sources have told Pittsburgh Sports Now.

Miller, 49, is an Ellwood City native and played as a point guard at Pitt from 1987 to 1992 after graduating from Blackhawk High School.



He’s currently the head coach at Arizona, where he’s led the Wildcats since 2009 with a 247-74 overall record and seven consecutive trips to the NCAA Tournament. Miller’s teams have had a perception of failing to capitalize in the spring. He’s been to two Elite Eights and no Final Fours despite four 30-win seasons in the Pac 12. They lost to No. 13 seed Buffalo in the first round this year.

Miller, who was falsely reported to have interviewed for the Pitt job in 2016, has been the persistent subject of rumors during this hiring process despite his continued employment at Arizona. Sources tell PSN that intermediaries have reached out to Pitt on Miller’s behalf to express his interest in the job.

What’s less clear is how much Pitt is interested in having Miller. The ongoing FBI investigation into college basketball has focused much of its efforts on Miller’s former assistant at Arizona, Emanuel “Book” Richardson, and ESPN reported this season that Miller discussed a payment for talented freshman forward Deandre Ayton with an agent whose phone was wiretapped. Miller disputed that report and Arizona allowed him to return to coaching after a one-game suspension.

Pitt athletic director Heather Lyke has a law degree and worked in the NCAA’s compliance office before stops at Ohio State and Eastern Michigan, so if anyone would be able to navigate the complicated mess of dual FBI and NCAA investigations into the Arizona program, she would seem to have the tools to do so.

Pitt’s past as a university has been fairly risk-averse when it comes to issues of compliance, and a move to hire Miller would represent a departure in that regard.

There’s also the matter of the money working out. Miller has a $10.3 million buyout, and it’s unclear if Arizona would be willing to waive that, if they intend to fire him, or any number of scenarios in between. He also made $3.7 million this season as one of the highest-paid coaches in the country, and would likely demand a greater salary than some of the other options Pitt is considering.

It’s far from a done deal that Miller will come to coach the Panthers, but it doesn’t seem completely implausible at this point, either.

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

You back someone because it’s the right thing to do, not because you expect something in return.

And the administration looks better for it.

And Pittsburgh is a shit school in a tough conference. Not seeing any reason except an escape to make that move.

JMarkJohns wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

You back someone because it’s the right thing to do, not because you expect something in return.

And the administration looks better for it.

And Pittsburgh is a shit school in a tough conference. Not seeing any reason except an escape to make that move.

That certainly sounds like what is currently on the table at this point. Why meet with them in LA before the ESPN shit hit?

Amy is allergic to the desert and misses green grass?

ChooChooCat wrote:

JMarkJohns wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

You back someone because it’s the right thing to do, not because you expect something in return.

And the administration looks better for it.

And Pittsburgh is a shit school in a tough conference. Not seeing any reason except an escape to make that move.

That certainly sounds like what is currently on the table at this point. Why meet with them in LA before the ESPN shit hit?

It seems pretty well documented that both Miller and Arizona expected a mutual parting of ways this offseason pre-ESPN. The big question is how the ESPN story changed things.

Sunny version: Arizona's backing of Miller in the furor has changed things.

Cold version: Neither Miller or Arizona has options right now.

Personal opinion: It's probably somewhere in between. We're both somewhat locked in, so how happy either part is about it is not really the point. I think Arizona did all it reasonably could have for Miller in the midst of the ESPN hoopla, and Miller defended Arizona the best he could at the same time.

I used the analogy of a married couple that stays together for the kids. Or the marriage Bill and Hillary have. If Miller was discussing cigar storage with Pitt, both parties can move on beyond it.

I can't see why Miller wouldn't pull the ejection seat handle and go to Pitt honestly.

If Miller is pulling the ejection seat, no way Arizona fires or mutually parts ways. That would forfeit a $10mm buyout, which will be used to pry another head coach away.

I think it would be best for all concerned if Miller got that job. He would be better off and I think Arizona would be too (even if we have a couple of rough years)

cpt wrote:I think it would be best for all concerned if Miller got that job. He would be better off and I think Arizona would be too (even if we have a couple of rough years)

If Arizona gets the $10mm buyout, perhaps, but the wildcard is who follows in Miller's footsteps. Forget final four or bust, multiple top 5 recruiting classes, conference championships, tourney titles, etc. Think that's appealing? Because it's not. Just like post-Howland, UCLA had problems

Bosy Billups wrote:If Miller is pulling the ejection seat, no way Arizona fires or mutually parts ways. That would forfeit a $10mm buyout, which will be used to pry another head coach away.

2009 was a shit show that resulted in a positive result luckily. There is a lot more uncertainty this time around. Not the time to gamble. No reasonably good coach is coming here at this time.

ASUHATER! wrote:I can't see why Miller wouldn't pull the ejection seat handle and go to Pitt honestly.

Well what if Pitt doesn't want him any more due to his current reputation? He'd pull the ejection seat and land on his head instead of at home.

PHXCATS wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:If Miller is pulling the ejection seat, no way Arizona fires or mutually parts ways. That would forfeit a $10mm buyout, which will be used to pry another head coach away.

2009 was a shit show that resulted in a positive result luckily. There is a lot more uncertainty this time around. Not the time to gamble. No reasonably good coach is coming here at this time.

Not necessarily. The real issue is you have absolutely no idea who is dirty and who isn't right now and if you do hire a dirty coach you have zero guarantee he doesn't turn up in this FBI crap. That's the real problem and ultimately IMO why Arizona is backing Miller.

ChooChooCat wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:I can't see why Miller wouldn't pull the ejection seat handle and go to Pitt honestly.

Well what if Pitt doesn't want him any more due to his current reputation? He'd pull the ejection seat and land on his head instead of at home.

That's why I'm not put off that Miller may have had intermediaries feel Pitt out. If he was ever thinking he might want to leave, he would undoubtedly want to look before he leapt.

I think you guys are all wrong. Love for Miller to go to Pitt. Then we bring out the dump truck of Cash for Mark Few or Eric Musselman which we can do. We cant for football but for basketball we can way overpay a coach given how profitable our program is and how our athletic department needs it to stay profitable.

2009 was WAY WAY worse then today. Following a legend like Lute with an old arena and a fan base still living in the past and UCLA coming off a bunch of final fours looking like they are going to run the west forever again.

There is no program outside of UCLA which comes close to matching what we have on the West Coast.

A great coach will see that. A great coach will ponder our job and call someone like John Calipari and ask should they take it, and calipari will say "YES, RIGHT AWAY. Next 2-3 years might be a bit rough but there is a pot of gold at Arizona"

Because you can build and create something special at Arizona. You can at UCLA but that's it on the west coast.

I am praying Miller takes the Pitt job. Would be best solution for all parties.

If you think otherwise look at Washington and Ohio State. Both fired coaches last year and both looked like knee jerk reactions (UW had top class coming in and Ohio State was acting like they were some power)

Fast forward and I would find it hard to believe anyone would say either of those programs made the wrong move.

Miller, its time to go home

ChooChooCat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:If Miller is pulling the ejection seat, no way Arizona fires or mutually parts ways. That would forfeit a $10mm buyout, which will be used to pry another head coach away.

2009 was a shit show that resulted in a positive result luckily. There is a lot more uncertainty this time around. Not the time to gamble. No reasonably good coach is coming here at this time.

Not necessarily. The real issue is you have absolutely no idea who is dirty and who isn't right now and if you do hire a dirty coach you have zero guarantee he doesn't turn up in this FBI crap. That's the real problem and ultimately IMO why Arizona is backing Miller.

I can see this logic, devil you know is better then the devil you don't. Thats why hoping Miller leaves and forces our hand.

I honestly think most head coaches were smart enough to make sure that things could never get back to them

Pitt apparently has offered Danny Hurley the job. I know UCONN wants him too.

http://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2018/03/ ... -contract/" target="_blank

EastCoastCat wrote:Pitt apparently has offered Danny Hurley the job. I know UCONN wants him too.

http://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2018/03/ ... -contract/" target="_blank

some of the things i've seen swirling around is that pitt and uconn are for danny hurley and miller, they just get to pick which ones they want.

ASUHATER! wrote:

EastCoastCat wrote:Pitt apparently has offered Danny Hurley the job. I know UCONN wants him too.

http://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2018/03/ ... -contract/" target="_blank

some of the things i've seen swirling around is that pitt and uconn are for danny hurley and miller, they just get to pick which ones they want.

UCONN no way.

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

dmjcat wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

This supposes our program committed infractions. We know Book was charged with taking bribes. We don't know if any players received benefits. Arizona could be pleading guilty to what specifically? You don't plead guilty and go to sentencing if you aren't sure if you've committed a crime.

dmjcat wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

Hindsight, this would have been the right move for sure but I don't think anyone thought we would lose by 20 to Buffalo in the first round of the tourney so strategy was Win and Vacate which was the right call at the time since we thought we could make a deep run.

ASUHATER! wrote:

EastCoastCat wrote:Pitt apparently has offered Danny Hurley the job. I know UCONN wants him too.

http://pittsburghsportsnow.com/2018/03/ ... -contract/" target="_blank

some of the things i've seen swirling around is that pitt and uconn are for danny hurley and miller, they just get to pick which ones they want.

UCONN and Miller aren't options for each other. The more time that goes on the more I don't see a Miller/Pitt marriage either, especially with what Miller is doing right now publicly.

dmjcat wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

I would love for you to be the one to look into the eyes of our players and wave a white flag. What a bitch ass move that would be for the kids. Real good life lesson for them to quit and run when things get tough.

zonagrad wrote:

dmjcat wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

This supposes our program committed infractions. We know Book was charged with taking bribes. We don't know if any players received benefits. Arizona could be pleading guilty to what specifically? You don't plead guilty and go to sentencing if you aren't sure if you've committed a crime.

Sure, Book is an innocent angel and lied on tape. All prison felons are completely innocent...........do you also believe in the tooth fairy???

84Cat wrote:

dmjcat wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

I would love for you to be the one to look into the eyes of our players and wave a white flag. What a bitch ass move that would be for the kids. Real good life lesson for them to quit and run when things get tough.

The real "Bitch ass move'" would be to look into the eyes of the 2020/2021/2022 team and tell them they can't play in the tournament because
the 2018 team go caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

I wouldn't be worried about the sanctions - the NCAA will punish the coaches like they did with Chip Kelly.

Also, Pitt is an absolute disaster without an FBI investigation of a former assistant. That job is a massive step down compared to Arizona and a bottom third job in the ACC.

Self sanctioning wouldn't help our future cause. IMO.

Also, didn't quinerly sign with South Carolina after being cleared by NCAA?

So if ncaa had any proof Book actually passed money on to Q why would they clear him?

At least that is my understanding

Postmaster wrote:Self sanctioning wouldn't help our future cause. IMO.

Also, didn't quinerly sign with South Carolina after being cleared by NCAA?

So if ncaa had any proof Book actually passed money on to Q why would they clear him?

At least that is my understanding

Quinerly signed with Villanova.

dmjcat wrote:

zonagrad wrote:

dmjcat wrote:

Bosy Billups wrote:Do you think they still would have backed Miller? I would think so, just curious...

Also, no chatter here on the Miller to Pitt rumors? There is a lot of smoke on Twitter AND from Goodman. What's UP!

A better question to ask is would the Athletic Dept. have gone ahead and self sanctioned and pulled the UA out of the tourney?
At the end of the day we would have not been embarassed nationally and probably safely put future NCAA sanctions (and this entire mess) largely behind us.

Frankly, I still believe we screwed up by not self sanctioning by pulling out of the tournament.

This supposes our program committed infractions. We know Book was charged with taking bribes. We don't know if any players received benefits. Arizona could be pleading guilty to what specifically? You don't plead guilty and go to sentencing if you aren't sure if you've committed a crime.

Sure, Book is an innocent angel and lied on tape. All prison felons are completely innocent...........do you also believe in the tooth fairy???

I never said Book was innocent. But you don't know if what Book did compromised the eligibility of any players. For all we know, Book took money from the agents with the promise to steer some players their way. That's it. So it's quite possible Arizona gets off easy. The Yahoo report had no reference to Arizona, which is a good sign. It points more to the possibility that Book acted alone and got busted and it was not a full wide conspiracy involving the Arizona program.

zonagrad wrote:

Postmaster wrote:Self sanctioning wouldn't help our future cause. IMO.

Also, didn't quinerly sign with South Carolina after being cleared by NCAA?

So if ncaa had any proof Book actually passed money on to Q why would they clear him?

At least that is my understanding

Quinerly signed with Villanova.

Thanks

Postmaster wrote:Self sanctioning wouldn't help our future cause. IMO.

Also, didn't quinerly sign with South Carolina after being cleared by NCAA?

So if ncaa had any proof Book actually passed money on to Q why would they clear him?

At least that is my understanding

The sanction now crowd baffles me and this is a huge reason. The only thing that is known that would actually amount to a violation in the FBI complaint is if Book paid Quinerly. Book is on tape asking for money to pay Quinerly, but Quinerly appears fairly clear.

That's it. There's the ESPN story, but that's a whole separate bag of shaky sources. If we self sanctioned on Book, we'd be self sanctioning for paying a player who is clear to play, implying the NCAA thinks he didn't get paid.

What's the theory of violation then? An attempt to commit a violation? Self sanctioning without a clear idea of the violation is a really bad idea.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Postmaster wrote:Self sanctioning wouldn't help our future cause. IMO.

Also, didn't quinerly sign with South Carolina after being cleared by NCAA?

So if ncaa had any proof Book actually passed money on to Q why would they clear him?

At least that is my understanding

The sanction now crowd baffles me and this is a huge reason. The only thing that is known that would actually amount to a violation in the FBI complaint is if Book paid Quinerly. Book is on tape asking for money to pay Quinerly, but Quinerly appears fairly clear.

That's it. There's the ESPN story, but that's a whole separate bag of shaky sources. If we self sanctioned on Book, we'd be self sanctioning for paying a player who is clear to play, implying the NCAA thinks he didn't get paid.

What's the theory of violation then? An attempt to commit a violation? Self sanctioning without a clear idea of the violation is a really bad idea.

Ultimately if the NCAA wants to punish us for that very thing we can appeal/sue and point to Mississippi State football trying to pay Cam Newton's dad for his services, which led to zero punishment whatsoever.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Postmaster wrote:Self sanctioning wouldn't help our future cause. IMO.

Also, didn't quinerly sign with South Carolina after being cleared by NCAA?

So if ncaa had any proof Book actually passed money on to Q why would they clear him?

At least that is my understanding

The sanction now crowd baffles me and this is a huge reason. The only thing that is known that would actually amount to a violation in the FBI complaint is if Book paid Quinerly. Book is on tape asking for money to pay Quinerly, but Quinerly appears fairly clear.

That's it. There's the ESPN story, but that's a whole separate bag of shaky sources. If we self sanctioned on Book, we'd be self sanctioning for paying a player who is clear to play, implying the NCAA thinks he didn't get paid.

What's the theory of violation then? An attempt to commit a violation? Self sanctioning without a clear idea of the violation is a really bad idea.

Ultimately if the NCAA wants to punish us for that very thing we can appeal/sue and point to Mississippi State football trying to pay Cam Newton's dad for his services, which led to zero punishment whatsoever.

Yeah, I'm not 100% we even committed a violation at this point, let alone a violation warranting a postseason ban. Historically, the NCAA has only done it if they feel they have something on the back end to prove the payment, and that runs smack into Quinerly being more or less cleared at this point.

At this point, any attempt by the NCAA to levy shocking sanctions against Arizona, if the AD chose to fight it in court, could be met with so much damaging counter-precedent that litigation would ultimately be the best option to any sanctions, actually.

And I think, in Heeke and Robbins, our university has the leadership that understands that.