ShareThis Page
Breakfast with Benz: Coaching rejections magnify Pitt’s problems, so who’s the next target? |
Breakfast With Benz

Breakfast with Benz: Coaching rejections magnify Pitt’s problems, so who’s the next target?

Tim Benz
Getty Images
Nevada Wolf Pack fans hold up a sign for head coach Eric Musselman.

Another week in the books at Breakfast With Benz! We can’t wait for our next week of covering the Pitt basketball coaching search. We assume that this will be a process that’ll last a couple of months at this rate.

After three or four candidates have failed to show much of an interest in the job, I think we’ve found the next candidate for Heather Lyke to approach.

But if Jackie Moon still wants to be player and owner as well as a coach, Lyke may not be able to get him either. I have a good idea for someone else in my daily column .

I also tell you who Pitt should specifically avoid, too.

Speaking of the Pitt coaching search, Bill Koch of the Providence Journal was fantastic talking about Dan Hurley’s decision to leave Rhode Island and why he went to UConn instead of Pitt. He gets really specific about the money, and how high Pitt actually went to try to hire him. It’s surprising .

We look at tonight’s Sweet 16 college basketball games in the NCAA Tournament. But, c’mon. We know there is only one that really matters!

Syracuse’s Tyus Battle (Getty Images) </small

I know. You hate Syracuse because they are doing the their typical sneak-into-the-tournament-and get-on-a-great-run routine.

But as we all know, a win over a Duke is a win for America. So today, I know that you are all Orange right there with me.

It’s previewed in What to Watch , as is tonight’s Penguins home game vs. the Devils.

And in First Call , a look at the other rules changes up for debate at the owners meetings besides the proposed catch rule changes we tackled yesterday .

Have a good weekend. And until then, if you have this man’s number, tell him there is a job opening in Oakland.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.