Four years ago, Jamie Dixon was emphatic he wanted no part of conference realignment.
The Pitt coach was outspoken in December 2009 about his affection for the Big East and his disregard for rumblings that Pitt, Rutgers and Syracuse were candidates to leave for the Big Ten.
“I can't see how moving from the best conference in college basketball history would be a good thing for anybody,” Dixon said. “Who's really going to improve their position from our conference? Nobody.”
Don't remember those comments? Neither does Dixon, who now shrugs them off as simply being a supportive member of his former league.
“The Big East isn't the Big East anymore,” Dixon said. “You do have to be adaptable. I was supportive of the conference we were in, but I knew at the same time that the conference wasn't going to be the same, and it hadn't remained the same. If things were all to stay the same, yeah, it would have been great to stay.”
As Pitt prepares for its inaugural men's basketball game in the ACC, it is as good a time as any to remind you of those words: The Big East isn't the Big East anymore.
And to paraphrase Dixon, the ACC is not what it once was. Driven by football and the necessity for BCS inclusion, the league has had to innovate, adapt and overcome the circumstances of modern-day, major-college sports.
Pitt isn't the only team entering a new world when it visits North Carolina State at noon Saturday.
“It's really the Big East now,” ESPN college basketball analyst Jay Bilas, a Duke alumnus, said of the ACC. “Look at all the Big East teams in the league.”
It's true that, with Pitt, Notre Dame and Syracuse joining Boston College, Miami and Virginia Tech — and Louisville on its way — that half of the ACC's membership next season will be composed of former Big East schools.
Which is why everyone inside and outside the conference is dismissive of talk that Pitt will have to adapt to an ACC style of play.
“There is no ‘ACC style' anymore,” Bilas said. “That's an antiquated notion of how things used to be.”
Yet what impresses me about Dixon is that he has adapted to a different style of play, even if it's not one attributed to the ACC.
Man-to-man defense and rebounding remain the core principles of his coaching foundation and what the Panthers must do to win.
But we're seeing a coach who expanded his rotation last season, one who is using zone defense on a much more frequent basis and is at least preaching playing faster.
Bilas disputes the last notion and points to KenPom.com statistics to prove it. The Panthers rank 312th out of 350 teams in pace, or possessions per game. Bilas noted that 80 percent of Pitt's possessions are out of half-court sets, so the Panthers are winning the same way they did in the past.
“If they're running more, they've kept it a secret,” Bilas said. “They're good. I know they're good. But this is not an up-tempo team.”
But it's one that appears to be better suited to play an up-tempo style than it was in the past, when the Panthers embraced their image as the bullies of the Big East.
Pitt outran Stanford, coached by former Duke star Johnny Dawkins, in a 21-point victory Nov. 26 in the Legends Classic in Brooklyn.
Then the Panthers got pushed around by Cincinnati, a former Big East foe, in a 44-43 loss Dec. 17 at Madison Square Garden.
Believe it or not, this Pitt team is better suited for the new ACC than the old Big East. Even if everyone dismisses the difference in styles.
“I don't know how different the style of play is going to be. I think, at the end of the day, basketball is basketball,” Pitt sophomore point guard James Robinson said. “That's one of our goals coming in, just competing every night and knowing we've got to play our style of play and not really get caught up in whether we're playing Big East basketball against ACC basketball. We want to play Pitt basketball. I think, as a team, we're ready to do that.”
Kevin Gorman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at email@example.com or via Twitter @KGorman_Trib.
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.