Share This Page

Panthers Insider: Pitt embraces underdog role in NCAA Tournament

| Monday, March 17, 2014, 10:21 p.m.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Pitt's Lamar Patterson celebrates with Tailb Zanna during their defeat of Wake Forest in the second round of the ACC Tournament on Thursday, March 13, 2014, at Greensboro Coliseum in Greensboro, N.C.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Pitt's Talib Zanna dunks over Virginia's Mike Tobey in the first half of their ACC Tournament semifinal Saturday, March 15, 2014, in Greensboro, N.C.

Pitt is aware a No. 9 seed can make a Final Four run in the NCAA Tournament.

Wichita State did it last year — at the expense of the Panthers — after a 73-55 win over Pitt in a West Region second-round game in Salt Lake City.

“I definitely think it's good to see that it can happen,” Pitt sophomore point guard James Robinson said. “We've got faith in ourselves, faith in our coaches. We're going to take this one step at a time and just battle this thing out.”

Whether the Shockers, who went on to beat No. 1 Gonzaga next, can serve as inspiration for the Panthers is another story. Pitt must accomplish a first under Jamie Dixon: Beat a higher seed in the NCAA tourney.

The No. 9 Panthers (25-9) will get their chance against No. 8 Colorado (23-11) at 1:40 p.m. Thursday in a South Region second-round game at Amway Center in Orlando, Fla.

“Just being in the tournament is inspiration enough for us,” Pitt senior swingman Lamar Patterson said. “We know what we have to do. We have to go out there, play solid and get Ws.”

That's been a problem for Pitt in recent years in the NCAA tourney.

Six times in its past 11 appearances, the Panthers lost to a team that reached the Final Four: Wichita State last year, Butler (2012), Villanova '09), UCLA ('07), Oklahoma State ('04) and Marquette ('03). Only Oklahoma State and UCLA, both No. 2 seeds, were higher seeds than Pitt.

“Last year, Wichita State did a really good job,” Pitt senior center Talib Zanna said. “We can make a run in the NCAA Tournament. It's a matter of coming together, playing good defense and playing the way we did at the beginning of the season.”

Dixon embraced Pitt's underdog role after watching the NCAA selection show but knows the Panthers must get past Colorado before they worry about the next game, likely against No. 1 Florida.

“We'll be focusing on Colorado here. That's the No. 1 thing,” Dixon said. “We've constantly talked to our team about what we could become.”

Dixon said at the start of the season that he thought Pitt could win the ACC. The Panthers' 16-1 start was sabotaged when sixth man Durand Johnson was lost to a knee injury, and the Panthers struggled over a stretch where they lost six of 10 games.

“Where we're going to be was always out in front of us,” Dixon said. “To me, that was the carrot that we had to focus on. Obviously, we had to readjust when Durand went down. But our goals didn't change.”

Now Pitt has to beat the odds. Since the tourney expanded in 1985, No. 9 seeds are 68-72 against No. 8 seeds and 7-62 against No. 1 seeds.

“Some people care about the seed. I think the seed doesn't matter,” Zanna said. “It's whoever has the heart to come out and dominate and play like they want it the most. That's who's going to win the tournament.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

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.