Pitt's Chas Alecxih slams Michael Haywood
Pitt senior defensive tackle Chas Alecxih was concerned about the program "crumbling" a year ago, but when Michael Haywood was fired he said, "I was happy."
"A real (jerk), that guy," Alecxih said.
Alecxih, who will play his final home game Saturday against Syracuse, said Haywood did not make a good impression during his first and only meeting with players in December.
"You should have seen our first meeting," Alecxih said. "He came in with a wrinkled suit, the worst suit I had ever seen. It looked like he had picked it up at Goodwill.
"He said, 'Do me a favor, everybody sit up in your chairs.' Basically, he told us we owed him something. Very arrogant.
"We walked out of the meeting and we said, 'Wow, that's going to be our next head coach?' When he got fired (after he was arrested on a domestic abuse charge), I was happy."
Haywood's attorney Tony Buzbee did not return calls seeking comment.
Alecxih said the situation changed almost immediately when Todd Graham was hired to replace Haywood.
"My first impression was he was confident in himself, he was real confident in the program," Alecxih said. "(He) came in and said, 'You had a great coach before (Dave Wannstedt), which we did, but we're going to take this program to the next level. He told us he had a plan and we needed to trust him."
The season has turned into a disappointment, but Alecxih said, "I have grown as a person and I feel like a lot of my teammates have grown as people.
"Things are going to be on the rise in the future, too. Watch out."
Show commenting policy
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.