Editorial: Haywood firing to have wide implications

“Screwed” is a small word to use when pondering the future of Pitt football.

With a… “Screwed” is a small word to use when pondering the future of Pitt football.

With a shiny-new head coach being suddenly fired amidst a felony domestic battery charge a month before recruits’ signing deadline, few would paint rosy horizons for the Panthers in a conference that’s about to get much more competitive.

Former head football coach Michael Haywood is accused of putting a woman in a chokehold over custody issues on Dec. 31 at his South Bend, Ind., home. He was fired from his Pitt post on New Year’s Day and pleaded not guilty on Monday.

Chancellor Mark Nordenberg said in a statement that the decision to fire Haywood was made without regard to his guilt or innocence, but rather it was made with the “strong belief that moving forward with Mr. Haywood as our head coach is not possible under the existing circumstances.”

This occurred only two weeks after Haywood was  picked to replace Dave Wannstedt, the outgoing head coach who resigned on Dec. 7 but who has been offered a position as special assistant to the athletic director.

Whatever conclusions trickle out of Haywood’s trial, one thing’s for sure: The past few weeks have been an embarrassment to Pitt’s athletic program. The coaching debacle threatens to undermine the Pitt football team’s competitiveness in a stronger Big East  — Rose Bowl-champion Texas Christian University will join the conference in two years  — and diminish the Pitt athletic brand as a whole.

Given the importance of sports to our University, we at The Pitt News are more than just a tad concerned.

Let’s consider the fate of Pitt recruiting, perhaps the most important factor in improving teams and winning titles. As Haywood said himself at his introductory press conference, “Recruiting is the bloodline to any institution.”

Since Athletic Director Steve Pederson and the department are now scrambling to find a viable leader with a recognized name only weeks before the Feb. 2 signing deadline, what recruit should be expected to choose Pitt? Prospective players are looking — with good reason — for programs touting solidified leadership with clear goals and heavily vetted ways to achieve those goals, but at this point we can think of little Pitt can offer other than an NFL stadium to play in.

We have already seen how difficult recruiting has become. Since Wannstedt resigned, only six out of 19 recruits remain intending to sign.

But it’s theoretically possible to forestall such a recruiting dip, especially if the Athletic Department makes a strong coaching choice, which is another issue entirely. We’d like to know more about what actually goes on in the coach-selection process, who is involved and what values are applied. Will the process change any in light of this controversy?

As well, the Haywood incident could easily affect the University’s students and its image in general. Will student attendance to games or the number of overall applications change? Will ESPN continue to broadcast Pitt games as it has this year? Will the dreaded day come when we can no longer make fun of West Virginia without feeling disingenuous?

The list of questions goes on and on.

Over the next few weeks, The Pitt News will try to navigate the innumerable issues and unanswered questions left festering in the aftermath of Haywood’s firing, providing follow-up content in print and on the Web.

Do you have questions about Pitt football? E-mail editor@pittnews.com or call 412-648-7985 and we’ll do our best to follow up.