The football controversy that dominated headlines during the first few weeks of January has… The football controversy that dominated headlines during the first few weeks of January has subsided, but a reflection on how the Pitt football program went from Dave Wannstedt to Michael Haywood to Todd Graham reveals a tight-lipped administration that did little to inform students about the process.

During the weeks of Haywood’s arrest, Pitt officials communicated primarily through statements, news releases and the occasional, selective press conferences.

Pitt officials have repeatedly denied requests for additional comment on the process during the past several weeks.

The whole situation began on Dec. 7 when, after a 7-5 season, former head football coach Wannstedt resigned. He was with the football team for six seasons.

Wannstedt, who had a contract with Pitt until 2014, was offered the position of special assistant to the athletic director, but Pitt did not release details of the contract, including how much he would be paid.

The position was specially created for Wannstedt.

Eight days after Wannstedt’s resignation, Athletic Director Steve Pederson hired Haywood as Pitt’s new head coach. Pitt officials did not release any information about the search in the interim.

Haywood, who was the head coach for Miami University (OH), led the team to a 10-4 record during the 2010 season and finished with a division title in the 2010 Middle Atlantic Conference East and a win in the 2009 GoDaddy.com Bowl against Middle Tennessee.

Two and a half weeks after he was hired, Haywood was arrested on charges of domestic battery.

On Jan. 1, he was fired. A statement Pitt released at the time said that the University’s decision did not reflect on Haywood’s guilt or innocence but rather “it reflects a strong belief that moving forward with Mr. Haywood as our head coach is not possible under the existing circumstances.”

Haywood pleaded not guilty to the charges and is scheduled to appear in court on March 10.

A media frenzy erupted after New Year’s Day, but Pitt officials kept communication to a minimum, choosing to relay information through statements instead of interviews.

When Pitt Athletic Department spokesman E.J. Borghetti was asked for further information about the football program, he declined to comment.

“I might suggest you connect with one of the reporters who attended that press conference and utilize those quotes from Steve [Pederson] since he headed up the process. That would serve your story best, I believe,” Borghetti said in a Jan. 13 e-mail.

It wasn’t until six days later that Pederson opened up about the situation, inviting select media members to a conference call about the new coaching selection process. The Pitt News was not invited to participate in the press conference.

During the conference, Pederson said the post-Haywood selection process would involve a “small team” to evaluate potential candidates.

This differed from the first process in which Pederson interviewed candidates in December, although Pitt has not elaborated on how much it differed.

Borghetti said the new team, comprised of Pederson, Executive Vice Chancellor Jerome Cochran and Executive Associate Athletic Director Donna Sanft, would conduct initial candidate interviews.

Then, a smaller number of candidates would be invited to participate in further discussions, which would include a meeting with Chancellor Mark Nordenberg, Borghetti said in an e-mail.

On Jan. 10, Pitt officials declined to explain what was discussed in these interviews or talk about any terms of the contract.

Pitt officials also initially refused to answer why Cochran, who works as Pitt’s general legal counsel, was involved in the process and why it was necessary for him to meet face-to-face with potential candidates.

Borghetti eventually replied in an e-mail on Jan. 14 after multiple requests for comment.

“The individuals who participated are ranking administrators within the University or athletic department, and own unique and experienced perspectives on the qualifications of potential candidates,” he said.

The majority of the information regarding the selection process has come from other media sources

According to Rivals.com, an online college sports media source, it was rumored that Pitt met with Sal Sunseri, the assistant head coach at Alabama and Pitt quarterback Tino Sunseri’s father, for Sunseri’s first and only interview on Monday, Jan. 3; with Penn State defensive coordinator Tom Bradley for a first interview on Tuesday, Jan. 4; with Tulsa head coach Todd Graham in Atlanta, Wisconsin offensive coordinator Paul Chryst and Florida International head coach Mario Cristobal on Wednesday, Jan. 5; and with Virginia Tech defensive coordinator Bud Foster two days later.

Rivals.com also said Graham had his second interview on Saturday, Jan. 8, meeting with Nordenberg in Dallas. Graham denied this, but according to Rivals.com, other sources say he was in Dallas.

On Jan. 5, WTAE Channel 4 announced that Pitt had agreed to sign Bradley as head coach of the Panthers. But a few hours later, Borghetti denied the report later that day.

Last Friday, Penn State Assistant Athletic Director and spokesman Jeff Nelson said Bradley was not allowed to speak about this selection process. Iván Irizarry, a spokesman for Florida International University, said Cristobal was not allowed to comment on the selection process either.

Jeff Purinton, athletic director of Alabama football, was the only one who did comment.

On Jan. 18, he said, “We are not going to be able to get Coach Sunseri on the phone with you for a couple of reasons. They are out there recruiting now, and we normally don’t do interviews unless it’s a special deal. I think this is more of a topic you would want to approach Pittsburgh about rather than Coach Sunseri.”

When Pitt announced Graham as the new head coach on Jan. 11, it still declined to answer questions regarding the selection process and contract terms.

But Pitt officials did publicly announce confidence in their decision.

“Todd’s innovative, creative and energized approach to football makes him an exciting leader for our program,” Pederson said in a news conference at the Panthers’ South Side football facility last Tuesday. “The outstanding job he has done at Tulsa has been noticed around the country, and I know he is excited to meet his new team and the great people of Pittsburgh.”

Multiple media sources have reported that Pitt gave Graham a salary of approximately $2 million per year, which is more than the $1.8 million Graham asked for. According to a Jan. 15 article in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, this contract makes Graham the highest-paid employee in the public sector of the state of Pennsylvania.

Pitt has not released Graham’s salary, although it is required to report the salaries of its top five highest-earning employees each year when it files its taxes.

In 2009, the last year for which statistics are available, Wannstedt had a salary and bonus package worth $1.09 million.