Top Stories

Oregon Duck Spied in NBA Seats Money Can’t Buy

Last night during the Lakers-Blazers game in Portland, longtime PDX media personality Dwight Jaynes noted on Twitter that Oregon running back Kenjon Barner was at the game and seated courtside.

Kenjon Barner Lakers Game Courtside Seat Photo

A photo of Barner, who is a junior at the University of Oregon and reportedly mulling entering the NFL draft, was included as part of a brilliant photo essay of Thursday’s Blazers-Lakers game by OregonLive.com photographer Bruce Ely.

Kenjon Barner Lakers Game Courtside Seat Photo

From images taken from the KCAL 9 broadcast feed, one can see that Barner’s courtside seat at the Rose Garden was located next to Lakers head coach Mike Brown - and just feet away from Kobe Bryant & Co.

If you listed the most desirous seat of all Portland NBA home games this season, sitting next to the Lakers bench is at the top of the list. Barner’s seat last night was the kind of ticket normally bought by someone to whom money is no object. And, as Jaynes also noted during the game last night, having deep pockets doesn’t always guarantee the right to acquire such a prized seat location.

Kenjon Barner Lakers Game Courtside Seat Photo

That’s why the right to buy such a high profile seat location is usually extended only to those who posess certain status that money cannot buy - with last night confirmation that such extra benefits indeed extend to current members of the University of Oregon football team.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

San Diego Leads Off NFL’s LA Team Sweepstakes

With the citizens of San Diego on high alert in observance of a sign, any sign, that their beloved Chargers will not leave them behind for Los Angeles, recent comments by the team’s owner and legal counsel have done nothing to assauge that concern.

LA Downtown Stadium map

(Batter up: Chargers step into November ballot box)

Beginning on February 1, the San Diego NFL team has an annually-granted, three-month window in which it may decide to exercise an early-termination clause in its Qualcomm Stadium lease. If the Chargers were to enact that right in 2012, which expires on April 1, the result would mean a $24 million payment to the city of San Diego - and an NFL team for Los Angeles.

Matthew T. Hall of UTSanDiego.com reported this week that Chargers owner Dean Spanos announced at a press conference Tuesday that while Chargers GM A.J. Smith and head coach Norv Turner will stay with the team, he refused to confirm the same, immediate fate for the city of San Diego.

At a news conference, he did not even commit to the Chargers staying next season. “All I am telling you is we want to be in San Diego,” Spanos said. “I remain consistent with that.”

Chargers special counsel Mark Fabiani has also been fronting the team’s public position on a possible move to Los Angeles. On Tuesday, Fabiani told Hall via email that there was, “nothing new on the (lease termination) trigger today.

While those comments may seem ominous as it pertains to the Chargers staying in San Diego, the club is currently in the throes of a negotiation with the city for a downtown stadium. San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders reportedly hopes to release substantive details of such a deal in March, with the hope that such a proposal would be voted on by the local citizenry in November.

Last year the Chargers confirmed in early December they had no plans to get out of their Qualcomm lease but this year such an announcement - at least in relation to the annual lease termination window - has not been made. Though concern over such a delay is mitigated considering such an early assurance by the team would reduce the Chargers’ leverage in its current negotiation with the city for a new stadium.

Perhaps in deference to San Diego’s hope that a stadium deal for the Chargers could be voted on by the public in late 2012, last month NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said not to expect news of a move to Los Angeles anytime soon:

“We want (football) to return in a successful way, and that requires a stadium. I don’t think we’ll be in a position to make that decision by 2012, but we’ll continue to work with the different alternatives in Los Angeles and hope that we get a solution that will work.”

While Goodell continues to reference “different alternatives” in Los Angeles, all that remains for L.A. to be NFL-ready is an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) required of downtown Los Angeles NFL stadium proponent AEG.

While AEG’s EIR will be released in 2012, the comments period after the report hits the public in February won’t conclude until after the lease termination window for the Chargers has expired for this year.

The EIR, which is significant but not likely to hinder AEG’s downtown stadium from going forward, is likely the final sign Goodell and the NFL need to confirm that Los Angeles has a stadium “solution that will work” for the league.

Considering that San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders does not want to be known as the man who allowed the Chargers to move on his watch, expect him and other local officials to do everything they can to put a new Chargers stadium plan to a public vote before 2012 is over.

While such a vote will likely be the final word on the Chargers in San Diego, Sports by Brooks has been told by multiple sources familiar with the situation that it will not ultimately dictate LA’s NFL fate.

The Chargers would indeed be a turnkey solution for AEG in securing an NFL team for Los Angeles, but if the people of San Diego keep their team via the ballot box, Jacksonville, St. Louis and Oakland will officially be on the clock.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

Program, Interrupted: Student Tryouts For Utah?

After the University of Utah’s 2009-10 basketball season under then-head coach Jim Boylen, four scholarship players with eligibility remaining left the program.

Larry Krystkowiak

(Utah Coach Larry Krystkowiak: Pac-12 Crash Landing)

Following the 2010-11 season, Utah fired Boylen and replaced him with Larry Krystkowiak on April 3. Since then, eight more scholarship players with eligibility remaining have left the Utah program.

Two months after his hire, Krystkowiak had already signed several future Utes to scholarships, a class of which was noted by Bill Oram of the SALT LAKE TRIBUNE:

It was a whirlwind recruiting season for Krystkowiak, who pieced together a recruiting class of two Division I transfers, three junior college transfers and three incoming freshmen. Krystkowiak said the process was “as high-intensity as any coach can go through.”

While Pac-12 schools such as Arizona and Oregon added five-star, top-25 recruits, Utah’s highest-rated signee is three-star forward Javon Dawson, who backed out of a commitment with Colorado State to join the Utes.

“I’m not a big fan of the two-star, three-star, four-star kind of recruits,” Krystkowiak said late last week, “but I’m a big fan of character guys. We’ve got a group of guys who are high-character guys, hard-nosed players.”

In its inaugural Pac-12 conference game last Saturday, Krystkowiak’s Utah squad was beaten by Colorado 73-33 - dropping the Utes to 3-10 overall. After the latest of what has been a series of unimaginable losses already this season, Utah player Cedric Martin said of Krystkowiak’s postgame remarks:

His main message was that if you’re not prepared off the court, you’re not going to be prepared on the court.”

More from Oram’s postgame report in the Salt Lake Tribune:

To hear Krystkowiak tell it, the Utes have been far from prepared.

“Practices have been going great,” Krystkowiak said, “with the exception we’ve had a lot of guys be late for things and not show up for things.”

“When you’re right around the corner from this Pac-12 thing cranking up and the inaugural season,” Krystkowiak said, “it’s pretty important. For me, all it is a statement from all of our players that other things are more important.”

Krystkowiak did not specify which players had been the problem. He simply said the Utes now have a “zero-tolerance” policy.

“If somebody’s late again, they won’t be in the lineup,” Krystkowiak said. “They won’t be on the team.”

But even without the possibility of Krystkowiak enacting such drastic disciplinary action in the future, the injury- and defection-addled Utah squad put out a call today for student bodies:

“We’re probably going to have tryouts when school starts,” Krystkowiak said.

“I’m not sure there’s not a couple of guys in the student body that wouldn’t come on over and lend some help,” Krystkowiak said. “When we’re beat up we need some more bodies to practice. Utah’s a pretty good basketball state, I would imagine there’s some good hoopers on intramural programs running around. We’re going to look into that when school starts.”

Utah may indeed be a “pretty good basketball state” but unfortunately for its flagship university’s basketball team, it hasn’t translated into a single in-state player on scholarship this season.

Not that you necessarily need scholarship players from the state or, for that matter, the school itself, to win - as Rick Majerus proved during the 1992-93 season.

On March 25, 1993, Doug Robinson of the SALT LAKE DESERET NEWS reported that the Utah squad that finished with a 24-7 record that season did so despite “losing six players during the offseason and replacing them with student tryouts.”

Of course, Utah didn’t play a Pac-12 schedule that season. Or UNC-Asheville.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

Penn State’s Bradley To Meet With Pitt About Job

Multiple sources close to the football programs at Penn State and the University of Pittsburgh have indicated to SbB that acting Penn State head football coach Tom Bradley is the leading candidate for the defensive coordinator position under new Pitt head football coach Paul Chryst.

Pitt's Paul Chryst thinks Tom Bradley is good fit as assistant

(Fit for Pitt? Bradley coached under Joe Paterno for 33 years at Penn State)

One source close to the Pitt program told SbB that Bradley is Chryst’s first choice for the job, but because of Bradley’s longtime association with the Penn State program - and his reported close ties to Jerry Sandusky - the Pitt coach will have to get school athletic director Steve Pederson and other Pitt officials and donors to sign off first. Read more…

Meyer Doing More Than NCAA Waiver Allows For?

On the same day it announced Urban Meyer as its next head football coach, November 29, Ohio State requested and was granted a NCAA waiver allowing the school to exceed the allowable number of football coaches on staff through the Buckeyes’ bowl game.

(Meyer not practicing what he preaches?)

Rusty Miller of the ASSOCIATED PRESS reported on December 9, 2011:

The existing staff, under Luke Fickell, will prepare the Buckeyes on the field in the days leading up to and including their Gator Bowl game against Florida on Jan. 2. Then there is incoming coach Urban Meyer, who will handle only recruiting while hiring his own assistants.

The waiver specifies that no more than 10 coaches - and no more than seven at any one time - may be involved in recruiting. Ohio State asked for the waiver because otherwise it would have exceeded the maximum number of allowed coaches under NCAA rules.

Such waivers have been granted in the past, but Ohio State’s situation is unique because Fickell plans to retain a prominent spot on Meyer’s staff as a lead recruiter and defensive play-caller.

Thursday Fickell was asked by Ohio State Football Radio Network broadcaster Jim Lachey - via WBNS-FM in Columbus - how Meyer was coping with not being part of Ohio State’s Gator Bowl preparations.

Lachey: “(Has it) been tough keeping him on the sidelines?”

Fickell: “He tried not to come around too much but when it’s in your blood, it’s in your blood.”

One presumes Lachey meant to say “off the sidelines.” Regardless, Fickell’s answer has already raised some eyebrows.

Earlier today GAINESVILLE (FL) SUN columnist Pat Dooley, who has covered Florida football for decades, Tweeted this response to Fickell’s contention that Meyer has “tried not to come around too much“:

Fickell on his coach’s show last night: “(Urban) tried not to come around too much but when coaching is in ur blood it’s in ur blood.” Hmm.

Because of Meyer’s intimate knowledge of the personnel of Ohio State’s Gator Bowl opponent, Florida, his possible involvement in Ohio State’s preparations for its game against the Gators would be of more impact than had the Buckeyes faced any other opponent in college football.

If Meyer was indeed involved in briefing the Ohio State coaching staff and/or players on Florida personnel or game preparations in any way, which would be against the terms of the NCAA waiver, it’d be another slap in the face to Gator fans at the hands of the former coach.

Fickell indicating that perhaps Meyer hasn’t limited his influence on the current OSU program to recruiting is also likely to concern University of Michigan Athletic Director Dave Brandon, who complained about the Ohio State NCAA waiver when it was first announced. He then provided greater detail to his objections last week.

Brandon to the DETROIT NEWS on December 22, 2011:

Our (Michigan) coaches right now are sleep-deprived. They’ve got to plan to get 130 people to New Orleans (Michigan plays Virginia Tech in the Jan. 2 Sugar Bowl), practicing and preparing a game plan and doing all the things coaches do, and yet this is one of the busiest recruiting seasons of the year.

“Urban Meyer is able to spend 100 percent of his (December) time recruiting athletes, and no other coach in our conference has that flexibility.

“The NCAA preaches over and over about maintaining a level playing field and treating everybody the same. If that’s their guiding principle, someone at the NCAA needs to explain how this translates into a level playing field.”

On second thought, considering the significant positive impact Ohio State is likely to gain from Meyer’s salesmanship to prospective players, perhaps Brandon would prefer the new OSU head coach spend more time gameplanning for a meaningless Gator Bowl than matching wits with Michigan’s ’sleep-deprived’ assistants on the recruiting trail.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

Video: Sheriff Joe Arpaio Calls Iowa “Buckeyes”

After his recent immigration policy-based endorsement of Rick Perry’s bid for President, Phoenix-area Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a staunch proponent of U.S.-Mexico border control, joined Perry this week on the GOP primary trail in Iowa.

(Perry to Arpaio: “You know how to get Iowans riled up in the morning”)

While warming up the crowd for a Perry stump speech to the Westside Conversative Club in Des Moines on Wednesday morning, Arpaio mischaracterized an Iowa namesake for a state hundred of miles away:

Boy, I’m getting to know Iowa, the great state of Iowa. Was it the Buckeyes? (boos) … What are they? What are they called?”

Iowa is known as “The Hawkeye State”, while Ohio is known as “The Buckeye State.” The flagship universities of the states are similiarly nicknamed.


After his mistake was met with an inevitable chorus of boos, Westside Conservative Club co-Founder Paul Zietlow politely corrected Arpaio who, while chuckling, turned to the crowd and said, “Hawkeyes, Buckeyes, what’s the difference?”

When that comment elicited a collective groan from the crowd, Arpaio looked at his watch and replied, “It’s 3 o’clock Phoenix time.

For the record, Arpaio was speaking at 7am in Des Moines at the time. 6am, Phoenix time.

After Arpaio introduced Perry, the Texas Governor said of the Sheriff losing sight of the border between the states and two Big Ten schools:

“Well, you know how to get an Iowa crowd riled up in the morning…call ‘em Buckeyes. Actually, there’s probably some Cyclones in this crowd.”

By mentioning “Cyclones”, Perry was referring to the nickname of the second-most prominent college in Iowa, Iowa State University.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

ESPN Was Likely To Part Ways With James In April

Earlier this year while discussing a potential run for a U.S. Senate seat in Texas, Craig James said he didn’t think his documented, prominent role in Mike Leach’s ouster at Texas Tech would affect his political aspirations.

Craig James: Lubbock Radio Station Poll

 (”No“)

From Glenn Hunter of D Magazine on Jan. 31, 2011,

ESPN college football analyst Craig James, who’s weighing a run for Kay Bailey Hutchison’s senate seat, says his role in the firing of Texas Tech football coach Mike Leach won’t hurt him politically–even in the heart of Red Raiders country.

“I feel very confident about our position,” said James. “Most people in Lubbock support my position.”

Those comments prompted an attempt by widely-published, D.C.-based pollster Stefan Hankin to verify the latter claim made by James.

On March 7, 2011, Paul Burka of Texas Monthly magazine reported that Hankin’s James-based poll consisted of, “401 likely general election 2012 voters in the West Texas metropolitan regions of Lubbock, Odessa-Midland, and Amarillo were surveyed March 2-3, 2011.

The results, per Hankin:

We found that Mr. James has virtually zero support in West Texas. He is, most likely due to his role in the firing of Texas Tech Coach Mike Leach, a very unpopular figure.

While the entire region is not overly friendly territory for Craig James, the former SMU football star is especially unpopular in the Lubbock area with 52% of voters having an unfavorable opinion of Craig James and only 7% having a favorable opinion.

If you had to pick a winner in the PR battle between Mike Leach, Craig James and the Texas Tech administration, the former football coach is the overwhelming winner.”

In the same January, 2011, D Magazine article that inspired Hankin to clinically debunk James’ claim of support in Lubbock, James said of his possible political campaign:

I’ve got to analyze it. I’m thinking about it. I’ll announce [my decision] sooner rather than later.”

Over 11 months of analysis and thought led James to affirm his decision to run on December 19, 2011.

The same morning that James committed to vying for a U.S. Senate seat in Texas, the highest-rated talk radio station in Lubbock, News Talk 790 KFYO, posted an online poll asking listeners, “Would you vote for Craig James in the GOP primary?

The results: 97% of respondents to the conservative talk radio station’s poll answered, “no.”

And the citizens of West Texas aren’t the only ones voicing disdain over James’ germinating political campaign.

Monday Mac Engel of the FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM reported:

A friend of mine who works for a senator in Austin told me a few lobbyists are already leaning on James to not run in this race. That he has no chance of defeating Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst in the Republican primary in the spring.

The same day as Engel’s report noting Texas lobbyists imploring James to reconsider his political candidancy, James told Fox News:

I’m out of the things I’ve enjoyed and I’m going to take that to Washington to make a change and make a difference.

With former presidential primary pollster Hankin already having verified his microscopic voter support in West Texas, and a reported growing distaste across the state for James as a political candidate, why would the former ESPN announcer jump into such a difficult race?

Perhaps because he was about to be pushed?

Multiple sources have indicated to SbB in recent days that ESPN was unlikely to retain James as an employee of the company after his contract expired in April.

While that likelihood may or may not have played into James deciding to make his first foray into politics, his decison had to have come as a relief to ESPN management, which is facing a defamation lawsuit from Leach that is largely based on the documented actions of Craig James.

It would be impossible to think that those actions by James, which were detailed in a trail of damning emails published in Leach’s Swing Your Sword autobiography earlier this year, weren’t central to what SbB has been told was a pending case that ESPN execs were preparing to make against their future employ of James.

Monday, James said on Fox News, “I’m out of the things I’ve enjoyed.”

For the past two years, Mike Leach has been saying the same - thanks to James.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

1915: ‘merry Christmas. We will not fire to-morrow’

From THE TIMES of LONDON: Jan. 11, 1915.

Christmas football truce 1915 World War I letter from The Times of London

LETTERS FROM THE FRONT.

-

 

THE SCOTS GUARDS’ CHRISTMAS.

-

 

A PIPER’S IMPRESSIONS.

A Piper in the Scots Guards writes:

We had a glorious time of it on Christmas Day. There was a keen frost and snow falling slightly.

On Christmas Eve the Germans shouted from their trenches: “A merry Christmas, Scottie Guardie. We are not going to fire to-morrow ; we will have a holiday and a game of football.”

Our fellows agreed. Next morning, sure enough, the Germans came out of their trenches, and began to saunter over to ours unarmed. At this our chaps went over half-way to meet them. They greeted one another like the best of friends and shook hands.

You would have thought the war was at an end.

We exchanged cigarettes for cigars, tobacco &c. They brought over ever so many things as souvenirs. A German officer gave me a button off his coat for my capstar. We were chatting all day. I was talking to a German who was four years in London.

He could speak fine English. I asked him when did he think the war would be over. He said in six months’ time.

I remarked that they were getting the worst of it now ; and he said that if they were beaten it was taking four countries to do it. They said they were getting tired of it.

They seem to be as well off as we are, and have plenty of everything. One German gave our officer a letter to post to a lady he knows in Essex.

I had such a funny feeling talking to our enemy, who would seek to shoot us on the morrow ; but there was another surprise in store for us.

Next day they came over and stood up on the trenches. We could walk and go where we liked.

Later the same night we heard that they were going to make an attack, so we prepared for it by getting our artillery to shell them ; but not a rifle shot was fired and they didn’t attack.

Next morning, being the third morning of peace, they came over half-way to inquire what was the matter with our artillery last night, that it had killed a lot of their chaps. They came to the conclusion it was the French.

All day they never fired a shot. In the evening we were relieved by the [redacted]. The Germans knew we were being relieved and asked us to tell them not to fire, and if they got the order to fire high, to fire high, and they would do the same.

I don’t know how they got on since, but we are going back to-morrow. That would never end the war, would it?

I think the Germans are tired of it, and would never shoot if we didn’t shoot first. I must say some of them were very nice fellows and did not show any hatred, which makes me think they are forced to fight.

I wrote you a letter telling you we made a bayonet attack. I wonder if you got it. We lost a few men.

The Germans helped us to bury them on Christmas Day.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

Transcript: Joe Paterno’s Grand Jury Testimony

The date is January 12th, 2011, 11:06 a.m. The questions were asked by Ms. Jonelle Eshbach, Witness, Joseph V. Paterno.

Q: Would you please introduce yourself to the Grand Jury?

Mr. Paterno: My name is Joseph V. Paterno.

Q: I’m sure everyone in the room knows, but just in case there’s anyone that doesn’t, how are you employed?

Mr. Paterno:
I’m a football coach at the Pennsylvania State University.

Q: As that football coach at the Pennsylvania State University, did you have as employed under you an individual by the name of Jerry Sandusky?

Mr. Paterno:
I did for a while, yes.

Q: Do you currently have employed for you since sometime in the early 2000s an assistant coach named Michael McQueary?

Mr. Paterno: Yes.

Q: I’d like to direct your attention to what I believe would be a spring break of 2002, around that time. Do you recall Michael McQueary calling you and asking to have a discussion with you about something that he observed?

Mr. Paterno: I’m not sure of the date, but he did call me on a Saturday morning. He said he had something that he wanted to discuss. I said, come on over to the house.

He came over to the house.

And as I said, I’m not sure what year it was, but I know it was a Saturday morning and we discussed something he had seen.

Q: Without getting into any graphic detail, what did Mr. McQueary tell you he had seen and where?

Mr. Paterno: Well, he had seen a person, an older — not an older, but a mature person who was fondling, whatever you might call it — I’m not sure what the term would be — a young boy.

Q: Did he identify who that older person was?

Mr. Paterno: Yes, a man by the name of Jerry Sandusky who had been one of our coaches, was not at the time.

Q: You’re saying that at the time this incident was reported to you, Sandusky was no longer a coach?
Mr. Paterno: No, he had retired voluntarily. I’m not sure exactly the year, but I think it was either ‘98 or ‘99.

Q: I think you used the term fondling. Is that the term that you used?

Mr. Paterno: Well, I don’t know what you would call it. Obviously, he was doing something with the youngster.

It was a sexual nature. I’m not sure exactly what it was.

I didn’t push Mike to describe exactly what it was because he was very upset. Obviously, I was in a little bit of a dilemma since Mr. Sandusky was not working for me anymore.

So I told — I didn’t go any further than that except I knew Mike was upset and I knew some kind of inappropriate action was being taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster.

Q: Did Mike McQueary tell you where he had seen this inappropriate conduct take place?

Mr. Paterno: In the shower.

Q: Where was the shower?

Mr. Paterno: In the Lasch Building.

Q: Is that on the campus of Penn State University?

Mr. Paterno: It’s right on the campus.

Q: Did you tell Mike McQueary at that time what you were going to do with that information that he had provided to you?

Mr. Paterno: I don’t know whether I was specific or not. I did tell Mike, Mike, you did what was right; you told me.

Even though Jerry does not work for the football staff any longer, I would refer his concerns to the right people.

Q: You recall this taking place on a Saturday morning, the conversation with Mike?

Mr. Paterno:  Yes.

Q: When did you — did you do something with that information?

Mr. Paterno: Well, I can’t be precise.

I ordinarily would have called people right away, but it was a Saturday morning and I didn’t want to interfere with their weekends.

So I don’t know whether I did it Saturday or did it early the next week.

I’m not sure when, but I did it within the week.

Q: To whom or with whom did you share the information that McQueary had given you?

Mr. Paterno: I talked to my immediate boss, our athletic director.

Q: What is that person’s name?

Mr. Paterno: Tim Curley.

Q: How did you contact Mr. Curley?

Mr. Paterno: I believe I did it by phone. As I recall, I called him and I said, hey, we got a problem, and I explained the problem to him.

Q: Was the information that you passed along substantially the same information that Mr. McQueary had given you?

Mr. Paterno: Yes.

Q: Other than the incident that Mike McQueary reported to you, do you know in any way, through rumor, direct knowledge or any other fashion, of any other inappropriate sexual conduct by Jerry Sandusky with young boys?

Mr. Paterno: I do not know of anything else that Jerry would be involved in of that nature, no. I do not know of it.

You did mention — I think you said something about a rumor. It may have been discussed in my presence, something else about somebody.

I don’t know.

I don’t remember, and I could not honestly say I heard a rumor.

Q: You indicated that your report was made directly to Tim Curley. Do you know of that report being made to anyone else that was a university official?

Mr. Paterno: No, because I figured that Tim would handle it appropriately.

I have a tremendous amount of confidence in Mr. Curley and I thought he would look into it and handle it appropriately.

Q: We have no further questions of you.

Testimony concluded at 11:13 a.m. Date, January 12, 2011, 11:20 a.m.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates

Pitt Hires UW Assistant Chryst As Football Coach

In a Thursday morning press release, Pittsburgh announced that Wisconsin assistant football coach Paul Chryst has agreed to become its head football coach.

Paul Chryst

Chryst will be introduced to the public at a 3pm ET press conference at the Panthers’ practice facility.

Multiple sources also confirmed that Chryst will retain his duties as offensive coordinator of Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl, with one source indicating to SbB that will entail Chryst spending “three days in Pasadena.

Wisconsin Athletic Director Barry Alvarez played a key role in Pitt’s decision to hire Chryst, as a source close to the Pitt program told SbB that the former longtime Badgers football coach convinced longtime friend and influential Pitt booster A.C. Dellovade to champion the Chryst candidacy to other prominent Pitt donors and officials.

Chryst, who is credited for an impressive makeover of the Wisconsin offense dating to 2005, replaces Todd Graham, who coincidentally got the nod over Chryst for the Pitt job last year - before abruptly departing for Arizona State a week ago.

Follow Brooks on Twitter or join him on Facebook for real-time updates