the school: Pittsburgh

Continuing the deep-dive look at the ACC's newest members, we move on to the team that will join UVA in the Coastal Conference and become a yearly opponent.

Overall profile
Enrollment (undergrad):

1. Florida State: 31,800
2. Maryland: 26,800
3. NC State: 26,200
4. Virginia Tech: 23,900
5. North Carolina: 18,600
6. Pittsburgh: 18,400
7. Clemson: 16,600
8. Virginia: 15,800
9. Syracuse: 14,800
10. Georgia Tech: 14,500
11. Miami: 10,300
12. Boston College: 9,100
13. Notre Dame: 8,400
14. Duke: 6,500
15. Wake Forest: 4,800

Academic rank (USN&WR):

1. Duke (#8)
2. Notre Dame (#17)
3. Virginia (#24)
4. Wake Forest (#27)
5. North Carolina (#30)
6. Boston College (#31)
7. Georgia Tech (#36)
8. Miami (#44)
9(t). Syracuse (#58)
9(t). Maryland (#58)
9(t). Pittsburgh (#58)
12. Clemson (#68)
13. Virginia Tech (#72)
14. Florida State (#97)
15. NC State (#106)

Director's Cup average:**

1. North Carolina: 6.2
2. Florida State: 9
3. Virginia: 10.6
4. Duke: 12
5. Notre Dame: 18.4
6. Maryland: 28.8
7. Virginia Tech: 40
8. Clemson: 50.8
9. Syracuse: 54
10. Miami: 56.4
11. Georgia Tech: 59.6
12. NC State: 60.2
13. Boston College: 67.6
14. Wake Forest: 70.8
15. Pittsburgh: 113.6

**average finish in the last five years, including 2013.

Pitt is about 4,000 students bigger than Syracuse, but academically right in the same area.  They're a private school that behaves like a public one (funding from the state, lower tuition for instate students) thanks to the weird way the Pennsylvania higher education system is set up; otherwise, their profile is remarkably similar to Syracuse.  The differences on the athletic fields are much more pronounced, however.  Pitt will become the only ACC team to finish outside the top 100 in Director's Cup standings at any time in the last five years; worse yet, the only time in the past five years they finished inside the top 100 was in 2008-2009, when they were 93rd.  That's worse than all but one of Wake Forest's showings.  Thus, it's the Panthers that stand to gain the most from ACC membership of any of the three additions.

Sports we play that they don't

Men:

Golf
Lacrosse
Tennis

Women:

Field hockey
Golf
Lacrosse
Rowing

Sports they play that we don't

Men:

None

Women:

Gymnastics

Pitt has a much more balanced profile of offerings than Cuse does, but like Cuse, they skip a number of sports that UVA is good at.  Lax and men's tennis come to mind, and crew and field hockey on the women's side.  Gymnastics is the only Pitt sport not offered at UVA.

Common sports

(The number after each year shows how many Director's Cup points were earned by that sport in that year.)

Baseball:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 78)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 83)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)

Totals: 0 (UVA 314)

Pittsburgh has never found itself at the bottom of the Big East standings; in fact, they usually end up somewhere between the middle and the top.  But they haven't earned any national tournament berths because when they do have a good record, it's built on an inferior OOC schedule.  They were 42-17 this year - their best record in this time frame - but had the 202nd-best strength of schedule.  They've been competitive in the Big East - whether that translates to the ACC will be very much in question, because they really haven't played a team as good as those at the top of the ACC in the last five years.  They'll at least be better than BC, though.

Men's basketball:

2008-2009: 73 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 50 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 50 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)

Totals: 198 (UVA 25)

One of the school's calling cards, but less successful of late than in the past and slowly earning the reputation of a tournament underachiever.  They earned 1 seeds in 2009 and 2011, but that didn't get them past the Elite Eight, and then only in 2009.  Still, they're a tough team under Jamie Dixon and they consider it a major disappointment if they miss the tournament.

Women's basketball:

2008-2009: 64 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)

Totals: 64 (UVA 75)

Had a good run in the mid-2000s, but a three-year string of losing seasons led to a coaching change this past offseason.  Like UVA, rebuilding and looking uphill in a tough conference, and probably have farther to go than we do.

Men's cross country:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 48)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 40)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 61.5)

Totals: 0 (UVA 194.5)

Women's cross country:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 22)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 45)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 32)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 34)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)

Totals: 0 (UVA 131)

Both cross-country teams run in the bottom levels of the Big East, and will continue to do so in the ACC.

Football:

2008-2009: 25 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 60 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 45 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 25 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 25 (UVA 0)

Totals: 180 (UVA 25)

Between Pitt and Syracuse, the Panthers are the team more likely to find some early success in the ACC.  They have a five-year bowl streak going, although the last three are trips to the Compass Bowl in Birmingham, Alabama.  As with Syracuse, it might be harder in the ACC to find six wins than it was in the Big East, but the Panthers are moving to what right now is the easier side of the conference.

Men's soccer:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 100)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 25)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 25)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 50)

Totals: 0 (UVA 250)

Pitt might very easily be the very bottom of the barrel in ACC soccer.  In the recent five years they won seven Big East games, three against Seton Hall.  That makes something like 30-some losses (I didn't bother to look out for ties.)

Women's soccer:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 64)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 73)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)

Totals: 0 (UVA 329)

The women are slightly more competitive, but the story's still the same.  The ACC is a monster conference in women's soccer, and the Pitt ladies will probably get steamrolled for a while.

Softball:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 25)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)

Totals: 0 (UVA 25)

Similarly to UVA, sort of generically bad, but with lower high points (as in, we once made the NCAA tournament and they didn't.)  They usually have a losing record in Big East play and probably will in the ACC, too.

Men's swimming and diving:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 69)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 67.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 70.5)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 60)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 47)

Totals: 0 (UVA 314)

Women's swimming and diving:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 64.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 69)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 63)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 57)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 56)

Totals: 0 (UVA 309.5)

Pitt used to really dominate Big East swimming, but that was ten or more years ago; they typically roll in about 3rd or 4th in the 11-team Big East meet these days.  They've been a regular dual-meet opponent of ours as well, and UVA has always won without dominating.  I suspect if I looked a little deeper into the lineups I might find that UVA hasn't been throwing the A-team out there; an experienced swim coach like Bernardino knows what kind of minimum lineup he can set in order to shuffle things around a little and still win.  At any rate, if UVA is knocked off its lofty pedestal in ACC swimming, it probably won't be Pitt that does it.  Neither will they free-fall to the bottom of the rankings.

Women's tennis:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 50)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 50)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 64)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 64)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 64)

Totals: 0 (UVA 292)

Nothing very notable about this team, and unlikely to give UVA a difficult time or to make many waves in ACC competition.

Men's track and field (outdoor):

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 24.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 49.5)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 46)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 15)
2012-2013: 5 (UVA 0)

Totals: 5 (UVA 135)

Women's track and field (outdoor):

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 36.5)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 44)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)

Totals: 0 (UVA 80.5)

Occasionally send a participant to the national championship meet.  Bout all that can be said.

Women's volleyball:

2008-2009: 0 (UVA 0)
2009-2010: 0 (UVA 0)
2010-2011: 0 (UVA 0)
2011-2012: 0 (UVA 0)
2012-2013: 0 (UVA 0)

Totals: 0 (UVA 0)

Will enter the league ahead of UVA in the pecking order, but then, most teams would.  Their lack of entries into the NCAA tournament probably won't be rectified by joining the ACC, but they won't embarrass themselves either.

Wrestling:

2008-2009: 36 (UVA 40)
2009-2010: 48 (UVA 60)
2010-2011: 40 (UVA 50.5)
2011-2012: 60 (UVA 45.5)
2012-2013: 59 (UVA 53)

Totals: 243 (UVA 249)

Pitt's wrestling team is good and getting better, with some top-15 finishes at the national championships.  They're close to where Virginia Tech finishes, and Tech is the usual ACC champion, with UVA coming in 2nd in recent years.  Pitt will come into the ACC and instantly be the most likely team to dethrone the Hokies; wrestling will easily be their most likely path to an ACC championship.

Pitt's campus is smack in the middle of a large northern city, with minimal if any room for outward growth.  That has about exactly the effect you'd expect on their athletics.  With the exception of football - for which they borrow the Steelers' stadium - and five points in track this spring, not one of their outdoor sports has earned a Director's Cup point in however many years.  Everything they do well is indoors, and they typically earn all the points they're going to earn during the winter season, after scraping a few from football.  They have potential to be a major force in ACC wrestling and will definitely add to the ACC profile in hoops, and they'll do alright in football, too.  I don't see them having an upper-echelon baseball team (and they have one of those obnoxious even-the-dirt-is-turf fields) but they ought to provide some competition for the likes of Duke, Tech, and Maryland for the bottom seeds in the ACC tourney.  Most of the rest of their programs, though, won't be competitive at least until the ACC money starts to take effect.