After watching this video of the '96 Final Four team...

[TheStateUofMS]

That team had some serious serious talent. I can see why we made it to the Final Four. Definately was no fluke. That team was legit. There are some similarities between that team and this years team:

1. The '96 team and this years squad depended HEAVILY on their starters.
2. The '96 team and this years team had a dominate C on the defensive end.
3. Both teams have great outside shooters.
4. Both teams were turnover prone
5. Both teams seem to feed off the play of other players. If one guy is making shots, everyone is making shots. If no one can make a shot, our team can't feed offeachother and we start throwing up bricks as a team.
6. Also, both teams seem to not handle a lead that well and let up a little bit after the 10min mark in the 2nd half.

The main difference I see in the two teams iswe don't have one guy that can really create his ownshot like Jones couldand vocal leadership. Jones was a freak athletically and played with lots of emotion. We have one ormaybe twoplayers that provide both of those. Varnado can get emotional sometimes and so can Dee. I think those two need to be our emotional and vocal leaders on the court. Our team needs someone to look too for direction. This is evident whenour guysjust start jacking up threes and we, as fans, have no idea why we aren't getting better shot selection. We need someone to step up and be a leader and tell guys whento go in down low to JV and kick it out, go in to JV for a shot, start pushing the ball up the court, how to adjust defensively, ect. We have some good athletes on the team, but we have no vocal leadership and I would say that's the main difference bc both teams are very similar.

Some of you are probably wondering why I'm comparing the '96 Final Four team to this '10 NCAAT bubble team and that's because before this season started we had high expectations and some of us believed that we had a chance to go deep, maybe not final four, but really deep in the NCAAT. I know that not having Sidney and a short bench due to injurieshas made this team underachieve,but we still have some good talent out there with very capable players.

Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vz0v8c06lNA

Watch and the similarities are evident.</p>

 

[patdog]

1. The 96 team played much better defense.
2. While both teamshave good outside shooters, the 96 team had much better outside shooters. Darryl Wilson and Marcus Bullard are better than anyone on this year's team.

 

[futaba.79]

in toughness.

Walters and Dampier made people pay when they came insideand both could set some serious picks. Jarvis embarrasses people but he doesn't bring the pain.

Bullard brushed aside smaller guards. I don't think anybody is scared of Dee and Barry

 

[Hanmudog]

1. The 96 team played much better defense.
2. While both teamshave good outside shooters, the 96 team had much better outside shooters. Darryl Wilson and Marcus Bullard are better than anyone on this year's team.

While I agree that the two teams have their differences, I am not sure those are two big ones. Bullard and Wilson were great shooters but top to bottom this team has more good shooters and are a bit tougher to defend at the three point line. Defensively I don't see a huge difference because this year's team has not gotten enough credit for the improvement they have made on the defensive end and Jarvis is a bigger inside deterent than even Dampier was.
To me the biggest difference was the 96 team's ability to play physical when needed. No one was going to push that team around.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

I would take Ravern's shooting over Bullard and Stewart just broke Wilson's record. Granted he took more 3s than Wilson, but he still has the record. Marcus Bullard, looking at the records on the media guide, isn't even on the list of made 3s in a game and it starts at 6. So the most he made in a game in his career is 5 which is great but on our current team Ravern, Stewart, and Dee are on their 3x(combined) and that was prior to this season. This year Dee has made 7 and 6 in games. So those 3 players combined have made 6 or more 3s in a game 5x. Bullard didn't make it once. He did lead the team at 40% from 3 the 95-96 season which is 2nd all time for 3 point % for a season. Ravern is also on there at 38.5% which is 4th all time. So I don't know if that years team was a better 3 point shooting team, but both are very good at it so that's why I say they are similar.

 

[dawgstudent]

Stewart did his in close to 4 years because he played a lot as a freshman.

 

[dawgstudent]

besides Dontae Jones is that we have no role player whatsoever. No one comes in looking to do the dirty work like Russell Walters or a Branden Vincent if you want to look past the 96 team. Everyone is looking to score. Jarvis could be that perfect role player but we rely on him for offense too.

Which is why I always said this team could be on another level if it had another big man like Rhodes to bang down low with Jarvis and was a little bit more reliable in his offensive game.

 

[Thick]

The offensive schemes are not remotely close to each other. If the current team played under Williams, no way in hell that any of them would make as many attempts per game. If the '96 team played under Standsbury, I think that Bullard and SuperD would have thrived, not so sure that Dontae would have faired as well from beyond the arc. I think RJ is a better shooter then Dontae, Bullard was an actual 2 not a pg, and SuperD could flat out shoot it, period. Now that is not saying that I don't think you can compare both, but the '96 could score, from the arc, attack the rim, and could score in transition. To me, the difference maker is Dontae Jones, because he could shoot the 3, score in the paint either in the post or dribble drive, and he played much better defense then RJ when Williams got in his ***.

 

[patdog]

he played much better defense then RJ when Williams got in his ***.

The wording of this kind of disturbs me. I really don't want to know about that sort of thing.

 

[Rabid]

At the end of the season, the '96 team seemed to have a killer instinct. If you notice in the video, we were completely dominating the number one team in the nation and the eventual national champion.

This team is still hoping to win. This team may be similar to them in talent, but I don't know if we are mentally ready to go on a run like the '96 team did. Hopefully, we are ready and tonight will be the beginning of a beautiful March run.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

1. The 96 team played much better defense.
2. While both teamshave good outside shooters, the 96 team had much better outside shooters. Darryl Wilson and Marcus Bullard are better than anyone on this year's team.

While I agree that the two teams have their differences, I am not sure those are two big ones. Bullard and Wilson were great shooters but top to bottom this team has more good shooters and are a bit tougher to defend at the three point line. Defensively I don't see a huge difference because this year's team has not gotten enough credit for the improvement they have made on the defensive end and Jarvis is a bigger inside deterent than even Dampier was.
To me the biggest difference was the 96 team's ability to play physical when needed. No one was going to push that team around.

You're correct on that team was more physically built, but I don't know if they played harder. This team is good on defense. Obviously with Jarvis inside and Barry is a lock down defender on the perimeter. Ravern's defense is holding this teams overall defensive ability back. Kodi has been playing great D lately and Phil and Dee can defend really well. Physically they were tougher, but I don't think they played defense any harder than this years team.
SEC Stats
2010 MSU Defensive Stats: 2010 MSU Defensive IndividualStatisical Leaders:
1 in Scoring Defense#1Rebounder: Varnado
1 in FG percentage defense #1Shot Blocker: Varnado
2 in 3FG percentage defense
3 in rebounding margin
1 in blocked shots
1 in defensive rebounding

I can't find season stats on the 1996 team but it can't be much better than our 2010 defensive stats comapared to the rest of the SEC.

 

[dawgstudent]

[No message]

 

[Thick]

nm

 

[Coach34]

imagine Ravern trying to guard Dontae, or Randy having to try and get through all those damn screens they used to set for 00....he would get killed.

Wonder if Phil Turner could block out Russell Walters? hahahahahahahahaha

 

[dickiedawg]

nm

 

[Fdawg.sixpack]

this team needs a dietric slater type player...everyone on the court plays the exact same style of basketball which can be good at times but can also kill you

 

[patdog]

Dontae Jones = cleared to play
Renardo Sidney = not cleared to play

 

[Center Z]

I was at that game. I'll never forget that ****. Dontae Jones was on fire. I remember his turnaround jumper at 4:08 in that video like it was damn yesterday. That, and Hyche throwing the ball up in the air at the end. We sat by some arrogant-*** Kentucky fans and screamed our heads off the whole time. I remember hearing one of them say, "Somebody needs to shut them up." It was one of the only great MSU moments that I was in actual attendance for.

 

[VirgilCain]

something to the effect of "what is one thing that no one knows about the '96 team?" Bart replied with something about how russell walters was a dominant offensive player in practice but due the needs of the team (they already had plenty of scorers) he assumed the role of the "role player" (sorry for the redundancy).

The article is pretty fuzzy in my head but I think Bart went on to say things about russell actually having an awesome offensive game complete with a great fade-away jumper. I want to say that he said (or insinuated) that Russell often dominated dampier in practice (practice?...we talkin' 'bout practice?). Obviously this begs the question of why wasn't RW's offensive game ever feature if he was so good.... I have no idea.

I cannot remember where the hell I read this article, most likely the CL or genespage. Does anyone know what the hell I am talking about?

 

[38843dawg]

very nice editing throughout also.