another nugget from Scooba's research....

[dickiedawg]

But I found your wording humorous. I know your words weren't directed at Jesus.

 

[futaba.79]

knows who you were cursing.

Like I said, Coach gets to you pretty easy.

 

[msumhsfan]

and if we played duke, north car, texas, and michigan state what banners would we have hanging at the hump? Congrats on getting your *** kicked but you had a hard SOS! we might beat them every once in a while but losing to all those power teams wouldnt help getting into the NCAA at the end of the season but it would really bring the team moral up im sure

 

[perch0]

How many teams in the big 5 do you think we could schedule home and home from year to year?

 

[mstateglfr]

How many teams in the big 5 do you think we could schedule home and home from year to year?

2. And i wouldnt want to do more that that, since we end up playing at least 1 or 2 more in those random *** round robin style tournaments that pop up everywhere.

We could schedule 2 each year. Why not? We also are already in that Big East/SEC matchup, which is neutral court but still a game against a big time conference team.

 

[Johnson85]

I'd like to play a couple more teams from the bottom half of the Big 12 and Big 10 and maybe the bottom 1/4 of the Big East and ACC. No guaranteed losses, but I'd rather see a game against FSU, Clemson, Texas A&M, nebraska, etc. than another no name school (especially rather see them than a Richmond or other small school that is actually decent).

We may not be able to get any of those types teams outside of the Big East/SEC challenge and other round robin tournaments. This may not do anything of our tournament chances or RPI, I'd just rather go play mediocre schools from good conferences than crappy schools from bad conferences.

 

[jamdawg96]

peaches is a douche troll. free speech is great and all, but his presence here is what brings out the (steadily progressing) worst in this board. he does generate traffic though, i'll give him that.

 

[missouridawg]

What, so I'm supposed to now think that football and baseball are on more stable ground b/c we hired two new coaches?

I'm not asking you to think one way or the other. But when you enter a debate on the success of a program, it generally starts with the head coach. You simply asked how come he doesn't post the baseball/football records and I simply stated that those didn't need to be posted, because our Athletic Department has got new leadership to guide the programs. To try and compare them with Rick Stansbury would lead you no where.

But you too Missouri are becoming one of those that doesn't appreciate that success compared to other sports, and seems to begrudge the fact that we actually are successful for some reason.

Let me make this very clear. I absolutely LOVE Stansbury for the person he is, his dedication to MSU Basketball, the great role model that he is, and the success he's had. But to think that Stansbury is a great coach is absurd, in my opinion. He's an above average coach, but not great. Winning the SEC West is not a great achievement, on a national scale. Winning the SEC West doesn't even GAURANTEE you entry into the NCAA tournament.

I think some of you guys are only happy when we have a new coach and during his honeymoon period, so you can have your delusions of grandeur and dreams of winning national championships and just feel wooly thinking we might can win w/ the new guy, and that he's building something

If I didn't think our teams were trying to be the best in the NCAA, I probably wouldn't watch them. The reason why people aren't fond of Stansbury is because he seems less willing to change things to try to improve. There are things we see on the floor that other teams do and we wonder why we can't try them as well, particularly from other teams having success. Please note that I KNOW Stansbury has been the best coach in the SEC West this past ten years and I don't think Pelphrey, Brady, or Gottfried could even hold his jock.

I'm sure all you dreamers now think that Cohen and Mullen are 10x the coach that Stans is and that they'll bring more success than he has sustained over a long period of time, but let me tell you, the odds are probably against them duplicating our success in basketball.

To compare baseball/football success with basketball success is not an apples to apples comparison. Winning the SEC West in Football gets you to the Conference Championship, a shot at the Sugar bowl (and potentially the NC game) with a win, or the Cotton Bowl with a loss. Winning the SEC West in baseball will get you into the SEC Baseball tournament, potentially hosting a Regional (or even Super-Regional). Winning the SEC West in basketball gets you a better seed in the SEC Basketball tournament.... and that's it.

And another thing I think that gets hung up in this Rick Stansbury debate is the definition of "success". If you define success by winning the SEC West, then damnit, Rick Stansbury is our man. But personally, I don't define it on that. I define success by the overall body of work, with bonus points for winning SEC Overall Titles, SEC Tournaments, and NCAA Tournament Games (as well as games against qaulity opponents). I'll also subtract points for embarrassing losses.
Edited for spelling.