Basketball Outcome Preference

[ckDOG]

The repetitive pro-Stans and anti-Stans arguments got me thinking
yesterday. What do MSU fans consider a successful basketball season?
It seems as though when anyone ever offers any criticism of Rick, it's
reputed by stating the SEC Western Division Titles, Tourney
Championships, and SEC Reg Season Championship that Rick has
accumulated over the seasons. The counter-argument to that is always
"Well, his post-season resume sucks..." The counter-counter-argument is to discount the post-season results as if the NCAAT is less important than regular season performance.

So I'm curious as to what's better in the eyes of SPS.

My question: IF you had to chose one or the other, would you rather have a season where you:

A)
Had a solid regular season (i.e. some combo or individual
accomplishment of SEC Eastern Division Champ/SEC Champ/SEC Tourney
Champ), but early exit from the NCAAT (1st or 2nd round)

or

B) Have a decent enough season to slide in the NCAAT (no reg season titles) and then make a deep run (Sweet 16 or better)

 

[ckDOG]

The repetitive pro-Stans and anti-Stans arguments got me thinking
yesterday. What do MSU fans consider a successful basketball season?
It seems as though when anyone ever offers any criticism of Rick, it's
reputed by stating the SEC Western Division Titles, Tourney
Championships, and SEC Reg Season Championship that Rick has
accumulated over the seasons. The counter-argument to that is always
"Well, his post-season resume sucks..." The counter-counter-argument is to discount the post-season results as if the NCAAT is less important than regular season performance.

So I'm curious as to what's better in the eyes of SPS.

My question: IF you had to chose one or the other, would you rather have a season where you:

A)
Had a solid regular season (i.e. some combo or individual
accomplishment of SEC Eastern Division Champ/SEC Champ/SEC Tourney
Champ), but early exit from the NCAAT (1st or 2nd round)

or

B) Have a decent enough season to slide in the NCAAT (no reg season titles) and then make a deep run (Sweet 16 or better)

 

[Mr Meoff]

I think in any ONE season, most people would rather slide into the NCAA, but go the Sweet 16, rather than have a great season only to be disappointed and be upset by an inferior team. Hell, just 'sliding into the NCAA' means you've had a pretty decent year.

I think the argument would center more around two choices like:

1. year after year of supposedly being good, making the NCAA but getting disappointed

vs.

2. not making the tournament most years, but when you do make it, you go deep

 

[FQDawg]

Four months of success >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a single weekend (or week) of success.

The NCAA Tournament can be such a crapshoot... You may get a bad matchup or you may just run into a team that gets hot at the right time. And once you make it into the tournament, unless you get to the Final Four (or maybe Elite 8), where you end up losing doesn't really matter.

I'll take consistent winning over an entire season over winning one extra game in the tournament any day of the week.

 

[patdog]

But over a period of years, I'd rather go consistently than go once and have a deep run. I'd say the balancing point would be pretty close to tournament games played (i.e. an Elite 8 run and missing the tournament completely 3 times would be about equal to 4 1st round exits).

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

and I would be moderately happy with either outcome.

Of course it is worth noting that "sliding into the NCAAT" means you are the 4th - maybe 6th best team in the SEC. The equivalent in football would be a 8-9 win season.</p>

 

[DawgatAuburn]

It is highlighted by BaderDawg's proclamation of how awesome Ravern in. This is the same BaderDawg who later proclaimed our talent to be equal to Kentucky's.

http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=32418?page=1

 

[TBonewannabe]

Making a deep run every 6 to 8 years but not making the tourney the other years

or

Making the tourney every 6 to 8 years but not getting into the sweet 16

This is pretty much the whole discussion. To think we can become UK is moronic. We can either stick with Stans and hope he either a) finally figures out how to win a big game or gets enough talent to overcome his floor coaching skills or b) go with a young coach and hope he is successful. The young coach seems to work out about 1 out of 6 or 7 times. Either way is a gamble.

I say give Stans a chance at the next recruiting class that has a boatload of talent. If we don't get enough of those guys to push us deeper into the tourney I doubt Stans will ever get any further in the dance. One thing I do agree with Coach34 is to schedule some harder OOC games. It will either get us better seeds in the tourney or will get Stans fired for not making the dance.

 

[ckDOG]

to answer the question of "What has more value, regular or post season success?" Obviously, we all want both types. But, since we've only seen one type the past decade at MSU, I figured I'd toss the generalized question out there. If anyone doesn't like the scenarios presented, they can just think of A and B as "Reg Season is more important" and "Post-Season is more important", respectively.

I personally think post-season success is what it's all about in college bball. That's not discounting the the accomplishments required to get there, but I think in most folk's minds, all that prior accomplishment is tossed out the window on Day 1 of the NCAAT. Teams make or break their seasons based on a couple of weeks in March. Fair? Maybe not. But, that's the reality of college bball, in my opinion at least.

 

[SallyStansbury]

Ravern disappeared as predicted, Benock got those minutes instead of Turner or Osby and I continue to complain. Dang. Youcould almost conclude thatCoach Stans isn't listening to SPS? How dare he?

 

[paindonthurt_]

When you aren't consistently making the tournament or having good seasons, the one good run (making the tournament) that comes every 4 or 5 years is awesome.

BUT

When you expect to be good (RS made it that way) every season, you also expect every 4 or 5 years to have at least a really good run (sweet 16) in the tournament. Rick Stansbury has had 12 good seasons. He is yet to have a really good season with a strong run in the NCAA tournament.

 

[ckDOG]

The only thing I'm really trying to establish here is that post-season success IS vitally important to a basketball program.

I won't try to discredit Rick Stansbury in that I do think credit is deserved for the year in/year out regular season consistent solid performance. It takes a quality coach to do that and I won't slight him for that.

BUT,

I do think it's valid to be more than frustrated that we can't "get over the hump" and finally show up on the national scene in March. Some of that could be bad luck, but alot of that has to go to coaching - as it's the only common denominator over 10+ years. And it's even more frustrating that there are some folks that try to write off post season performance as being icing on the cake, rather than part of the cake - if that makes any sense. Many, if not most, people would say "post-season IS the season" when it comes to college bball.

I guess I just fell into the trap of letting the polarized arguments that are here every day represent the majority. Seeing that most people value post season success over regular season (on a season by season basis at least), it's probably fair to say that the folks that discount the importance of the post-season are in the minority. At the same rate, the folks that discredit our regular season accomplishments over the past decade are likely in the minority as well.

I feel better now knowing that I'm not the lone MSU fan that actually gives a **** about post season performance. Like you said, I'd expect us to have a good run every 4 or 5 years. I think that's a pretty reasonable expectation. I guess the next question is (to be saved for after this post-season), how many crappy post-seasons does it take before the masses get restless and we tell Rick to produce or find somewhere else to work. There has to be a threshold for putting up with no post-season achievements.

 

[Hanmudog]

I could not tell you who was in the Sweet 16 last season but I do know who the top 10-15 teams in the nation were because they were right there in front of us for 4 months instead of for a couple of days. Some, like you, put more weight on the post season and some, like me, like to see solid seasons as a whole rather than skidding into the NCAAs with a 19-11 record. Obviously, any State fans would like to see more post season success but too much emphasis can be place on it sometimes. Kind of like Ole Miss with Bianco. He is a very good coach but he gets slammed for not getting to Omaha all the time.

 

[Mr Meoff]

I bet damn near poster on SPS could name the times in the last 20 years we've been to the Sweet 16. I may not remember which teams were in the S16 last year, but honestly, why would I care? I only care when we go.

Conversely, at least in my mind, I'm not sure I could name all the years we went to the NCAAs. Maybe I could get close, because it's obviously important, but at some point if you go pretty much every year (or 6 out of 8) you almost get numb to it. Making is great, and we shouldn't take it for granted, but that's human nature -- and it's a product of Dick's & then Rick's success. We are where we are, and the next logical step if we want to feel like we're moving forward is to win some games in the tournament.

Holy ****, the Saints are going to the Super Bowl. Literally, anything can happen in sports. We should be able to win 2 games in the NCAA tourney at least once in a while.

 

[Coach34]

other people couldnt for the life of them tell you who was ranked 12th, 13th, or 14th heading into the NCAA Tourney. But they do remember Louisville blowing out Arizona,the controversialbubble team that made the Sweet 16. They remember Missouri upsetting Memphis in a shootout. They remember Dook getting blown out. And they remember Blake Griffen and OU taking down the Syracuse team that had gone so many OT's in the Big East Tourney.

Ya think maybe the reason you dont remember anything about the Sweet 16 is because we are never in it?

 

[RebelBruiser]

I think in any ONE season, most people would rather slide into the NCAA, but go the Sweet 16, rather than have a great season only to be disappointed and be upset by an inferior team. Hell, just 'sliding into the NCAA' means you've had a pretty decent year.

I think the argument would center more around two choices like:

1. year after year of supposedly being good, making the NCAA but getting disappointed

vs.

2. not making the tournament most years, but when you do make it, you go deep

So basically the Dave Perno at UGA vs. Mike Bianco at Ole Miss argument.

Would you rather suck every other year and win SEC titles and go to Omaha in your good years, or would you rather be good every year, host regionals, and never make it to Omaha?

I don't know the basketball equivalent to Perno at UGA, but Stans is the Bianco equivalent at basketball.

 

[Hanmudog]

I actually watch college basketball the entire season so the ones I remember are the ones I see winning on TV week after week moreso than the ones that win a game or two in March.I remember the Final 4 and Elite 8 but the Sweet 16 teams are not always necessarily the best 16 in the nation. Again, that is my opinion. If one mostly just watches in March then you would see it differently.

 

[FQDawg]

other people couldnt for the life of them tell you who was ranked 12th, 13th, or 14th heading into the NCAA Tourney. But they do remember Louisville blowing out Arizona, the controversial bubble team that made the Sweet 16. They remember Missouri upsetting Memphis in a shootout. They remember Dook getting blown out. And they remember Blake Griffen and OU taking down the Syracuse team that had gone so many OT's in the Big East Tourney.

How long did it take you to look up all those results?

 

[dickiedawg]

final-2009-ncaa-march-madness-brackets.jpg

 

[Coach34]

I remembered them. I love watching the NCAA Tourney. I had Louisville winning it all, and was very happy to see Arizona rewarded for playing a tough schedule. I like the way Missouri plays, and seeing them take down Mempho was a great game to watch. I always like to see Coach K get beat, and not a fan of Syracuse either. Those were just the games that stood out to me from last years Sweet 16

 

[paindonthurt_]

Either his coaching his questionable or he has been the unluckiest bastard ever. Either way i don't want that karma or lack of coaching ability holding me back any longer. Either do something about it or take a chance to get to the next level.

 

[seshomoru]

other people couldnt for the life of them tell you who was ranked 12th, 13th, or 14th heading into the NCAA Tourney. But they do remember Louisville blowing out Arizona, the controversial bubble team that made the Sweet 16. They remember Missouri upsetting Memphis in a shootout. They remember Dook getting blown out. And they remember Blake Griffen and OU taking down the Syracuse team that had gone so many OT's in the Big East Tourney.

How long did it take you to look up all those results?

Probably not long. All he has to do everyday is fill up condom machines and troll the internet.

 

[HD6]

*