Be careful what you wish for....

[dawgged]

The latest three game losing streak has agreater percentage of MSU fans than ever wanting a coaching change in basketball. I've been one of the biggest Stansbury supporters imaginable over the years, and even I ambeginning to think it might be time. But having said that, I just want to throw this out for public consumption. Based on past experience, not just in regards to MSU sports, but on life in general, I'm goingon record as saying there is at least a 50-50 chance, if not more,that Stansbury's successor will have LESS success than Stans had. Not only will this new coach have to be able to rally the fan base and coach up the team, but he's going to have to be able to continue recruiting as well as Stans has and that's not going to be an easy task.

I know everyone thinks we should be an NCAA tournament team almost every year andmaking at least the sweet sixteenevery two or three appearances in the tourney, if not more.But I'm tellin' ya.... while it's human nature to think the grass is greener on the other side, that's not always the case.And sports fanatics rarely seem to understand this. I'd certainly hate toreplace Stansbury only to discover in three years we were better off with him than without. I'm not saying we shouldn't make a change andI'm not saying we should. I'm just saying that weneed to understand that there is considerable risk whenmaking such a change. Personally, I'd like to see this team right itself, beat Kentucky Tuesday, finish strong, make the tournament, and make a run in the tournament. But I ain't holding my breath for that either. I'm not sure what the problem is with this team or with the program in general, but then again, I don't get paid half a million dollars a year to figure it out either. That's Scott Stricklin's job. Time to earn your money, Scott. </p>

 

[dawgged]

The latest three game losing streak has agreater percentage of MSU fans than ever wanting a coaching change in basketball. I've been one of the biggest Stansbury supporters imaginable over the years, and even I ambeginning to think it might be time. But having said that, I just want to throw this out for public consumption. Based on past experience, not just in regards to MSU sports, but on life in general, I'm goingon record as saying there is at least a 50-50 chance, if not more,that Stansbury's successor will have LESS success than Stans had. Not only will this new coach have to be able to rally the fan base and coach up the team, but he's going to have to be able to continue recruiting as well as Stans has and that's not going to be an easy task.

I know everyone thinks we should be an NCAA tournament team almost every year andmaking at least the sweet sixteenevery two or three appearances in the tourney, if not more.But I'm tellin' ya.... while it's human nature to think the grass is greener on the other side, that's not always the case.And sports fanatics rarely seem to understand this. I'd certainly hate toreplace Stansbury only to discover in three years we were better off with him than without. I'm not saying we shouldn't make a change andI'm not saying we should. I'm just saying that weneed to understand that there is considerable risk whenmaking such a change. Personally, I'd like to see this team right itself, beat Kentucky Tuesday, finish strong, make the tournament, and make a run in the tournament. But I ain't holding my breath for that either. I'm not sure what the problem is with this team or with the program in general, but then again, I don't get paid half a million dollars a year to figure it out either. That's Scott Stricklin's job. Time to earn your money, Scott. </p>

 

[Dawg in a pile]

This is what I worry about more than anything with the fire Stans stuff.
I wish the odds were 50/50 but they are likely much larger that we hire
someone that leaves us wishing Stans was still here. I for one don't think
he's going anywhere yet regardless of a NCAA tourney appearance this season,
not saying that's right or wrong but I think he gets another year regardless.

 

[Coach34]

" but he's going to have to be able to <span style="text-decoration:underline">continue recruiting</span> as well as Stans has and that's not going to be an easy task."


Shane Power just wrote an article about how Stansbury really hasnt recruited well- and this is now what many of the Bury supporters are now saying.

So is he recruiting well or not??? I just want a clarification

 

[Coach34]

This is what I worry about more than anything with the fire Stans stuff.

I wish the odds were 50/50 but they are likely much larger that we hire

someone that leaves us wishing Stans was still here. I for one don't think

he's going anywhere yet regardless of a NCAA tourney appearance this season,

not saying that's right or wrong but I think he gets another year regardless.

how do you quantify your less than 50% number?

Our program is nowhere near the turd it was in the 70's and 80's- why cant we continue what we have been doing and possibly even do it better?

 

[CadaverDawg]

I am now to the point where I would rather see a bunch of scrubs play their hearts out and come up short than to see these talented teams underachieve due to lack of effort and lack of coaching. Remember when everyone said the same things about Sherrill? And then Polk? And we held on to both of those guys too long, which made it take longer to rebuild from rock bottom. I don't want the basketball program to hit rock bottom like the other two programs, so let's act now. If Stans hasn't done more in 14 years what makes us think a light will come on and he will be the coach we've always wanted him to be now. Time to show him the door and let the grasshopper hire us a top notch guy.

 

[Tds &amp; Beer]

I'm goingon record as saying there is at least a 50-50 chance, if not more,that Stansbury's successor will have LESS success than Stans had. Not only will this new coach have to be able to rally the fan base and coach up the team, but he's going to have to be able to continue recruiting as well as Stans has and that's not going to be an easy task.</p>

If the next guy sucks, what are wereally losing? A terrible atmosphere due to apathetic fans? Being on the bubble or worse every year? How long has it been since he got an at-large bid? Are really risking that much? Also, it doesn't only have to do with success. He is embarrassing our program. If we are going to lose, I at least would like to lose the right way, playing hard and reaching our potential. Our baseball and football programs work hard and our coaches control them and have their respect. Let's see what happens if our basketball program is run that way.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

I shouldn't reply because I agree with almost none of it, and I'll come off looking like a jerk, but it's a message board for discussion, so here goes.

Based on past experience, not just in regards to MSU sports, but on life
in general, I'm goingon record as saying there is at least a 50-50
chance, if not more,that Stansbury's successor will have LESS success
than Stans had.

I see these stats thrown out all the time. One side names Pelphrey, Felton, Lebo, etc. The other side names Donovan, Calhoun, Krzyzewski, etc. Until there is exhaustive and comprehensive data, statistics like this are 100% useless. I honestly have no idea what your life experience has to do with this.

Not only will this new coach have to be able to rally the fan base and
coach up the team, but he's going to have to be able to continue
recruiting as well as Stans has and that's not going to be an easy task.

Stay with me here....we've had pretty good talent, right? And not a lot of great results. So perhaps with a different approach from the top down, we can achieve greater results with lesser talent. In other words, if we have a better coach (whatever that means), we don't have to have as good of players as we have supposedly had.

I know everyone thinks we should be an NCAA tournament team almost every
year andmaking at least the sweet sixteenevery two or three
appearances in the tourney, if not more.

I don't know anyone who has ever said that. Exaggeration doesn't help you make a point when it's not even believable. Seriously, find one post where the expectations are like you stated.

But I'm tellin' ya.... while it's human nature to think the grass is
greener on the other side, that's not always the case.And sports
fanatics rarely seem to understand this.

That's a bit preachy. I think most people here are pretty well grounded. The ones who are not are easy to spot.

I'd certainly hate toreplace Stansbury only to discover in three years we were better off with him than without.

Completely agree. Here's a question. If we keep him are we going to be better off three years from now?

 

[DerHntr]

nm

 

[missouridawg]

Awkward.

 

[SorryDog]

If he wasn't our current coach and we were looking, would we "Want" him for a coach?<div>Based on the current state of our program/fans/etc.I hope your answer would be "no."<div>
</div></div>

 

[rabiddawg]

i'll see myself out. Thank you.

 

[bobthecavemonkey]

but who would the coach be that we bring in. Please don't say Bruce Pearl, I would be truly upset if state brought in this guy. He has too much baggage andpossibilityto embarrass our program with a scandal.(not saying the last three losses haven't been embarrassing) <div>
</div><div>Also we are MSU not Duke or North Carolina. It would be impressive for us to get a big name coach here but won't happen in alllikelihood. Again in recruiting we will have to choose between talent and a good attitude. MSU cannot attain the highly intelligent, hard working, talented beasts that Syracuse gets. If we get rid of Stans we need to have a pretty good idea of who we are getting after him or we probable will get screwed. Regardlesswe are going to have a rough couple of years after this, but it will be hard to find a great coach to come to Starkville. </div>

 

[Coach34]

mold as Mullen/Cohen/the softball coach....all these hires have been very similar.

 

[bobthecavemonkey]

A high energy, high potential, and charismatic coach? <div>
</div><div>I really wouldn't be too opposed to that and I actually like Stans. I can just see this chapter in MSU sports closing especially since our chances of getting into the NCAA tournament are very slim after this three game slide.</div>

 

[mstateglfr]

What great recruiting?

Every 3-4 years he lands a legitimate 5* talented player.
He then lands a couple of serviceable under the radar recruits every 3 years.
Add in a few top 150 players that have worked out.
The rest of his classes are made up of 50-150 nationally ranked players who have quite often been petulant little children and often times transfer or are just horribly misrated.

5*ers- Austin, Roberts, Gordon, Moultrie, Hood

Under the radar, but serviceable- Hans, Stewart, Steele, Turner, etc.

Top 150 that has worked out- Bost, Jarvis, Bowers, Vincent, Frazier, etc.

Top150 petulant little children- Ravern, Kodi, Elgin, Ervin, Delk, Delk, Houston.
Top150 who were horribly misrated- Riek, BIG FECES, Sidney, Goodridge.

There are more players that he has signed who fall into all those categories...except the 5* category.

What great recruiting?

NC State managed to get some elite players in the last half decade and they havent been worth a crap in years now.
LSU sucks and still has pulled in 5* and great players.

I just don't see how Stans' recruiting is something of legend.

 

[dawgged]

Oh well, time to head out to mypitiful six figure salary job. Not bad for a GED guy, I suppose.

 

[Shmuley]

nm

 

[Original48]

nmDS

 

[NashvilleBulldawg]

nm

 

[shsdawg]

IS agreat recruiter of what Coach 34 says is talent. What Stans isn't a great judge of anymore is the other things that make up actual talent besides athletic gifts. He was at one time. Stans, and our fans, seem to be too caught up in the stars and have forgotten the hearts. It reminds me of the nutt bears in football, except not as bad.

 

[Coach34]

.

 

[buddawg]

high transfer rate and disfunctional teams. But State is decent.

Progressive people: Lets try to take this basketball program to a higher level. State may fall on its's face the first time, but damn lets try something different.

 

[hulkbuster]

has hired has made a difference SO FAR. Why would this hire be ant different? Like someone said, Sherrill was losing to terrible teams because he had packed ut in. Polk did the same. Stans has proven he's done it now w/ the last 3 losses too. Time to move on. He's the last coach from the "old guard" admin left. Time to hit the bricks. Get us a high energy, demanding and someone who holds the players responsible for terrible play. I don't care if it's a big named coach. Someone who ACTUALLY coaches! I don't care if it's Pelfrey or Ernie Watson! Give me a coach......a REAL coach!

 

[FlabLoser]

The latest three game losing streak has agreater percentage of MSU fans than ever wanting a coaching change in basketball. I've been one of the biggest Stansbury supporters imaginable over the years, and even I ambeginning to think it might be time. But having said that, I just want to throw this out for public consumption. Based on past experience, not just in regards to MSU sports, but on life in general, I'm goingon record as saying there is at least a 50-50 chance, if not more,that Stansbury's successor will have LESS success than Stans had.</p>

Anthony Kennedy has been roughly just as successful as Stans the last 6 years. I think the difference in SEC wins is like 1 game/year.

I really think we could do no worse than AK.

For all Stans outstanding recruiting, most of that is offset by horrible floor coaching, motivating, conditioning, and general malfeasance throughout the program.

Sort of like how Sidney's lack of heart and conditioning offsets his outstanding talents. That's not even debatable. When the majority of the fanbase can't agree on whether we're better or worse with Sidney in the game - its safe to say that his negatives are offsetting his positives.

 

[ckDOG]

If we make a change and it doesn't improve our program, where does that leave us? Mediocre teams and NIT appearances? That's no different than now. Stans had some good teams several years ago, but that's in the past. We have to make a change to reinvigorate the fan base. The new guy may be a bust, but that's no reason not to make a move that you think is better for the program in the long run. Keeping Stans is simply remaining happy with a mediocre status quo and crossing your fingers that it gets better. I don't want our administration to take that approach.

 

[mstateglfr]

Who cares if Coach says he is a good recruiter of talent?

Remove Coach and Coach's opnion(s) from the discussion.

Look at my list and tell me if that is the list of a great recruiter.
It isnt.

Its a list of a recruiter who at times gets an elite player, gets a good number of solid college players, gets a few sleepers, and gets a ton of headcases and overrated players.
All hail Stans' oh so incredible recruiting. Nobody could possibly match such a record.

 

[DerHntr]

nm

 

[SyonaraStanz]

If the Grasshopper doesn't can his *** this year, I'll begin to lose a lot of faith in him. Stansbury is hurting our basketball program, from marketing the program and invigorating the fanbase to actually doing his 17ing job.

If he sticks around another year, attendance will continue to drop and apathy will continue to grow, especially next year when 4 of our main players are gone. I feel confident that Stricklin sees this and realizes that this program and our fanbase need change.

 

[AssEndDawg]

a new douchebag being born into the internet world. Awww.. it's so precious to see these first fledgeling moments. When they spread their wings and start talking about net worth to a message board full of anonymous strangers who could never verify. It's just a beautiful thing to see.

 

[fishwater99]

He gets the talent, but fails to develop the players any further than they can go on their own. It's nothing more than a glorified AAU team in SVegas.. We have the talent with this years team, that's a fact.. You give our current team to almost any other coach in the SEC and see if they lose three in a row to UGA, LSU, and Auburn...

 

[Johnson85]

from Mississippi that he has lost. Also, while hit or miss, he's done a pretty decent job bringing in out of state talent. You look at other coaches without real success in the post-season, and see what kind of talent they bring in year after year. While this team has some issues (the biggest one being the tradeoff between how much Sidney helps on offense and how much he hurts on defense), it's still a top 25 team as far as talent goes, if not top 15.

 

[shsdawg]

Who cares if Coach says he is a good recruiter of talent?

Remove Coach and Coach's opnion(s) from the discussion.

Look at my list and tell me if that is the list of a great recruiter.
It isnt.

Its a list of a recruiter who at times gets an elite player, gets a good number of solid college players, gets a few sleepers, and gets a ton of headcases and overrated players.
All hail Stans' oh so incredible recruiting. Nobody could possibly match such a record.

there dude.