Buy/Sell: Stans Frustration....

[Stormrider81]

You should follow ThreePutt's infamous advice: take two weeks off from posting and then quit. Seriously, Bowers barely played until his sophomore season, and then he came off the bench and just shot threes. The next year he was vastly improved. His final season he was the leader of the team and the one we went to in crunch time. That Bama game is a loss without Bowers. Bowers, along with Zimmerman, are two of Stansbury's success stories in terms of player development.

Some of you are so incapable of objective thought when it comes to Stansbury that you'll resort to anything. I've seen CK idiotically say that our Sweet 16 expectations have nothing to do with Stansbury, which is of course nonsense since one would not expect to advance in the postseason were one not in the postseason consistently. Now I see your post. Seriously, maybe one of these days we'll be stupid enough to fire Stansbury so that you all get your wish: hiring someone who can't and won't win here. I guess you can pat yourself on the back for not settling.

 

[ckDOG]

Some of you are so incapable of objective thought when it comes to Stansbury that you'll resort to anything. I've seen CK idiotically say that our Sweet 16 expectations have nothing to do with Stansbury, which is of course nonsense since one would not expect to advance in the postseason were one not in the postseason consistently.

How am I being an unobjective idiot? You're the one that assumes making the tournament means we should expect to excel in it. My dog might have more common sense than that. I will expect that we start advancing in the postseason once we <span style="font-weight: bold;">START ADVANCING IN THE POST SEASON</span> - not just get there.

I think you are confusing the word <span style="font-style: italic;">hope</span> with the word <span style="font-style: italic;">expectation. </span> Both you and I hope we make it to at least the Sweet 16 this year, but why should we expect it? Expectations are events you consider likely or obtainable. Stansbury has given me nothing to consider it likely.

Let me give you a couple of figures surrounding Stans, his history, and the post season:

<table class="wikitable" style="font-size: 95%;"> <tbody> <tr> <th>Season</th> <th>Team</th> <th>Overall</th> <th>Conference</th> <th>Standing</th> <th>Postseason</th> </tr> <tr> <td style="border-bottom: 2px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: rgb(221, 221, 221) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;" colspan="9" align="center">Mississippi State (Southeastern Conference) (1998-present)</td> </tr> <tr> <td>1998-1999</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>20-13</td> <td>8-8</td> <td>T-3rd (West)</td> <td>NIT 1st Round</td> </tr> <tr> <td>1999-2000</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>14-16</td> <td>5-11</td> <td>T-5th (West)</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2000-2001</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>18-13</td> <td>7-9</td> <td>T-4th (West)</td> <td>NIT Quarterfinals</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(255, 255, 153) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td>2001-2002</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>27-8</td> <td>10-6</td> <td>2nd (West)</td> <td>NCAA 2nd Round</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(187, 255, 255) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td>2002-2003</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>21-10</td> <td>9-7</td> <td>1st (West)</td> <td>NCAA 1st Round</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(255, 221, 153) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td>2003-2004</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>26-4</td> <td>14-2</td> <td>1st (SEC)</td> <td>NCAA 2nd Round</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2004-2005</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>23-11</td> <td>9-7</td> <td>3rd (West)</td> <td>NCAA 2nd Round</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2005-2006</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>15-15</td> <td>5-11</td> <td>5th (West)</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(187, 255, 255) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td>2006-2007</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>21-14</td> <td>8-8</td> <td>T-1st (West)</td> <td>NIT Final Four</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(187, 255, 255) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td>2007-2008</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>23-11</td> <td>12-4</td> <td>1st (West)</td> <td>NCAA 2nd Round</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(255, 255, 153) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td>2008-2009</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>23-13</td> <td>9-7</td> <td>3rd (West)</td> <td>NCAA 1st Round</td> </tr> <tr> <td>2009-2010</td> <td>Mississippi State</td> <td>7-2</td> <td>0-0</td> <td>T-1st (West)</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="border-top: 2px solid rgb(170, 170, 170); background: rgb(250, 250, 250) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td colspan="2" align="center">Mississippi State:</td> <td>238-130</td> <td>96-80</td> <td colspan="5">
</td> </tr> <tr style="background: rgb(221, 221, 221) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: border; -moz-background-origin: padding; -moz-background-inline-policy: continuous;"> <td colspan="2" style="text-align: center;">Total:</td> <td>238-130</td> <td colspan="7">
</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
Show me exactly how I can take these past results and project those into the expectation of Sweet 16s going forward. If you can do that, I'll concede to being an idiot.

You may think the people that ***** about Stansbury aren't being objective, but there are easily just as many unobjective folks out there that defend him to a fault. Being a nice guy and having solid regular season performances can't cover up that giant turd of a postseason record we've posted over the last decade.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

...

 

[whatever.sixpack]

I'm sorry, but if you don't think our expectations (which are to reach the Sweet 16) are BECAUSE we've gotten close consistently, therefore giving us a reason to expect to take it to another level and advance that far, then you are an idiot.
We would in no way have those expectations if not for our recent success. It's almost Sweet 16 or bust here, and I don't think it's that way at any other SEC school, even UF, FL, or KY.

Another point. If you don't think Stans has developed players, you have a negative agenda. Period...
It's not just the big guys either. Frazier was terrible his freshman year, and guys like Zimmerman and Bowers barely contributed. When they left they might've been the best trio of guards we've ever had. Some people didn't think Phil Turner deserved to have a DI scholarship as a freshman, and now we've found him a role that he plays confidently and very well, and at times he seems like our best player

 

[ckDOG]

I'm sorry, but if you don't think our expectations (which are to reach the Sweet 16) are BECAUSE we've gotten close consistently, therefore giving us a reason to expect to take it to another level and advance that far, then you are an idiot.

Stans has taken us to the tourney 6 out of his 11 complete seasons. That's an acceptable rate. But, he hasn't advance to the Sweet 16 once. What makes you think it will be different in the future? I hope he get's the monkey off his back and starts nutting up in the tournament. But until then, I'm well within reason to be skeptical.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results - Albert Einstein

We would in no way have those expectations if not for our recent success. It's almost Sweet 16 or bust here, and I don't think it's that way at any other SEC school, even UF, FL, or KY.

You are kidding, right? You think KY or FL would put up with a decade of not making the Sweet 16? That's hilarious. You can assume that we have ultra-high expectations all you want but it just makes you look ridiculous. During Stans tenure at MSU, the only other SEC teams that have failed to make a Sweet 16 or greater have been South Carolina, Georgia, and Arkansas. All 3 of those programs have had coaching turnover during the period. We DO NOT have unreasonable expectations at MSU.

 

[Agentdog]

I get what you are saying. Stans has not had much success in the post season. Therefore, nobody should expect it or be frustrated when we don't have success. However, whether you believe it or not, he has raised post season expectations with his regular season success. Even though we have not advanced to the Sweet 16 in 13 years. When you win the conference, or do well enough to get a low seed. Fans expect to win a couple of games in the tournament. Stans success (making the tournament 50% of the time) and lack of a Sweet 16 appearance is where my frustration with him comes in. So, I buy. Now, do I expect this year to be in different than last year or the year before? Nope. But I would sure like for it to be. However, it won't. Which is where the frustration comes in.

I am repeating myself. But bottom line, regardless, of how many NCAA wins he has. State fans, at least on the internet, seem to be unhappy with just making the tournament now. WE want tournament wins. Prior to Stans being on staff, just making the tournament was the bar. Now, because Stans had us there 6 of 11 years. We expect more.......NCAA wins. We are not getting it. So, people are frustrated. Which means, Stans has raised the bar.

That is my take.

 

[BuckSimmons]

I am a lot older than 99% of this board and my reasoning may be a bit skewed . I was in school when the Babe was coaching, didn't see a losing home game.

But in what sport other than men's bb can we enter a game with reasonable expectations of winning year in and year out? That includes the tournament.

Hopefully Coach Mullens and Cohen can add two, and I will be one happy old codger if they do.

 

[Thick]

on this board. Do not speak of changing anything in bball at MSU or you will be flogged on the Pack.

 

[ckDOG]

Either which way you look at it, I hope the guy pulls it off this year and gets the monkey off his back. Hopefully, that will silence alot of the endless back & forths that come up every year.

 

[sleepy dawg]

We're Mississippi State, not Kentucky, UNC, Kansas. I will never understand why people expect so much to happen at MSU. We consistantly perform better in basketball than any other major sport we have. I am satisfied making the just making the tourny ever year. That is a good season to me. Not very many SEC schools are as successful as our basketball team is year in year out. Yet, when we have a losing record in football, it's like a dream season.

Hey, wouldn't that suck if we had a really good year in football next year, and then just start winning the west all the time, but lose our BCS bowls every year... I would want Mullen fired right away... Treat everyone the way you treat Stansbury.

.

 

[ckDOG]

Hey, wouldn't that suck if we had a really good year in football next year, and then just start winning the west all the time, but lose our BCS bowls every year... I would want Mullen fired right away... Treat everyone the way you treat Stansbury.

Winning the West in Football >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Winning West in basketball
Making a BCS bowl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Making the tourney in basketball

and

Sweet 16 in bball = NYD Bowl in FB
Elite 8 in ball = BCS Bowl in FB

That's the best analogy I can come up with.

Winning the West is nice, but it's not as big a deal as you make it out to me. Think about it - What do you think of when you hear the years 1995 and 1996 in the context of MSU basketball? Sweet 16 and Final 4, respectively. Do you brag about the Western Division Titles we won those years? Hell, did you even remember that we won them in those years? Hell no, you remember that we kicked *** in the tourney.

 

[Johnson85]

Or any other post of mine. I've never recommended firing Stansbury. I'm a firm believer in you don't fire your most successful coach ever (while he's still winning no less) and expect to be a desirable place for up and coming coaches (although USM may have already proven me wrong on this by hiring Fedora).

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

as long as he has. So some get hacked over almost getting there, but not quite.
That is why I think it's easy buy.
I'm in full support of Stans. I think Stans would have no problem getting another job in this league.