Coach 34 - you are dead wrong

[drt7891]

As a business person, Shirley you have heard of a house of cards. Ever heard of Enron? Worldcom? What about all the Wall Street banks bailed out a few years ago?

The fact is, we wanted to believe all those companies were performing admirably. Their stock prices were the anong the best on the market at one point and they seemed to always win big. Turns out, they really weren't what they said they were. They were out of spinning out of control and it was only a matter of time before they crashed and burned.

There were all kinds of warning signs beforehand in every case, but no one listened or wanted to listen. Seem familiar to you? Our "business" needed to declare bankruptcy and restructure itself from the ground up.

 

[Kojak.sixpack]

Coach is Dead Right.

Rick Ray has 5, sometimes 6 scholarship players. Each of these scholarship players are either true freshmen or suck. There is no way he can be held acoountable for this personnel, which is a mess that Stansbury left him.

Stansbury would have won three, maybe four more games if he were still coaching this team. This is not because of coaching ability--it is purely because of the number of scholarship players that we would have (9 as opposed to 5). Stansury would not have kicked the Euro and/or S Smith off the team. Also, Gray would run point and I am assuming Pollard would have signed (which is simply giving the cruiter the benefit of a doubt). Hood was gone. He has changed his story to suit him after the fact but there is no forgetting how gone he was even before Stansbury resigned. He and his father were both contemperanously quoted that the decision was made before Stans left.


So we would be in the same spot we are in presently -- nowhere near sniffing the NIT with Stans having one of the worst years evah and would be getting fired. Then we would have hired Rick Ray and would be a year behind where we are. Ray would be trying to unfurl Chicken, Freddy T and Warefrom the lazy do nothing mentalitythat would have been instilled under Stansbury. Invariably, one of these promising players would have to be kicked off the team by Ray for violation of all sorts of team rules.

 

[121Josey]

Businesses go defunct - rarely do unis drop a sports program

Let's see - a business has a budget, has goals, has employees, has competitors trying to beat you. Sounds like college basketball could be a business.

In a way, a university is in it for the money. But, they are not bound by profitability. State schools are subsidized by the government. Basketball will continue at MSU even with a 5 year losing streak.

 

[LandArchDawg]

THIS in spades.

 

[Hump4Hoops]

You don't seem to understand

what not having a point guard means to a basketball team. Your second to last paragraph proves that.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

The post is accurate in many ways no matter how much you clowns disagree

I have been libeled , cussed, and constantly belittled for defending Stans. I never said he was perfect either. It cost MSU almost $3,000,000.00 to get rid of Stans. Ticket sales plummetted to all time lows (so the argument about 50% of MSU fans wanted Stans gone is ********). Add that in to the money we are paying coach Ray, and it is easily over 5 million dollars Scott cost MSU. All the arguments about not correcting the problems with Stans don't hold water because Sidney was gone no matter what. Anybody that argues college athletics is not a business is an idiot, not the poster. I don't know the poster, but he evidently talked to the family members of Hood and Pollard and got the same answers I got. You folks have talked to none of them and you rely on Coach34 and DawgatAuburn for info and most of the time it is so slanted, and even erroneous because of their hate for Stansbury. Anybody in their right mind knows we are not going to have the success we had with Stans for at least 4 years and for this guys argument, he makes perfectly good sense. I don't care how many people didn't renew their tickets, the fact is, they were not replaced by all you Stans haters who cried for him to be replaced for more than 10 years, and don't give me the crap about only the past 4 years. Some of you forgot that we won the SEC tournament in that time frame in Tampa and should have won it again, if the crooked SEC officials had called the lane violation on John Wall. Tell me who has given us that prestige in the past 40 years other than the one year we won the tourney and got to the Final Four? Business wise, this was plain stupid. I am not saying Stans would have succeeded had he had another year but it could never have been this bad. All of the arguments about player development are BS too. Jarvis Varnado, Barry Stewart, Timmy Bowers, and others all improved and after watching us jack up threes now, I see very little improvement with Ray's offense. It is okay for someone to give a sound perspective other than the fools who try and dominate this board, and last I checked, that is what message boards are all about!

We've hashed this thing out to death. But what the hell:

A coach's job is not solely based on wins and losses- if it was, Joe Paterno would not have been fired. Stansbury was not fired solely on his won/loss record. What tipped the scale ultimately was the lack of discipline within the program that was causing a black eye for the University. The President of our University, or CEO as you would call him, did not appreciate people around the country referring to our basketball program as "the most dysfunctional program in America" and a "dumpster fire". He didnt enjoy seeing players on ESPN fighting in the stands after a game wearing a wife beater t-shirt.

Since you are a captain of industry- you are the CEO, and a division of your company that had been pretty good over the years, has started to slide. Not only has this division started to slide, but now they are embarrassing the company publicly with their antics. Local TV and radio stations are making fun of your company because of the antics within this division. You have warned your manager of that division a few times to get things cleaned up or changes would be made. Do you as CEO just continue to let things go? Or do you go in and make changes to get things cleaned up?

 

[archdog]

Rick Stansbury was proven to not be the answer.

Bingo. We are not here to make a slight profit. WE are here to win the whole 17n thing. Stans could not do it. Heck he never even got close, and with some of the teams he had....

 

[kired]

This can't be real - no one can continue to defend Stansbury

If MSU basketball was a business, this is the equivalent of declaring bankruptcy to stay in business --- thanks to the last 7 seasons. If you declare bankruptcy you probably need a change in leadership.

There was only 1 season out of the last 7 when we won more than 9 SEC regular season games.

2006 - terrible
2007 - NIT
2008 - wow, we made the NCAA
2009 - made the NCAA thanks to a miracle run in SECT (lost in 1st round)
2010 - NIT
2011 - missed NIT
2012 - ......unexplainable

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

In business you would never concede to suckitude for years in the hopes you will have a big year 5,6 or 7 years down the road. By then you will be out of business. But State can sustain 5,6 or 7 years of suckitude. And many will thoroughly enjoy it.

 

[dawgstudent]

Someone dropping from 8 to 2 floor seats in basketball is a pretty heft sum. I think those are 6K/ticket (the ones right one the floor). And that's assuming someone else didn't buy them.

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

FAIL

So the answer to a "shrinking ROI" is to fire the CEO and suffer thru a few years of massive losses. What a dubmass.

 

[Requiem For A Dawg]

I have been libeled , cussed, and constantly belittled for defending Stans.

:'(

 

[DawgatAuburn]

If someone else bought the season tickets, then no loss there.

 

[dorndawg]

True. We will need to know the specific business the OP runs, what he made on the English portion of the ACT, and what kind of car he drives.

 

[Son_of_34]

...Can't speak for anyone else

but I'd rather see our 5 scholly players and Baxter Price go out there and hustle there 17n asses off in a 12 point losing effort than see Renardo Sydney struggle to get up and down the court and being winded with 16:44 left in the first half. I'm loyal to my school, not to some coach.

 

[CadaverDawg]

Let me spell it out more clearly for Dawgbreeze and the rest of you Stansbury idiots....

Was Stansbury going to suddenly gain a new spark, and not only right the ship, but propel us further than he had in 14 years? Be honest with that answer. No, we were heading in the wrong direction no matter how you look at it.

So Stricklin had 3 things that could happen, and two of them could land us at Rock Bottom...

1. Keep Stans and let him gradually destroy the program.
2. Fire Stans and get a big name coach that can halt further slide, and start us on an up trend....avoiding rock bottom.
3. Fire Stans and miss the big name..thus leaving us with a Rick Ray and a rock bottom situation as well, but one we can at least build from.

As you can see, the only options that included the chance at building the program going forward, also included firing Rick Stansbury. Unfortunately we missed on the big names that could have gotten us a quicker rebuild, but at least we are in rebuilding mode. If Stans was here, we would still be a few seasons from rock bottom. So considering rock bottom was inevitable...I would much rather get it over with and get to rebuilding, which is exactly what we're doing.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

You are assuming the program would have been destroyed. Maybe it wouldn't have been, and even in the bad years, 20 wins is a lot better than what we are seeing now. I simply agree with the poster that this was a stupid business decision without already having a big name coach lined up. If you want to argue that, then go ahead because we are seeing that the way this was handled was a disaster.

Let me spell it out more clearly for Dawgbreeze and the rest of you Stansbury idiots....

Was Stansbury going to suddenly gain a new spark, and not only right the ship, but propel us further than he had in 14 years? Be honest with that answer. No, we were heading in the wrong direction no matter how you look at it.

So Stricklin had 3 things that could happen, and two of them could land us at Rock Bottom...

1. Keep Stans and let him gradually destroy the program.
2. Fire Stans and get a big name coach that can halt further slide, and start us on an up trend....avoiding rock bottom.
3. Fire Stans and miss the big name..thus leaving us with a Rick Ray and a rock bottom situation as well, but one we can at least build from.

As you can see, the only options that included the chance at building the program going forward, also included firing Rick Stansbury. Unfortunately we missed on the big names that could have gotten us a quicker rebuild, but at least we are in rebuilding mode. If Stans was here, we would still be a few seasons from rock bottom. So considering rock bottom was inevitable...I would much rather get it over with and get to rebuilding, which is exactly what we're doing.

 

[CadaverDawg]

You are assuming the program would have been destroyed. Maybe it wouldn't have been, and even in the bad years, 20 wins is a lot better than what we are seeing now. I simply agree with the poster that this was a stupid business decision without already having a big name coach lined up. If you want to argue that, then go ahead because we are seeing that the way this was handled was a disaster.

20 wins while missing the tourney with superior talent. We were trending down...you can't deny that fact.

 

[skb124]

20 wins with a watered down non-conference schedule and a weak SEC was not that difficult to do. The fact that we did that and still didn't make the tourney is pretty telling. How can you defend being ranked 15th and then a month later not even making the tourney? I will give it to Stansbury, when we played big games, he got the team prepared. That's evidenced by Baylor, Kentucky every year, Tennessee championship game, etc. Stans problem was the other games. No reason whatsoever for us to be losing to Auburn, home or on the road. Same with LSU and Georgia. If Stans couldn't win with Moultrie, Sidney, Bost, and Hood, why do you think he would win with other lesser talents?

 

[Bjarnason_Clucas]

You are assuming the program would have been destroyed. Maybe it wouldn't have been, and even in the bad years, 20 wins is a lot better than what we are seeing now. I simply agree with the poster that this was a stupid business decision without already having a big name coach lined up. If you want to argue that, then go ahead because we are seeing that the way this was handled was a disaster.

First, 20 wins is an irrelevant milestone in today's NCAA. In Stans's last 7 years he reached 20 wins 5 times and made the NCAAT 2 times (and probably would have only been 1 if it wasn't for winning the SECT).

Secondly, this season would not have been 20 wins if Stans was here. State was losing all 5 starters (Hood was leaving regardless of which coach was here no matter what was said after the fact).

Finally, maybe, just maybe the shape the program was in because of Stans was the reason it was hard to find a big-name coach. This is not an Indiana situation where Tom Crean knew he was walking into a crap situation but also knew he had the Indiana brand to rely on. The bigger coaches knew it was a crap situation due to Stans's recent mismanagement and MSU is not a brand worth risking that type of move for.

The MSU basketball program was in obviously decline and Stans was not going to resurrect it. The man had lost his fire to coach and the situation was only going to get worse. The AD decided to go a different direction and State will be better off 5 years from now because of it.

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

Exactly. Kind of like being ranked top 15 and losing 5 of your last 6 games including a beatdown in a bowl. Who would ever stand for crap like that?

"How can you defend being ranked 15th and then a month later not even making the tourney?"

 

[drt7891]

Delete.*

 

[Bjarnason_Clucas]

Exactly. Kind of like being ranked top 15 and losing 5 of your last 6 games including a beatdown in a bowl. Who would ever stand for crap like that?

"How can you defend being ranked 15th and then a month later not even making the tourney?"

Yes, because losing to top 10 teams (and our rival at their place) in the strongest football conference in nation is exactly the same as dropping games to terrible basketball teams like Georgia (twice), Auburn and LSU in the weakest major basketball conference in the nation.

*Edited to add that Northwestern was average. Texas A&M, LSU, and Alabama are not.

 

[olblue.sixpack]

FAIL

So the answer to a "shrinking ROI" is to fire the CEO and suffer thru a few years of massive losses. What a dubmass.

This thread doesn't give me great confidence in the quality of the MSU business school.

 

[skb124]

Wait are you serious? Wow....

 

[tenureplan]

Northwestern was mediocre at best

nm

 

[Bjarnason_Clucas]

As was UMass, who we lost to at HOME in the NIT. I was just talking about the way each team ended their respective regular seasons.

 

[ShrubDog]

Who cares if you run a business with 5000 employees.

Bernard Ebbers ran a company with more than 5000 employees and look where he is at.

Bottom Line - Stans Sucked as a coach and had no respect from his players...did I mention he sucked.

 

[o_Hot Rock]

Big Business

I run a big business (5000 employees). .

We have too high a % of our fan base looking backwards. I don't consider a fan just a customer but an intrical part of a school/team. Let me put it this way:

That's a lot of employees. But not so big that big business won't come and sweep you up in a hostile takeover. You had better not keep talking about how good the old company was because "Big" business hates people that keep looking backward instead of forward. If you don't learn to play with the new man in charge, then you will be replaced so fast you won't even know what hit you. Especially if you were in a leadership role in the old company. It causes too much disention in the ranks.

If you really care about Mississippi State, then please quit talking up Stans. He is gone, turn your eyes toward the future!

 

[UIUCDog]

So say we had given him one more season. MAYBE Hood comes back. I don’t have any info on this other than what’s been said on this board and in the media, so I’ll just give you the benefit of the doubt. MAYBE we don’t have these defections, suspensions, injuries. Granted all that, MAYBE we win 16-18 games, at the very best? Definitely not good enough for NCAAT, maybe not good enough for the NIT. Do you make a change then? At what point is enough enough? The guy had 2 NCAA appearances in 7 years, and one of those was a fluke.

I’m as uninspired by the Ray hire as anyone, but I just don’t see how you hang onto Stansbury another year when you KNOW that he wasn’t making the NCAAT this year. That is, unless you’re prepared to just let him coach here as long as he wants provided we don’t start having losing seasons. You’d basically be saying ok, our expectations for this program are a good shot at the NIT pretty much every year, with an NCAA thrown in every once in a blue moon when the stars align. That’s what we knew we were going to get with Stansbury.

Honestly, I don’t think there’s much question that we would’ve been better THIS YEAR if Stansbury were still here, but really keeping him would’ve been just prolonging the inevitable.

 

[NewTweederEndzoneDance]

Ah yes, its much better to stay the course and continue to decline

I guess I missed the part in business classes where companies reward poor performance. The point is you make a change. No where did I say anything about burning down the company. The OP was the retard comparing a business to basketball.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

and I will reiterate, to replace the all time winningest coach without having a name coach to replace him was insane. That was Jmac's point before all the usual pile oner's chimed in. One thing is correct, we are definitely losing our *** financially this year and blame anybody you want to, that is business!

So say we had given him one more season. MAYBE Hood comes back. I don’t have any info on this other than what’s been said on this board and in the media, so I’ll just give you the benefit of the doubt. MAYBE we don’t have these defections, suspensions, injuries. Granted all that, MAYBE we win 16-18 games, at the very best? Definitely not good enough for NCAAT, maybe not good enough for the NIT. Do you make a change then? At what point is enough enough? The guy had 2 NCAA appearances in 7 years, and one of those was a fluke.

I’m as uninspired by the Ray hire as anyone, but I just don’t see how you hang onto Stansbury another year when you KNOW that he wasn’t making the NCAAT this year. That is, unless you’re prepared to just let him coach here as long as he wants provided we don’t start having losing seasons. You’d basically be saying ok, our expectations for this program are a good shot at the NIT pretty much every year, with an NCAA thrown in every once in a blue moon when the stars align. That’s what we knew we were going to get with Stansbury.

Honestly, I don’t think there’s much question that we would’ve been better THIS YEAR if Stansbury were still here, but really keeping him would’ve been just prolonging the inevitable.

 

[maroonmania]

There is strong evidence we are losing support. There is a 25% drop in reported attendance in home SEC games. I'm quite sure the drop in actual attendance is much worse than that. So yeah there is evidence that support has dropped. Anyone with eyes can see "butts in the seats" support has dropped about 50%.

This year can be totally thrown out as far as what kind of fan support has been lost or not. I am as big a fan of MSU sports as there is out there but I'm not going to waste my time watching on TV or money driving 3 hours to see a team that has a near zero chance of competing and winning. We are going to gunfights with a pocket knife with THIS team THIS year but it won't stay that way. Once Ray puts a competitive product on the court (and he likely will do that fairly quickly given what little it takes to compete in SEC basketball) then I will be right back there watching on TV and going to games when I can as normal and a lot of our other fans will be as well.