stop with the gay nicknames for Stansbury. Say he's a horrible coach or whatever but I am tired of reading Stands and variations thereof. If you don't, I will my pull my Gene card.
Coach and everyone else...
- Thread starter dawgstudent
- Start date
stop with the gay nicknames for Stansbury. Say he's a horrible coach or whatever but I am tired of reading Stands and variations thereof. If you don't, I will my pull my Gene card.
Frankly, if this board is any indication (which I am still hopeful that it isn't), our fans don't deserve a basketball program worth a damn. We suck in every other sport, might as well get rid of the only coach that wins anything.
I agree! If the fans had concentrated harder on the game today, we could have advanced deeper in the amazing NIT!!
Inigo Montoya said:
No it isnt the NCAA, and yes there are sadly too many fans that are too cool for school when it comes to the NIT. Its still a solid tournament with good teams.
But my point is that we have one coach on campus that actually wins games. And he is the one coach that our dumbass fans want to run off. Was this season a bit disappointing? Sure. But overall, he has consistently won, and gets us to the tourney more often than not, and for a Mississippi State team to routinely be in the upper echelon of the SEC is rare. Yet, we do it. Other teams have good years, then fall off the map for awhile (LSU, Bama for instance). We have stayed pretty consistent. I'm not saying I don't want us to win more. But Stansbury should have a very long leash. Or we'll wind up going through coaches like all our rivals do.
how you construed that reply out of my post. I was just saying the NIT isn't something to hang your hat on. I would it rather not exist.
MSUCostanza said:
Once we get a better coach. Go back the last 2 years and make me a list of quality wins. Hell, go back 5 years and make a list of actual quality wins. They aren't there other than a couple.
0-20 vs the top 25 in RPI (regular season) last 5 years...not to mention his entire career record vs the top 25 in RPI
having to win the SEC Tourney 4 of the last 5 years to even qualify for the NCAA's
Beating 17'ing Valley, Centenary, and St Bonaventure isn't winning
but I guess I will anyway.
Before 1991, we went to one NCAA tournament. Taking Ross Barnett out of the equation, we probably would've been to 3, maybe 4. Since in those days, only conference champions went to the tournament.
Since Williams turned the program around (with Stansbury's help... can't be denied), we've been to 9 tournaments in 20 years. Williams 3, Stans 6. Like it or not, Stansbury had a hand in the 3 tournaments Williams went to.
Six out of 12 is not Roy Williams or Jim Boeheim territory. But we aren't UNC or Syracuse. And I have news for you - we never will be. Just like our football program will never be on the level of Texas, Florida, or whoever. Call me what you will, but that's reality.
At this point, I almost hope you get your wish and we get rid of Rick. You'll be secretly wishing you had him back in 2-3 years.
Before 1991, we went to one NCAA tournament. Taking Ross Barnett out of the equation, we probably would've been to 3, maybe 4. Since in those days, only conference champions went to the tournament.
Since Williams turned the program around (with Stansbury's help... can't be denied), we've been to 9 tournaments in 20 years. Williams 3, Stans 6. Like it or not, Stansbury had a hand in the 3 tournaments Williams went to.
Six out of 12 is not Roy Williams or Jim Boeheim territory. But we aren't UNC or Syracuse. And I have news for you - we never will be. Just like our football program will never be on the level of Texas, Florida, or whoever. Call me what you will, but that's reality.
At this point, I almost hope you get your wish and we get rid of Rick. You'll be secretly wishing you had him back in 2-3 years.
2 of the last 3 and 6 of the last 9 is indeed more often than not. You and everyone else knows that it should be 3 in a row with or without a SECtourney win
the SEC only got one team in the NCAA Tourney...
since the field expanded and the rules changed, I'd say we have been pretty good about getting in
There are a helluva lot of other SEC schools without a large number of NCAA Tourney bids on their resume as well.
How many national titles does the SEC have in basketball from schools not named Kentucky in it's entire history? So, you can quit with the "before 1991" crap-
**edited to add**- no SEC team other than Kentucky won an official National Championship before UPig in 1994. LSU does claim one for 1935
since the field expanded and the rules changed, I'd say we have been pretty good about getting in
There are a helluva lot of other SEC schools without a large number of NCAA Tourney bids on their resume as well.
How many national titles does the SEC have in basketball from schools not named Kentucky in it's entire history? So, you can quit with the "before 1991" crap-
**edited to add**- no SEC team other than Kentucky won an official National Championship before UPig in 1994. LSU does claim one for 1935
....when you got laughed off the board.
You are the perfect example of self-loathing. People who think we can do better than what we've done the past 5 years are not self-loathing. People (like you) who think 1 at large berth in 5 years is good enough are self-loathing and the epitome of "Poor ol' MSU."
Glad we're not UCONN though, right?
You are the perfect example of self-loathing. People who think we can do better than what we've done the past 5 years are not self-loathing. People (like you) who think 1 at large berth in 5 years is good enough are self-loathing and the epitome of "Poor ol' MSU."
Glad we're not UCONN though, right?
The SEC is not a great basketball conferenc to start with. We have Kentucky, and usually 1-2 pretty good teams like UT this year. And that second team changes annually it seems. How many one and done teams did the SEC have this year? Florida, Vandy and etc. I just don't see the SEC getting any better as far as basketball.
In baseball and football it's different because in baseball we have proven that we can compete on a national level. We have the fans, facilities, and the resources to get a good coach. We are also in a state that is in the top half of of the country as far as producing draftable players. In football, SEC is king, and HS football in Mississippi is king. We can be successful with a good coach, even in the SEC, but we have to manage it better than say the Alabama's or the Tennessee's do. But there is a good pool of players there to be successful. Mississippi doesn't produce basketball players like that. And neither does the southeast. I don't think that there's the commitment to the sport that there is in say North Carolina or Kentucky- most of the great athletes in this state are given shoulder pads and a helmet and pulled off of the court rather than encouraged to stay on it. I know we have the "fab five" or whatever, but that is an anamoly for Mississippi. There are many years where the Dandy Dozen has zero guys that are worthy of a D-I offer. We only start one Mississippian as it is- Ravern Johnson, and there are only two guys on the entire team that come off of the bench that are from Mississippi- Romero and Phil. Ole Miss starts zero Mississippians. The pool to be a great team isn't there.
Then you look around the SEC, and its basically a carousel of coaches- how many times has Auburn, Alabama, LSU, Ole Miss, Arkansas, South Carolina, Georgia, heck Florida had to have Slive beg to get them in this year after failing to get in twice. We're just not that good of a basketball conference, and that hurts us as far as getting in to. If you play in the Big East, the ACC, or whatever that has a good reputation, it helps you out immensely. You can say what you will about the scheduling, but the SEC doesn't help us out either. We've gone to the Big Dance as frequently if not more than a lot of those program I mentioned, with the exeption of maybe Florida. Yes we need to schedule "better" but we also need for the entire SEC to be better if we want a better seed to get to the Sweet 16.
There are a lot of "other" factors here and I don't think that hiring a new coach is necessarily going to "fix" them. The fact of the matter is, Stansbury winning consistently is at worst pretty darn good. A 24 win season is a "bad season"- easy schedule or not. How many people in the SEC would like to have won that many, and do it on an annual basis? Auburn apparently would because there were rumors about them wanting Stansbury. You can spout off about all these numbers and downplay his accomplisments and all of your other anti-Stans BS, but you can't argue that he is consistent. You can say that he sucks as an in game coach, and he does, but if he wins every year, so be it. I'd rather win than have a pretty offense and win 12 games every year. As would anyone else with a brain. No one has won as consistently as Stansbury has at MSU. He has us in postseason play literally every year- NCAA or NIT and I know that the NIT sucks, but I'd rather be in that than sitting at home, which is what most of our other coaches did. Not to mention than Stansbury had no support from his very own athletic administration for years during his best years.
So, go ahead and dissect my post, put in some numbers about how Stansbury is 0-1 agianst North Carolina to make your point, and whatever else you do.
Thanks for letting me play.
In baseball and football it's different because in baseball we have proven that we can compete on a national level. We have the fans, facilities, and the resources to get a good coach. We are also in a state that is in the top half of of the country as far as producing draftable players. In football, SEC is king, and HS football in Mississippi is king. We can be successful with a good coach, even in the SEC, but we have to manage it better than say the Alabama's or the Tennessee's do. But there is a good pool of players there to be successful. Mississippi doesn't produce basketball players like that. And neither does the southeast. I don't think that there's the commitment to the sport that there is in say North Carolina or Kentucky- most of the great athletes in this state are given shoulder pads and a helmet and pulled off of the court rather than encouraged to stay on it. I know we have the "fab five" or whatever, but that is an anamoly for Mississippi. There are many years where the Dandy Dozen has zero guys that are worthy of a D-I offer. We only start one Mississippian as it is- Ravern Johnson, and there are only two guys on the entire team that come off of the bench that are from Mississippi- Romero and Phil. Ole Miss starts zero Mississippians. The pool to be a great team isn't there.
Then you look around the SEC, and its basically a carousel of coaches- how many times has Auburn, Alabama, LSU, Ole Miss, Arkansas, South Carolina, Georgia, heck Florida had to have Slive beg to get them in this year after failing to get in twice. We're just not that good of a basketball conference, and that hurts us as far as getting in to. If you play in the Big East, the ACC, or whatever that has a good reputation, it helps you out immensely. You can say what you will about the scheduling, but the SEC doesn't help us out either. We've gone to the Big Dance as frequently if not more than a lot of those program I mentioned, with the exeption of maybe Florida. Yes we need to schedule "better" but we also need for the entire SEC to be better if we want a better seed to get to the Sweet 16.
There are a lot of "other" factors here and I don't think that hiring a new coach is necessarily going to "fix" them. The fact of the matter is, Stansbury winning consistently is at worst pretty darn good. A 24 win season is a "bad season"- easy schedule or not. How many people in the SEC would like to have won that many, and do it on an annual basis? Auburn apparently would because there were rumors about them wanting Stansbury. You can spout off about all these numbers and downplay his accomplisments and all of your other anti-Stans BS, but you can't argue that he is consistent. You can say that he sucks as an in game coach, and he does, but if he wins every year, so be it. I'd rather win than have a pretty offense and win 12 games every year. As would anyone else with a brain. No one has won as consistently as Stansbury has at MSU. He has us in postseason play literally every year- NCAA or NIT and I know that the NIT sucks, but I'd rather be in that than sitting at home, which is what most of our other coaches did. Not to mention than Stansbury had no support from his very own athletic administration for years during his best years.
So, go ahead and dissect my post, put in some numbers about how Stansbury is 0-1 agianst North Carolina to make your point, and whatever else you do.
Thanks for letting me play.
Hardly. It sucks that we didnt make the NCAAT, but that doesnt mean the NIT sucks.
There are 4 postseason tournaments. We made the 2nd one. I expected to be in the NCAAT this season, and it sucks that we didnt make it. It sucks that we didnt live up to well accepted expectations.
But the NIT doesnt suck.
The CollegeInsiderwhatever.com tournament sucks. The CBI can even suck.
But the NIT?...Seriously, many of the teams are in the top 100. Hell a decent number are in the top 75. That just doesnt seem to suck to me.
It isnt something to boast about, sure. But if it sucked, we wouldnt play and fans would hide from it. Sucking means its embarassing. I dont consider the NIT to be that.
There are 4 postseason tournaments. We made the 2nd one. I expected to be in the NCAAT this season, and it sucks that we didnt make it. It sucks that we didnt live up to well accepted expectations.
But the NIT doesnt suck.
The CollegeInsiderwhatever.com tournament sucks. The CBI can even suck.
But the NIT?...Seriously, many of the teams are in the top 100. Hell a decent number are in the top 75. That just doesnt seem to suck to me.
It isnt something to boast about, sure. But if it sucked, we wouldnt play and fans would hide from it. Sucking means its embarassing. I dont consider the NIT to be that.
we apparently define it differently. I understand what our limitations are. You apparently do not. I'll say it again - I hope you get your wish and we run Stansbury off. We'll see who was right.
People are sick of his ranting. we get it, he hates Rick and will belittle him at every opportunity. Hell,Ole Missisn't our enemy, it is jerks like him and they have no influence whatsoever on anybody because Byrne thinks they are crazy. We underperformed, so be it, but do you fire a coach with 24 wins and then get some clown like Hatfield or coach to come in? Get real!
...some 6pack poster recently pointed out coach34 is allowed to hang around this message board because all the **** coach34 constantly stirs up increases the sixpack messageboard hit count.
Whoever that poster is, you deserve an award for perfectly expressing the one & only reason this annoying ******* is allowed to keep hanging around.
Whoever that poster is, you deserve an award for perfectly expressing the one & only reason this annoying ******* is allowed to keep hanging around.
Exactly right, he is consistently mediocre. We lose about 80-90% of games that come down to the last minute, and games that come down to the wire like that are normally won by which ever team has the better coach (except for win someone makes a miracle buzzer beater or something). Do all of the Stansbury lovers not get tired of never winning a big game, losing to terrible out of conference teams every year, or just flat out underachieving EVERY SINGLE YEAR?Todd4State said:
Our program is stagnant right now under Stansbury, we aren't getting any better, and could be regressing. he peaked in '03-'04, but even that year he beat monmouth in the first round of the NCAA, congratulations on that huge win, then lost in the second round to xavier.
I never said I wanted him fired this year. I do think he should be for Ed to change some assistants, and if he fails to make the tournament next year then we should go get a new coach. How many years would you like to give him before you let him go
a lot of big games, and a lot of close games. People tend to forget those and only remember the losses, in typical MSU fan style. I cannot tolerate people who blame him for all the losses, but give him no credit for anything that happened in 2004. At least be fair.
Rick is, what? 16-10 in the SEC tournament with 4 title game appearances? Richard Williams was 4-11 and 3 of those were in one year.
Rick Stansbury is not Roy Williams. He's not Jim Boeheim or Bob Knight. He never will be. But all the coaches that were deemed better than him or smarter or better recruiters or were considered threats to us are all unemployed or trying to rebuild their careers. Add John Pelphrey to that list in another year or two. Sadly, we won't know how good we actually have it until the Coach34's of our fanbase succeed in running Stans off, and we start cycling through our own set of Lebos, Gottfrieds and Bradys.
Rick is, what? 16-10 in the SEC tournament with 4 title game appearances? Richard Williams was 4-11 and 3 of those were in one year.
Rick Stansbury is not Roy Williams. He's not Jim Boeheim or Bob Knight. He never will be. But all the coaches that were deemed better than him or smarter or better recruiters or were considered threats to us are all unemployed or trying to rebuild their careers. Add John Pelphrey to that list in another year or two. Sadly, we won't know how good we actually have it until the Coach34's of our fanbase succeed in running Stans off, and we start cycling through our own set of Lebos, Gottfrieds and Bradys.
If he is so capable, is it a lack of effort on his part? I just don't see how you defend him for this season.
This was a horrible, horrible disappointment, and yet you seemingly happily accept a 20 win season, a western division championship, and a second round NIT exit.
And as far as big games and close games, where were they this year? Beating Vandy in the SEC tournament? Is that it?
I give him great credit for 2004. What a year that was. But it's over. I give Jackie credit for 1998 and 1999. What does it have to do with now?
This was a horrible, horrible disappointment, and yet you seemingly happily accept a 20 win season, a western division championship, and a second round NIT exit.
And as far as big games and close games, where were they this year? Beating Vandy in the SEC tournament? Is that it?
I give him great credit for 2004. What a year that was. But it's over. I give Jackie credit for 1998 and 1999. What does it have to do with now?
are you saying UF should fire Billy Donovan? Or Vandy should fire Kevin Stallings? Orshould they keepBilly D. because he won 2 national championships 3 or 4 years ago? As another poster said, what does that have to do with now?
We're .01 of a second away from making 3 tourneys in a row, I'd say that's a hell of a lot closer to being 3 of 3 than 1 of 3.
And it's total bs to say our resume was crap this year, we were pretty much the last team left out, and even most in the national media thought we got the shaft and should've gotten in over 2-3 teams that did. Too bad our own fanbase can't see that
And it's total bs to say our resume was crap this year, we were pretty much the last team left out, and even most in the national media thought we got the shaft and should've gotten in over 2-3 teams that did. Too bad our own fanbase can't see that
they play well in big games, we play well in one or maybe 2 big games a year, and still come up short in a lot of those games. kevin stallings is something like 5-2 against top 5 teams in his career! thats amazing for a coach at a school like vandy.1MSUDawgFan said:
in my opinion, the mark of a good coach is how well he does against good competition and coaches. in short stansbury is never good against good competition or good coaches.
........a f*** what you have to say about me. You seem a little too obsessed with me these days, especially considering I hardly post on the board. In this case, you're purposely misinterpreting my comments recently and in the past and twisting them around to benefit your desire to use me as your favorite whipping boy. Whatever floats your boat.
In truth, my belief is that uur "self-loathing fans" as you called themaren't the specific reason for our lack of success, and I've never claimed them to be, butfans definitely fill an important role when it comes to the successes or failures of athletics programs. It's more of a passive role, of course, but if fans don't demand better then they don't get better. That's not to say that just demanding it will make it so, but there's no question that the powers-that-be at MSU have always been more willing to accept mediocrity in athletics a lot more so if the fan base is willing to accept it, and our fans in large part always have. We're just way too cool with failure and I have a major problem with that. I'm bitter about that, have been for a long time, and all the name calling and making fun of me by you(Costanza) and anyone else won't change me one bit. I was apparently(and unfortunately)born with the attitude of an LSU/Alabama type of fan but with maroon blood in my veins. I guess it's a curse. I can't change being a fan of MSU, just as I can't change the fact that I've become disillusioned and bitter about our future prospects. Our athletics programs are barely on life support, actually thanks in large part to what modicum of success that Stansbury has brought us in basketball, but outside of that we've been flatlining in football and baseball for the better part of a decade. That's far too long, and how anyone can blame me for being bitter about that is beyond me. I used to think you understood that, but maybe I was wrong.
And just in case you're wondering, these are my real comments. I'm not BS'ing. But at the same time, many of you people take this internet **** waaaaayyyy too seriously.
In truth, my belief is that uur "self-loathing fans" as you called themaren't the specific reason for our lack of success, and I've never claimed them to be, butfans definitely fill an important role when it comes to the successes or failures of athletics programs. It's more of a passive role, of course, but if fans don't demand better then they don't get better. That's not to say that just demanding it will make it so, but there's no question that the powers-that-be at MSU have always been more willing to accept mediocrity in athletics a lot more so if the fan base is willing to accept it, and our fans in large part always have. We're just way too cool with failure and I have a major problem with that. I'm bitter about that, have been for a long time, and all the name calling and making fun of me by you(Costanza) and anyone else won't change me one bit. I was apparently(and unfortunately)born with the attitude of an LSU/Alabama type of fan but with maroon blood in my veins. I guess it's a curse. I can't change being a fan of MSU, just as I can't change the fact that I've become disillusioned and bitter about our future prospects. Our athletics programs are barely on life support, actually thanks in large part to what modicum of success that Stansbury has brought us in basketball, but outside of that we've been flatlining in football and baseball for the better part of a decade. That's far too long, and how anyone can blame me for being bitter about that is beyond me. I used to think you understood that, but maybe I was wrong.
And just in case you're wondering, these are my real comments. I'm not BS'ing. But at the same time, many of you people take this internet **** waaaaayyyy too seriously.