It happens pretty much every year. It also probably costs us a seed or 3 each year in the tourney. Or NIT vs NCAA. It is frustrating as hell for me. Yet I am not calling for anyone's job. To consistently be in contention for west/league titles (even if it is the 6th rated) means that Stansbury is one of the best coaches in the conference. I'm ok with that. I think Stansbury's OOC issues including short tourney appearances is attributible to him having problems gameplanning for teams/coaches he has never faced. Which is why he does well in the SEC because he already knows what to expect. That being said, he had a great gameplan 2 years ago for Memphis. They were just way more talented than we were. Kansas used that same gameplan to win the Tourney.
Enough with the doom and gloom with basketball.
- Thread starter Hanmudog
- Start date
- Status
And you know, Croom made a bowl, so we should have kept him too. Stansbury on the other hand is a winner every year and we should can his ***. You get dumber every year. I know this is bait, but good grief, you're an idiot.
What about the recent final four surprises? Cleveland State, James Madison, several others I can't remember ...
Did those have a lottery pick and/or a first rounder?
Yes, those teams got hot. Then again, given Stansbury's limitations (no fire, no prep for unknown teams, ***-poor perimeter defense, etc), we won't see that from a Stansbury-coached team.</p>
Did those have a lottery pick and/or a first rounder?
Yes, those teams got hot. Then again, given Stansbury's limitations (no fire, no prep for unknown teams, ***-poor perimeter defense, etc), we won't see that from a Stansbury-coached team.</p>
there are always outliers, if you don't believe me just ask bill simmons.
we're obviously talking in generalities and every case known to the world won't fit. if you can't understand that simple logic, well i'll be surprised if you can read this response.
we had two teams that should have gone. one (vs texas) got outcoached. One (vs Xavier) was sheer luck. they actually did get hot at the right time, just ask jameer nelson and st. joes. xavier destroyed them by 40 in their conference tournament. i was frustrated as hell both those years too, and we should've been. but that doesn't means stansbury sucks and we should fire him.
And, yes stansbury had great gameplans against memphis and duke the year before. 17ing And-1 Streetballa cost us that game. Gary 17ing Ervin...what a joke.</p>
we're obviously talking in generalities and every case known to the world won't fit. if you can't understand that simple logic, well i'll be surprised if you can read this response.
we had two teams that should have gone. one (vs texas) got outcoached. One (vs Xavier) was sheer luck. they actually did get hot at the right time, just ask jameer nelson and st. joes. xavier destroyed them by 40 in their conference tournament. i was frustrated as hell both those years too, and we should've been. but that doesn't means stansbury sucks and we should fire him.
And, yes stansbury had great gameplans against memphis and duke the year before. 17ing And-1 Streetballa cost us that game. Gary 17ing Ervin...what a joke.</p>
<table summary="user post and replies"> <tbody class="expandable post reply odd markymark" id="post-id-4"> <tr> <td class="th post-subject"><span class="post-title">ok, say this is all correct...</span></td> <td class="th post-number"></td> <td class="th toggle lastcol"><span class="collapse-button">[-]</span></td> </tr> <tr class="collapsible-content"> <td class="poster-detail firstcol"> <div class="avatar-block"> <p class="post-date"><span>Posted</span>: <span class="date">11/18/09</span> <span class="time">02:36 PM</span></p> </div> </td> <td class="post-content lastcol" colspan="3"> <div class="post-body"> <div class="scrolling"> just how many games short of our realistic potential do we fall if we lose in the round of 32? One game? Two? Even the wooliest of the wooly can't argue any more than two. I think our real problem through the years is unrealistic expectations. When I originally looked at our roster for this year, I figured 4 or so more wins than last year (which I still think is realistic). Everyone (including you c34 - although we all know your ulterior motives behind setting high expectations) was saying we would win the SEC outright, at least sweet 16, if we get sidney...well, final four here we come. Then when it appeared sidney was getting cleared, i actually found myself getting wooly. Our fan base is notorious for unrealistic expectations, then we ***** when we fall short of them. Right now, we have one player on our team who will ever play real minutes in the NBA, that's jarvis, and he's not even a guaranteed 1st rounder. If Sidney gets cleared, that's two. Kodi & Osby maybe Dee will all go the way of our other famous players (bower, zimmerman, frazier, etc.). think back...how many players have we put in the NBA since the 96 team? How many between 1970 and 1996? Roberts was our best prospect, and he can't hack it. He's too small. NBA players don't come through MSU. Stansbury does a great job at finding good college talent and maximizing their potential. Teams that make the elite 8 and beyond always have a roster with 1 or more future NBA players, so I submit that we fall one to two games per season short of our true potential. So, if you think we should fire him and run a high risk of falling to the bottom of the SEC standings in an attempt to find someone that can get us those 1-2 games, then that's your perogative...you just need to understand that's what you're doing.
And I don't want to hear that we don't have NBA talent b/c he can't recruit. There are maybe 30-40 players a year with that potential and most of them are going to go to Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, Mich St, or UCLA. MSU is not getting that kind of talent on a regular basis without forking out some serious dough (which I'm not saying i would be against). </div> </div> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
And I don't want to hear that we don't have NBA talent b/c he can't recruit. There are maybe 30-40 players a year with that potential and most of them are going to go to Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, Mich St, or UCLA. MSU is not getting that kind of talent on a regular basis without forking out some serious dough (which I'm not saying i would be against). </div> </div> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
I for one would prefer success year in year out rather than one Omaha trip in 10 years. We sucked the rest of the time in baseball, but in basketball, I know we have a chance to win, I usually expect to win no matter who we're playing at home, and I go home happy 80% of the time I go to a game every year. We're in the conversation every single year.
At least we're giving ourselves a look each year by getting there, so I think it's ludicrous to say we can't break through in the tourney, as if it's impossible. Hell, we were one possession away against the best team in the nation two years ago, don't you think we may have overachieved that year? If we're one possession away, I think it's only rational to think we might eventually win one of those.
At least we're giving ourselves a look each year by getting there, so I think it's ludicrous to say we can't break through in the tourney, as if it's impossible. Hell, we were one possession away against the best team in the nation two years ago, don't you think we may have overachieved that year? If we're one possession away, I think it's only rational to think we might eventually win one of those.
I admit I was wrong. Dunno where Cleveland St came in. And by James Madison, I meant George Mason.
Btw, George, what was your reaction when UGa beat MSU in the 2007 SEC final in their second game of the day?
Btw, George, what was your reaction when UGa beat MSU in the 2007 SEC final in their second game of the day?
but you don't fire a coach because of it. Even elite teams have head-scratching losses. **** happens.
tenureplan said:
On that Memphis game in the tourney, I feel like the game plan was so good because you matched up well. To beat that Memphis team, you needed to have a solid inside presence that could neutralize guys getting to the basket, and you needed big guards that were able to match up height-wise with Memphis's 6-4/6-5 back court.
Because you had Jamont and Varnado, you had a better chance to beat Memphis than anyone else outside of Kansas. Varnado inside made it where your defense didn't have to collapse to help when a player got in the lane. Memphis thrived on that, getting by you and either scoring in the lane or drawing the defense to kick out for an easy shot. Varnado helped neutralize that. And of course your guards, namely Jamont, had the size to play with Memphis. Michigan State and Texas could've tried the same gameplan, but it wouldn't have worked because they had small guards.
Other than that, I really agree on your assessment of Stans. That would also help explain why he hasn't made a Sweet Sixteen since he'd have to beat two quality unfamiliar teams back to back to get there.
- Status