Here's how I calculate the odds (assuming Sidney signs)...

[DowntownDawg]

1) Sweet 16 run or better. 25%
2) Strong regular season, decent seed, disappointing second round exit. 50%
3) Frustrating disaster of a season (1st round exit or no NCAAs). Sidney leaves. We move on. 15%
4) Frustrating disaster of a season (1st round exit or no NCAAs). Sidney leaves, and Stansbury loses the program due to key player attrition and/or NCAA issues surrounding Sidney. 10%

Point being, we are taking a big gamble with this guy. I am not opposed to taking a gamble to try to get over the hump, but I am nervous about this one. This may very well be a "price of success" type situation.

 

[DowntownDawg]

1) Sweet 16 run or better. 25%
2) Strong regular season, decent seed, disappointing second round exit. 50%
3) Frustrating disaster of a season (1st round exit or no NCAAs). Sidney leaves. We move on. 15%
4) Frustrating disaster of a season (1st round exit or no NCAAs). Sidney leaves, and Stansbury loses the program due to key player attrition and/or NCAA issues surrounding Sidney. 10%

Point being, we are taking a big gamble with this guy. I am not opposed to taking a gamble to try to get over the hump, but I am nervous about this one. This may very well be a "price of success" type situation.

 

[BriantheDawg]

.

 

[myusernamesucks]

asdf

Edit: I should read the post more carefully.

 

[8dog]

are a result of numerous complicated algorithms and extrapolations, but could you run them and give me some percentages if we don't sign Sydney?

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

regardless of what happens: 97.7%

 

[DowntownDawg]

...I can't speak for 34, but I don't hate Stans at all. I am simply pointing out that there are numerous risks with this guy, just like many have said. And for the 10th time, I am not opposed to taking the risk, but you and others on this board act like a national championship is just waiting on us now are ridiculous. We'll see what happens, but don't count your chickens, especially with a guy with this much baggage.

 

[BriantheDawg]

Riiight. I just want to make it to the 2nd weekend and think Sidney could be the guy to get us there. Just being realistic.

And for a guy that hummed on Croom's nuts the first 4 years, it's equally mind-boggling that you don't give the best coach we have on campus any credit when it's due. You and c34 always find the negative to talk about when it comes to Stans. You say you don't hate him, but nothing he ever does is good enough. Talk about being a douchebag.</p>

 

[Woof Man Jack]

According to your assumptions:

Good/decent things happening - 75%
Bad/terrible things happening - 25%</p>

</p>

How the hell is a 75% chance of a positive outcome considered a "big gamble?"</p>

 

[muddawgs33]

1) Sweet 16 run or better. 25%

Returning everyone except Johnson and having Kodi play the whole year (hopefully). I think adding Sidney gives us a 50% chance of making the sweet 16 or better. That gives us 3 legit big post scoring threats. Add that with a higher % 3 pointers, because opponents will be trying to key in on the post and should allow for a lot more open 3's instead of the run up the court shoot a 30 ft 3 pter...

 

[DawgatAuburn]

Because this...

2) Strong regular season, decent seed, disappointing second round exit. 50%

would be a bad thing. As great as 04 was, it ended crappy with the Xavier loss. You can't tell me you would be satisfied with another first weekend flameout if we were a top 15 type team.

 

[DowntownDawg]

....getting put out in the second round is disappointing next year IF Varnado and/or Sidney are on the team.

And the gamble is that he brings NCAA or other baggage. It's a big gamble because while the upside is so high, the downside is really low, too, even if the odds of it happening are lower.

And aGAIN, I am for us taking a gamble, but I am not going to be surprised if there are negative consequences to this down the road.

 

[DowntownDawg]

[No message]

 

[gtowndawg]

the rewards far outweigh the risk. I'd take those odds every time.

 

[DowntownDawg]

Dawg@Auburn and others. When he deserves credit, I give him credit. Click here. When he deserves criticism, he gets it. I think he did a fantastic job this past season in getting us to the tournament. That's what it's all about.

You have painted yourself into a corner that does not allow for a skeptical opinion of him. You are so defensive of him, it's ridiculous. When we win, you get more enjoyment out of coming on here and gloating at 34 than you do winning. Hell, this is a message board. Your knight in shining armor approach to Stansbury is getting old and ridiculous. To say that by signing Sidney he extended his tenure at State by 6 or 7 years is an extremely sheepish statement. Let's see what he does with the talent first.

 

[BriantheDawg]

have won multiple SECW, SECT and an overall SECC, it's just a little hard to be skeptical. Sorry, but it just is. I live in the real world where MState basketball never has been an elite program. We have a coach that's doing a good job of getting us there, but to some, it's simply still not good enough. And, congratulations for 'patting Stans on the back' for getting us to the Tourney in a rebuilding year. You're such a swell fan.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

I think Scooba's data proved that you don't have to be an elite program to make the Sweet 16 once or twice in 12 years.

 

[DowntownDawg]

...Stansbury has done a good, not great job. He deserves job security and the money he is getting. He does not deserve huge accolades that you give him. He is better than average, but he is definitely not great. I don't want him to go anywhere, but job performance discussion on anybody is fair game on this message board, last time I checked.

 

[BriantheDawg]

Please enlighten me.

Aren't you the one who has Stans just 'slightly better' than Andy Kennedy? Yet, AK has done NOTHING, EVER. I don't understand those 'huge accolades'.</p>

 

[DowntownDawg]

...saying that he was slightly better than AK. Maybe I did say it. I do think that AK is a better floor coach, but all in all, I would take Stans over Kennedy every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Huge accolades - saying things like "It's hard to be skeptical." "With the talent we have coming in, hell extend his contract for the next 6 or 7 years." Essentially, you make it sounds like he can do no wrong. 6 out of 8 is great. No Sweet 16's in twelve years is not. He's a good coach, and just like anybody else, it's fair game to reasonably criticize coaching/recruiting decisions. I don't know what is so wrong with that and why it can't be left at that.

I realize that a lot of this is about 34. Although it's entertaining, he's polarized the board on Stansbury. If someone makes a post that criticizes Stansbury in any way, that person is painted in the Coach34 corner. Coach admits that he does what he does to stir the pot, and he probably believes about half of it. I used to get sucked in like you, but I just laugh at it now. That said, not everybody that criticizes Stansbury hates him or wants him to fail. Again, there are several reasonable posters on here that give him credit when its due and criticism when it's due. These posters don't deserve to get put in the "Stanshater" corner. Aside from 34, I would bet that anybody on this board that is a State fan that has made a critical post of Stansbury wants to see him succeed.

 

[Woof Man Jack]

You can't tell me you would be satisfied with another first weekend flameout if we were a top 15 type team.

Absolutely not...but odds are we wouldn't be a top 15 type team without Sid. This scenario is more reflective of a disappointing end to the season, not so much a negative one. ie: NCAA bs

 

[VegasDawg13]

DowntownDawg and C34 being painted as allies. I never thought I'd see this day.

 

[BriantheDawg]

But I never said we should extend his contract for 6 or 7 years just to extend it. With the talent I believe he'll secure from the '11 class, especially if Sidney comes and can take us deep in the Tourney the next year or two, Stans will have the talent to keep us in the Tourney for that long. Of course whether he does it is a whole 'nother story, but if history's a lesson, I feel confident we will be good for a good long while.

And I didn't know not being skeptical means the same thing as giving someone accollades. But whatever.

 

[BriantheDawg]

But I never said we should extend his contract for 6 or 7 years just to extend it. With the talent I believe he'll secure from the '11 class, especially if Sidney comes and can take us deep in the Tourney the next year or two, Stans will have the talent to keep us in the Tourney for that long. Of course whether he does it is a whole 'nother story, but if history's a lesson, I feel confident we will be good for a good long while.

And I didn't know not being skeptical means the same thing as giving someone accollades. But whatever.

 

[Coach34]

DowntownDawg and C34 being painted as allies. I never thought I'd see this day.

I have to work the entire day delivering condoms and this **** breaks out...

 

[NutherT]

Just for the record, I have been an avid Stans supporter through the years, but I'm 100% with Downtown on all this Sidney stuff. That equals cautiously optimistic. I say that because I don't think people are putting enough weight on the long term impact this signing COULD (10%) have on our program. That said, there is no way we shouldn't sign Sidney. We'd be stupid to pass him up.

 

[dawgstudent]

that thinks logically that doesn't have some type of apprehension about signing him. But the possible return exceedingly outweighs the risk.