How do you fire Stans?

[DawgatAuburn]

"We expect to make the NCAAs better than half the time, and to advance to the second weekend from time to time. We expect to make the NIT every once in a while. And we expect to rarely be below .500.
We expect you to play quality competition, recruit excellent players who will graduate, and to represent our university well.
And we expect you to know how to coach zone offense.
For all of that, we will double the salary you are making at your current school, because we are in the SEC and we can.
Now Coach, I ask you, are you the man to do all of this for us?"

No coach worth his salt is afraid of a challenge.Anyone we hire would know coming into it what we expected.

 

[HD6]

the question remains, no matter who we lost to, none of us would be saying we thought we were a Sweet 16 team come March. So you might as well schedule teams you can beat, and then take care of your business in the conference. We did that in 2004, and we were a 2 seed. We didn't advance in the tournament, but it had nothing to do with our non-conference schedule. How do I know this? Because we lost to a team in the tournament we beat in non-conference.

 

[tenureplan]

Richmond has beaten some decent teams this year as has WKU.

ODU is a borderline quality win. I think they will definitely be one by the end of the year.
</p>

That said, we really need more than 1 OOC quality win. </p>

We will win 9-11 in conference and end up a 6-9 seed. Which will mean that come 2nd round, we will be playing one of those teams that everyone wants us to schedule. So please give the fire Stans crap a rest until then. </p>

 

[HD6]

They didn't seem to have a lot of takers after they canned Cutcliffe. I can't wait to see who our Ed Orgeron is.

 

[tenureplan]

they have the #6 SOS in the country and are 7-7.

If they have the same number of conference wins that we do (9-11), they probably still make the tourney and have a comparable seed to us. I know they have more name power than we do, but I don't think that means as much anymore. (See Florida and Kentucky the last 2 years). The difference will be that they had alot more nationally televised games than us which will continue to give them a recruiting edge.

If we scheduled 3 more top 100 games, I am confident that we could win 2. Even if we only won 1, it is one more quality win. Which matters to the comittee. Nobody could have guessed that UCLA would be THIS bad this year, so that really is a quality team scheduled.

It is funny how polarized the 2 sides are on this. I don't think Stans is as good of a recruiter or that this team talent wise is as good as the Stans Haters think. Nor do I think he is as bad of a coach as they think either. We are better than WKU but it is negated on their home floor.

This team has no choice but to live and die by the 3. Tonight they died. If Bost had started taking it to the hole 2 minutes earlier...we win. Other than him, we are 3 streaky shooters and a serviceable big man (offensively).

</p>

 

[HD6]

Dampier averaged more points and rebounds than Varnado did as a junior. Continue to make it up as you go.

 

[mstateglfr]

and since you are his lapdog, I just assumed you agreed. He has said many times we should play teams that would never give us a return game. But fine, we'll play your scenario. If we had lost 3 games to three top 100 teams, I'll go with Siena (currently 75), Northern Colorado (currently 85), and and Northern Iowa (currently 48), would you think that we would be better in the NCAA tournament?

There would be a high chance that we would lose to Siena and UNI.

No idea on Northern Co.

Just adding in pointless opinion.

 

[mstateglfr]

When you start throwing out ridiculous scenarios that no one has ever suggested, you clearly are grasping. But for kicks, I'll answer, sort of. We don't need to play those teams. Never said we did. We need to look at the bottom four or five teams in our typical schedule and replace 2-3 of those with top 100 or 125 teams. That is completely doable. There are teams in the Valley, the Horizon, the OVC, C-USA, the A-10 and the like that would love to play an SEC team. If it means a home and home, then fine. I have a theory on why we don't do that. Stansbury knows that when we play Charlotte, WKU, UAB, Southern Illinois, etc, that he is just as likely to lose as win. And since most of his fan base is like you, happy with 20 wins and NCAA bids ~half the time, there is no need to do it. Just play weak teams, pad the stats, become the all time winningest coach, get into the NCAAs and have free time from mid-March through early April every year.

IF we were to upgrade the schedule, I guess there are three possibilities. One, Stans would get better in coaching against non SEC teams, or hire better staff members to help with that, and we would start winning those games and have a better seed and eventually push through to the SS. Two, Stans would struggle, we would miss the NCAAs several years in a row and he would get canned. Three, we would win about the same number of games and still struggle in the NCAAs, meaning this would not have been the right approach.

Agreed. Much of the A10 and MVC would beat us on any given night.
Of course we could beat them too on any given night, it just depends on if the team shows up or not.

But to take that chance...seems too risky. And it also seems like the reason why it isnt done more often.

 

[mstateglfr]

We need to start beefing up the schedule.

Playing better teams will get us more national exposure which will lead to better recruiting.

Gonzaga certainly did not get where they are in recognition by scheduling cup-cakes every year.

Gonzaga has to play a tough non con schedule because their conference schedule is disgustingly horrible. They spend all of Jan and Feb scheduling cup cakes, with the occasional Saint Mary's thrown in for excitement.

 

[GhostOfJackie]

when you were posting tranny pics you thought were hot.

Just sayin.

Someone please fill me in on this.

 

[mstateglfr]

Mizu, Marlyand, and Seton Hall. Fairly big on name but not as big on the court. I think we could get a home and home with all 3.

So you would add them to UCLA and DePaul?

2 Big East teams, an ACC team, a Big12 team, and a Pac 10 team?

And then also conference play in the SEC?

Not many teams play that many power conference teams.
Granted DP and UCLA blow, but that was just what was drawn for us in the Challenge and the Wooden game. It could have been 'Cuse and Washington.

 

[JimC1097]

http://

http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=38307

 

[tenureplan]

That was one mean man-to-man they put on us tonight.

They had some decent looking sets too.

That said I still vote to keep Stans.

 

[anon1751035439]

As a Rebel, I hope you do. I think he has been a pretty good coach. Our record against him isn't too good.

 

[BlindDawg]

This says all you need to know about whether firing Stans is a good or bad idea. The rest of the conference would love for us to fire him.

 

[LAMSUFAN]

There is a LOT worse out there than Stans...he's had plenty of sucess and will continue to as Byrne will not fire him.

 

[Stormrider81]

" We need tougher opponents, and either Stansbury steps his game up, or we lose and get a better coach."

I like how there are just two possibilities there. Either we get better or we lose and hire a better coach, as if that last part is all but assured. I guarantee you there is a higher probability that if we lose and fire Stans, we end up with a worse coach. In support of that I point you to the rest of the SEC, in which there are scant few coaches better than Stansbury. I'm not using this as a reason not to fire him if he ends up failing, but you people act as if Stansbury failing would guarantee we would end up with a better coach when it would almost guarantee the opposite.

 

[Stormrider81]

In basketball the SEC is far from the best in the nation. Just look at the football coaches compared to the basketball coaches. It isn't comparible. Comparing football, or even baseball, to basketball doesn't work.

 

[Stormrider81]

He beats up on one of the best coaches in the SEC the past 8 years using less successful coaches, most of whom have already been fired or will shortly be. Brady, Gottfried, Pelphrey, Heath, and now Kennedy. Not to mention that Kennedy has never taken Ole Miss to a NCAA Tourney in the same stretch where Stansbury has taken us to two, and in the same stretch where the idiots on this board want him fired. It's amazing to me, it really is. Peaches wants to fire Stansbury because he hasn't accomplished enough, so he props up coaches who haven't accomplished as much as Stansbury. I don't care what you think about Kennedy, that guy hasn't done jack squat at Ole Miss thus far. He hasn't accomplished a single thing yet. Maybe he will, but let's hold off until he actually does something noteworthy.

 

[ImHurtinLinda]

improve the OOC schedule the next two years and make him play some top 25 and top 50 teams...and quit scheduling the 200+ RPI teams....

Our record will tend to even out quite a bit

but how would we deal with him continuing to win conference championships?? - damn that Stansbury.

 

[00Dawg]

"We expect to make the NCAAs better than half the time, and to advance to the second weekend from time to time. We expect to make the NIT every once in a while. And we expect to rarely be below .500.
We expect you to play quality competition, recruit excellent players who will graduate, and to represent our university well.
And we expect you to know how to coach zone offense.
For all of that, we will double the salary you are making at your current school, because we are in the SEC and we can.
Now Coach, I ask you, are you the man to do all of this for us?"

No coach worth his salt is afraid of a challenge.Anyone we hire would know coming into it what we expected.

Let me sum that up: We want you to do exactly what our previous coach did, but with a tougher pre-conference schedule, advancing further in the NCAAs, and running an offense that fans can recognize from their couches.

 

[dawgstudent]

is we need better expectations. We should not be happy with out of the last 8 years a 75% clip of going to the tourney but no Sweet 16's.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

Yeah, that's right. We want you to do what the previous guy did except for those teeny tiny little things like playing real teams, winning and being knowledgeable about the game.

Thanks for helping make the point that any coach we would offer would crawl to Starkville. Please note the "we would offer" part of that sentence. That does not say "any coach would crawl" meaning we could hire Coach K or Bill Self. The sad thing is having to type that clarification because there are at least a couple dozen of you out there who would feel the need to reply with those type of coaches if I didn't.

 

[Dawgfan61]

there is only 1 way to fire him...

For years you have been denying that you want him fired. At least now you say you want him fired. Getting a little truthful in old age??

How reasonable are you to fire a coach that has made the NCAA tournament 3 out of the last 4 years?? Are you not getting a little petty?? Just a little?? cmon admit it...

 

[markymark.sixpack]

you all assume that we will continue getting the same talent to come to MSU. I don't believe that's the case. Year in and year out under stansbury we are usually one of the 4 most talented rosters in the SEC. Why? We're definitely not a storied program. It's not like recruits are just dying to get an offer from us. Stansbury keeps the cupboard stocked, he just doesn't know how to use all of his ingredients to cook a decent meal. Can we get a better coach (as in floor coach)? Definitely. Will we get a recruiter on his par? No, probably not. I'd say there's a 95% chance we see a serious drop in talent immediately after we fire Stans (if it ever happens). Look at Tubby Smith....a great coach, but he couldn't even recruit to Kentucky...the #1 program of all time in many minds. I think that's why you see the Heath's, Pelphrey's, Felton's, etc. struggle in the SEC. You need elite athletes to compete. Even if we are only the "6th best conference" (which is NOT the same as a 6th rate conference you 17ing moron), that still puts us ahead of 80% of basketball conferences. You need depth and talent AND a good coach. Right now we have 2 of the 3. We fire Stansbury, and there's a very very high probability that we drop to one or zero out of 3 and end up as just another Georgia, Arkansas, or South Carolina. But hey, if that's what you want, then keep hollering about it. Just know what you're asking for (I understand that's a lot to ask for from someone as stupid as you peaches).