I'm calling out the Stansbury critics/haters.

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

 

[Columbus Dawg]

Not many people are saying to fire him....yet. But now that most of us are happy with our football and baseball coach, he will come under more scrutiny.

The biggest thing Stans has to do, is hold onto players. This would be a different team with Ben H.

Tonight's game was winnable, but I don't think coaching gave us the best chance to win.

 

[Dawg in a pile]

Not many people are saying to fire him....yet. But now that most of us are happy with our football and baseball coach, he will come under more scrutiny.

Our football and baseball coach have yet to coach a game for State. Let's discuss this again when they have done anything close to what Stans has accomplished at State.

The biggest thing Stans has to do, is hold onto players. This would be a different team with Ben H.

Agree with this for sure.

Tonight's game was winnable, but I don't think coaching gave us the best chance to win.

Our players didn't do a whole lot to help us tonight either.

 

[rhs43]

you gotta think that reflects coaching.

 

[Columbus Dawg]

I think you missed my point. There has been so much energy spent complaining about Polk, LT, and mainly Croom that Stans has been shielded a little bit. Right now there is nothing to ***** about except Logos and Stans.

 

[Garciacamebackadawg]

during those 8 losses this year. Stansbury is a pretty good recruiter, but outside of that he is exposed by better coaches year in and year out. Who gives a **** about the west division every year or so? Only people that don't get the big picture, and the big pic is how many times you go to the big dance and how well you do when you get there. Rick does not fare well in the big dance, because he is not an x and o guy. When went 14-2 in the conference, we used to spring the 1-3-1 half court trap on people, and it scared people to death. Have not seen it since. Our half court offense consists of the 3 guard weave until the clock gets down for the "The Brick" to throw one up. We have piss poor of season training, just look at our guards. They are no bigger then guys you can find at Sanderson. We need a practice facility, but we also need some coaches that are going to use that gym to develop good high school ballers into real good college players. How many of Stansbury's kids have made it to the NBA? Answer: NONE!

 

[Coach34]

"1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances) "

He has done a decent job at MSU. But, after 10 years, we have no Sweet 16's. We have 1 SEC title and one Tourney title. I'm glad we have that, but more could have been done for sure (dont give me crap about SEC West titles, when BCS conferences average 5-6 teams in the NCAA Tourney, those are really insignificant)

"2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">December</span>)"

Yes it is. And we already have 4 losses and we will lose another 1 or two before conference play starts. Its obvious we arent very good this season. We are an NIT at best club

"3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years"

this will be our 3rd down season in the last 4. Making the NCAA Tourney 1 every 4 years is not acceptable to me and other good fans.

"And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?"

We will replace him with a top notch coach, just like we did in baseball and football. As far as pay, we are in the top 25% of college basketball, it will be easy to find a replacement. I would have thought our two recent hires would have showed you this.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)

C34 response: "He has done a decent job at MSU. But, after 10 years, we have no Sweet 16's. We have 1 SEC title and one Tourney title. I'm glad we have that, but more could have been done for sure..."

Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, California, Virginia, and Michigan all fall in the "no Sweet 16 category" as well (as well as many others).

In the last 10 years, only Kentucky (4), Florida (3), MSU (1), Georgia (1) and Arkansas (1) have won the tournament.Outright titles are pretty much the same crew, drop UGA and Ark and replace w/ Bama & LSU.</p>

(Note: National championships won by Kentucky in 1998, Florida in 2006 & 2007.)</p>

</p>

Certainly, we haven't performed up to the level of Kentucky, but I would argue that Kentucky is in a different class.
</p>

</p>2. The season is young (it's mid-December)

C34 response: "Yes it is. And we already have 4 losses and we will lose another 1 or two before conference play starts. Its obvious we arent very good this season. We are an NIT at best club"

Let me phrase it this way: achieving the NIT would be a reasonable goal given the exodus of last year's talent, compounded by the inexperience on thhis team. I think we basically agree here.

3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

C34 response: "this will be our 3rd down season in the last 4. Making the NCAA Tourney 1 every 4 years is not acceptable to me and other good fans."

Looking at the last 4 years records, how would you quantify a "down" season? I think we'd agree that '05-'06 was a down year, but what makes the others, in your opinion, "down" years?

Year Over. SEC
2004-2005 23-11 9-7
2005-2006 15-15 5-11
2006-2007 21-14 8-8
2007-2008 23-11 12-4

And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

C34 response: "We will replace him with a top notch coach, just like we did in baseball and football. As far as pay, we are in the top 25% of college basketball, it will be easy to find a replacement. I would have thought our two recent hires would have showed you this."

I have several problems with this statement. First, neither the baseball nor football coach have won (or lost) a game here yet. A lot of data has yet to be assembled. Second, while I could stretch to agree with top 25% (which would equate to a top 75 program), I'm not so sure about the ease of finding a quality replacement. Thirdly, does MSU have the budget to hire the quality replacement?

And, last, but not least, is all of this sustainable? I think we can agree on some areas, but we'll have to agree to disagree in others. Nonetheless, I appreciate your attempt to address my original question.

 

[Frances Drebin]

Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, California, Virginia, and Michigan all fall in the "no Sweet 16 category" as well (as well as many others).

But have all of those programs had the talent State has had over that time? We had two or three seasons where we had Elite Eight or even Final Four talent but underachieved.

 

[patdog]

But have all of those programs had the talent State has had over that time? We had two or three seasons where we had Elite Eight or even Final Four talent but underachieved.

If you're going to ***** about what Stans has done with all the talent he's had, you've got to give him credit for recruiting that talent (especially when coaches at places like Arkansas, Georgia, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, California, Virginia, and Michigan apparently can't recruit Sweet 16 talent to what are for the most part much easier places to recruit at). You can't have it both ways. His record is what it is, and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference how it got that way. He's averaged 20+ wins per season, and whether he got there by being a great recruiter and a terrible coach, or a terrible recruiter and a great coach, or (the truth) somewhere in between doesn't matter. The fact is, MSU is the second winningest basketball program in the SEC since he's been our coach.

 

[1MSUDawgFan]

Someone got that talent here. We fire Stansbury, we no longer get that talent. Just letting you know - you better be careful what you ask for - you just might get it. Ask Arkansas fans right now.

And I guess every year in our school history except those 9 years in which we made the tournament were "down" years.

 

[mstateglfr]

Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, California, Virginia, and Michigan all fall in the "no Sweet 16 category" as well (as well as many others).

But have all of those programs had the talent State has had over that time? We had two or three seasons where we had Elite Eight or even Final Four talent but underachieved.

Clemson, probably. California, for sure. Arkansas, i think so.

 

[stateskills]

The fact is, MSU is the second winningest basketball program in the SEC since he's been our coach.

we have a winner.

 

[YellowFeverDawg]

1. I am a Stansbury fan. I think that this team will be fine if they toughen up and get used to playing together, but if you want legitimate criticism, here it is. His decision to stay in the 3-2 last night lost the game. It was a winnable game. We were even to slightly ahead when we were playing man defense. I know everyone will say that you can't play man defense all night. My answer: You can when you rotate your entire squad.

If Stans is going to continue to play 2 full units, then he needs to stay away from zone defense. We are a young team and half of our players don't have a clue what there zone responsibilities are. Osby is the best example of this. His athleticism creates opportunities for him, but he is typically in the wrong place on defense. Add to that for the first time in his life Osby is playing guys that are just as fast and strong as he is. This is why we look so much better in man defense. You say to your athletic freshmens, "that is your man. Go get him," and they do.

2. This team is not better with Hansbrough. We lack real post presence and solid perimeter defense. Ben couldn't give us either of those, and don't tell me wah, wah, wah he hustled. He was a slow white kid that could shoot a little. What most fans consider hustle was Ben diving to catch up after being beaten by whoever he was supposed to cover. Some will say he would have been our leader. Ben was despised in the locker room.

Now if someone said that we would be better with Regi Delk, I would agree. Taller, faster, better defender, and better shooter than Ben. But he left. So, I will always consider him soft.

 

[99jc]

That Substitution crap last night cost us a chance. We were making a run until Benock and company made their entry. Not to say we would not have lost anyway but it's about in game decisions. Just like he could have called for that foul in the Butler game but he didn't that's why we don't advance in the tourney.

 

[Garciacamebackadawg]

He could be the winningest coach in the SEC if he could coach. Typical MSU mentality, let's just settle for where we are regardless if it's good or bad, let's never try to improve our status in the league, let's just accept where we are and be proud of it, let's not have any ambition. His assistants have interviewed for other positions, and can't get a bite. What does that tell you? A.) They aren't quality candidates, B.) They are shunned for their association with Stans (cheater mentality), C.) Just don't interview well. He's a good coach when he has the better talent, and he's coaching against an average coach (Brady, Gottfrie, etc.), but he get's outcoached by smaller schools with average talent, (Charlotte, and that list could go on). One more time, how many of Stans' boys are in the NBA? NONE.

 

[Stormrider81]

If we fire Stansbury after this season people are going to mention that he was the second winningest coach in the SEC during his tenure. They are going to mention that he did this at Starkville, which many outsiders consider a place that is extremely difficult to get talent to and win at.

People aren't going to look at the negatives of Stansbury's tenure, they are going to look at his record and our history and they are going to blast us for firing him.

 

[Coach34]

The fact is, MSU is the second winningest basketball program in the SEC since he's been our coach.

we have a winner.

1. I have a hard time believing we are ahead of Kentucky or Florida for 2nd place the last 10 years. I'd like to see those numbers.
2. I showed last March that he has a losing record against major conference teams that arent in the SEC
3. Being the best in the West doesnt mean a whole lot. The SEC West isnt exactly nationally known for being a powerhouse
4. Alot of those 20 win seasons are built on wins over Jacksonville St and McNeese St. We always play the weakest pre-conference schedule
5. We could get lots of coaches in here to pull in decent talent, beat up on the SE LA's and Alabama State's, and then compete in a weak SEC West
6. I'd rather take a chance on getting another coach that has the chance of being great than stick with Stansbury, who we all know is never going to win big games at MSU
</p>

 

[VegasDawg13]

He could be the winningest coach in the SEC if he could coach. Typical MSU mentality, let's just settle for where we are regardless if it's good or bad, let's never try to improve our status in the league, let's just accept where we are and be proud of it, let's not have any ambition. His assistants have interviewed for other positions, and can't get a bite. What does that tell you? A.) They aren't quality candidates, B.) They are shunned for their association with Stans (cheater mentality), C.) Just don't interview well. He's a good coach when he has the better talent, and he's coaching against an average coach (Brady, Gottfrie, etc.), but he get's outcoached by smaller schools with average talent, (Charlotte, and that list could go on). One more time, how many of Stans' boys are in the NBA? NONE.

So, you think we should fire a basketball coach for not having the best program in the conference? Just because if we didn't it would be the "typical MSU mentality" of "accepting where we are?" Yeah, that's a great idea. As for your other point, Stansbury has been rumored for other jobs as recently as last year with the South Carolina job. So, what does that tell you? Stansbury's problem, as someone else has said, is keeping players. We spend the early part of every year getting used to playing together, when we should be building off of previous years. There are plenty of people out there who believe the consistent transferring was a result of Jamont. I have no idea if that's true, but I want to see what happens in the next couple of offseasons. If the transferring stops, Stans will be back to his results in the first part of this decade. If it doesn't, then we'll see. Stans has earned a somewhat long leash.

 

[Bdog9090]

I don't get it. Some of you are saying that he is a really good recruiter and a bad coach. Some are making the point that he has no players in the NBA. Which would lead one to think that he is a bad recruiter. Which is it? Cause despite all this garbage about him being a bad coach, he's obviously doing something right. He consistently wins games. He might not make it far in the tournament, but he does get us there. I think we would be crazy to get rid of Stans. He has the most wins in school history. And if we did get rid of him, it would be terrible pr for the school. Remember when Kentucky got rid of Tubs. I think that's how ppl would look at us if we got rid of Stans.
And I don't think you can equate last years tourney appearance as a bad outting. We were very close to beating a much more talented team that went on to play in the national title game.

 

[DISTRICT DOG]

in a what have you done for me latley world Stans hasn't really done anything, yea you can count wins and losses all day long but who cares what your winning percentage is if you can't even make a run in the tourney. We had prime chances to beat duke and memphis and we blew them, you people act like he is going to make us a national power house when he can't get past the 2nd round in games we were capable of winning

 

[SWFLDawg]

How is he a great recruiter? From what I can recall only one of his players has even sniffed the NBA and he was a transfer. "The recruiter" myth is based on the players who almost came to State like Ellis and Outlaw.</p>

 

[DawgatAuburn]

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)

C34 response: "He has done a decent job at MSU. But, after 10 years, we have no Sweet 16's. We have 1 SEC title and one Tourney title. I'm glad we have that, but more could have been done for sure..."

Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, California, Virginia, and Michigan all fall in the "no Sweet 16 category" as well (as well as many others).

Right, and what have those schools done in the last 10 or so years??????

Georgia - Fired Jirsa, hired Harrick who cheated, fired him, hired Felton, who is about to get fired.
Arkansas - Fired Nolan, Fired Heath after he made the NCAAs, hired Pelphrey
South Carolina - Fired Fogler, hired Odom, allowed Odom to retire with grace this year
Va Tech - They have Seth Greenberg, who can flat coach. I don't know who was before him and how that person left the job.
FSU - Fired Steve Robinson, hired Hamilton who is now feeling the heat even with Stan Jones on the bench
Clemson - Fired Shyatt and hired Purnell who has them improving each year
Cal - Fired Braun after 12 years and five NCAAs, but no Sweet 16 appearances
Virginia - Fired Jeff Jones, one of their all time great players, and hired Pete Gillen but fired him because he sweated too much and his teams were generally terrible
Michigan - Fisher cheated and got run off, some guy came in after that and was horrible, then Amaker came in and rebuilt things from the ground up but not fast enough, and was fired after five years

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

I see a lot of griping, but no real good arguments to refute the following:

1. Stansbury has a proven record at MSU (~.650 win %, 8 for 10 in postseason appearances)
2. The season is young (it's mid-<span style="font-style: italic;">December</span>)
3. Yes, even the big-name schools have "down" years

Other than "the team looks bad so far this year," I have yet to see a credible argument. And here's the BONUS QUESTION: Should you let him go, who are you going to get to replace him and how much is it going to cost?

Fire away.

You should just save your breath because there is a large group of Stans haters that have been around for some time. No matter what argument you give them...lack of post players this season, no veterans, the "we're young" isn't just an excuse this season...they will find something not to like about the only winning program we have had at MSU in the past decade. The best thing you can do is let them howl. They believe that since we have dumped a baseball and football coach within the last year, we should just do the same with Stans. If you are worried about Stans, don't be. He has a pass this season. That being said, if he has a lot of attrition this off season and another dismal season next year, he is probably on the chopping block with the standards our new AD has put in place. I wouldn't worry though because from what I have been told, this is the most harmonious bunch of players at MSU in years. We will take our lumps this season, recruit a couple of big bodies for the post and shooting guards and be much better next season. As for the rest of this season, I would be surprised if we make the NIT. We have talent but no court sense outside of Vanardo. Then again, you never know when a young bunch can start to click and surprise even the haters.

 

[sixpackmafia]

I havent been keeping up with MSU basketball that much over the last few years, and this stat tells me why......I didnt realize we had only been one out of the last four, and yet had good seasons.....that tells me a lot of those wins werent quality enough to get us to the big dance....beating 10 McNeese State's wont get you to the big dance....I have always been a huge Stans supporter, but 10 years on the job with the amount of talent he has brought in MSU should have 3-5 Sweet 16s.....I am not for firing the guy, but I think being put on a performance plan over the next 2-3 years with mandatory goals would be sufficient.... D

 

[Coach34]

"Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina, Virginia Tech, Florida State, Clemson, California, Virginia, and Michigan all fall in the "no Sweet 16 category" as well (as well as many others). "

And since they have no Sweet 16's among them, how many of them have stuck with the same coach the last 10 years?...(i'll give you a hint, its 0)

"In the last 10 years, only Kentucky (4), Florida (3), MSU (1), Georgia (1) and Arkansas (1) have won the tournament.Outright titles are pretty much the same crew, drop UGA and Ark and replace w/ Bama & LSU."

and thats back to my original point- there is Kentucky and Florida in the SEC and then everybody else. We arent anything special by any means. We just compete on the ****** side of the conference.

"Looking at the last 4 years records, how would you quantify a "down" season? I think we'd agree that '05-'06 was a down year, but what makes the others, in your opinion, "down" years?

Year Over. SEC
2004-2005 23-11 9-7
2005-2006 15-15 5-11
2006-2007 21-14 8-8
2007-2008 23-11 12-4 "

at this point of our program, since we are the "2nd winningest SEC team" as ya'll proclaim- the NIT has got to be considered a down season. You cant claim to be the 2nd or 3rd best SEC team over the last decade, yet still consider NIT trips acceptable. We are at a point now that anything less than the NCAA Tourney should be considered a down season. Its going to happen from time to time, but 1 trip in 4 years is unacceptable

 

[jackobee]

Weren't MSU fans having pretty much the same discussion last year when we started non-conference play poorly. I think we ended up in the NCAA and lost by a couple of points to a team that made the final 4.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

I havent been keeping up with MSU basketball that much over the last few years.... but 10 years on the job with the amount of talent he has brought in MSU should have 3-5 Sweet 16s.....

You must not keep up with basketball PERIOD if you think we should be in the Sweet 16 every other year or every third year. Let the grown men have this discussion while you play Wii.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

And if we hadn't played like crap in December against the real non-conference teams we played (who almost all beat us), then we would not have been an 8 seed stuck playing a 1 seed in the second round, and quite possibly could have made the elusive Sweet 16.

 

[Coach34]

And if we hadn't played like crap in December against the real non-conference teams we played (who almost all beat us), then we would not have been an 8 seed stuck playing a 1 seed in the second round, and quite possibly could have made the elusive Sweet 16.

his 17'ing up games that we should win cost us in March. Stans has a damn LOSING record against non-SEC major conference teams. Beating up the McNeese States arent getting us much come March.

 

[DISTRICT DOG]

SWFLDawg that is truest thing anyone will say all day...until we get the big name kids on campus I really don't want to hear about the recruitor thing. When the elliss outlaws and hopsons of the world are eating chik-fil-a in the union then you can call him the recruiting guru that everyone seems to think he is. My bad I take that back I forgot about Marcus Cambell and the joke they called Stelmach

 

[DawgatAuburn]

That one cost us a 7 seed. No doubt in my mind. Beat Bama on Friday night, beat a horrible UGA team on Saturday in front of friends and family at Tech, and you are playing the Hogs for the sixth time in two years, this time for a trophy and with a win there, probably a 6 seed.

 

[GhostDawg.sixpack]

He's averaged 20+ wins per season, and whether he got there by being a great recruiter and a terrible coach, or a terrible recruiter and a great coach, or (the truth) somewhere in between doesn't matter. The fact is, MSU is the second winningest basketball program in the SEC since he's been our coach.

This is the money statement. Unless you're a destination program like UNC, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, et.al., this is the truth which must be understood. Goals should be founded on realistic expectations.

Quite frankly, I've been pleasantly surprised by Stansbury's tenure, as well as entertained by his teams. I see no substantial evidence currently that his removal would even be a topic.

 

[SallyStansbury]

You seem to have watched the same game that I did.

Comments in addition to yours.

1. I think we stayed in the zone to keep Turner from getting abused worse against the bigger guy @ 4. This strategy looks great when the opposing team is cold shooting. Dude got hot. Adjust sooner coach.

2. We have Turner @ 4 to free up the inside for Jarvis to work. If Jarvis gets 20+ points and we lose by 10 who gives a ****? We have other scoring options in Ravern, Osby, Kodi. Please, please consider using them. Bob Knight made this point about Jarvis needing help, but it was with respect to rebounding.

3. Randy: Horrible turnovers at the worst possible times. Nevermind the continued crappy shooting. Stop shooting.

4. Dee: stop shooting. Work on your drives and passing.

5. Benock: no.

6. Coach Stans: adjustments needed. Make them.