You're completely ignoring two key words from my post. WITH POTENTIAL. And yes, I'd rather watch a team that hustles, shows potential, and wins 12 games than one that wins 18 with no excuse for not winning 24 because with the first I know the team can get better and become a winning program. With the second I know it will never get any better and only get worse unless a change is made.
Just back from the Hump
- Thread starter FreeDawg
- Start date
Who said a dang thing about playing time? No one until you.
The point is simple: we can't hustle and lose for long if we want to build a program. A season, maybe two, of flirting with double digit wins, and you can still recruit top-flight talent with the promise of improvement. After that, it gets sketchy at best.
The point is simple: we can't hustle and lose for long if we want to build a program. A season, maybe two, of flirting with double digit wins, and you can still recruit top-flight talent with the promise of improvement. After that, it gets sketchy at best.
Believe me, I don't disagree at all. However, I'm not sure that these two classes aren't exactly what the program needs right now. Hard workers that will lead by example and grab a young "blue chipper" by the throat if he steps out of line. I believe that the talent will come, but it can't be only the coaches who teach them how to hustle and handle themselves.
Just wait until we have Stansbury-type expectations from Ray
you know, expecting 24 wins when we only get 18, then we can all hate Ray too.
you know, expecting 24 wins when we only get 18, then we can all hate Ray too.
I am thrilled with the fact we forced 27 turnovers. It took last year's team about 5 games to force that many. Turnovers=Easy baskets.
I still think we will be lucky to get to 10 wins because of our size and reliance on Wendell Lewis but I am liking what I see so far from the freshmen. We are some unlucky bastards though. I have never seen a team have this many injuries two games into a season.
I still think we will be lucky to get to 10 wins because of our size and reliance on Wendell Lewis but I am liking what I see so far from the freshmen. We are some unlucky bastards though. I have never seen a team have this many injuries two games into a season.
I haven't seen any video from either game so far, but ...
from what I can tell from what you guys seem to be saying, Ray is doing a good job. Sounds like the players are really hustling, which is a lot more than the did last year ... some seemed to have a case of "prima donna-itis" ... one in particular. And when he was first announced I thought he would be good ... he presents himself well and seems very well spoken and intelligent. Plus he just seems to look the part of a basketball coach (for what that's worth). But I'm all for giving him a chance. If he can make anything at all out of this year after most of the players jumped ship, then he will be a miracle worker.
from what I can tell from what you guys seem to be saying, Ray is doing a good job. Sounds like the players are really hustling, which is a lot more than the did last year ... some seemed to have a case of "prima donna-itis" ... one in particular. And when he was first announced I thought he would be good ... he presents himself well and seems very well spoken and intelligent. Plus he just seems to look the part of a basketball coach (for what that's worth). But I'm all for giving him a chance. If he can make anything at all out of this year after most of the players jumped ship, then he will be a miracle worker.
Yeah, if we get to the point we're consistently underperforming by more than 5 wins per season for several seasons in a row, you'd better believe we're going to hate the coach. No matter who he is. I was a huge Stansbury fan and stuck with him almost until the end. But he destroyed our basketball program towards the end.
Both guys mentioned = tremendous personal work ethic guys that succeeded in spite of a lack of coaching. But I'm glad you could name me two players that developed and improved drastically in fifteen seasons.
I didn't say Stans did nothing right. His early teams were fun to watch much like this one is. Still very questionable coaching decisions that constantly burned us at the end of big games, but at least they tried hard. He hadn't done much right for the last 5 years, culminating in keeping Sidney after the fight, while basically running off Bailey, Turner, Osby, and Gardner.
I don't blame Croom, Stansbury, and Polk when something goes wrong unless it IS their fault. In that way, I'm logical. Was it Cohen's fault his first two teams here sucked? Was it Mullen's fault that Croom chose to not recruit OL for 2 seasons leaving the hole in the depth chart that killed us last year? It IS his fault for not getting JUCOs to fill the gaps, which he tried desperately to do and mostly failed in 2010 and 2011...so in that manner, they share the blame. What part of this team, thusfar, is Ray's fault?
Fact is, nothing can be blamed on Croom or Polk anymore, but there is still a crapload of problems that can be squarely blamed on Stansbury. And will continue to be. When will it expire? Ray's third year most likely.
What has Frank Martin done at South Carolina better than Rick Ray has done at MSU thusfar? Situations are similar. When they start really outperforming us, then we can get worried about the hire we made... until then, I'll choose to be optimistic about the path that we are going down.
You would think that if someone was able to find them, they would also be able to report the right numbers. Not so the case in this instance.
Based on what we're encountering with Mullen and our football team, I don't think we'll have to wait long for that. I still cannot even begin to wrap my head around the fact that people are posting that they'd be fine with Mullen "moving on" after this season.
How do you hit a moving target? I'll give it a quick shot.
Frank Martin's calling card is his ability to reel in blue chippers, so he better do it early and often at SC. His spring class was uninspiring, but this class includes the Thornwell kid from Oak Hill (top 100) which is a start. But aGAIN, he better do it more often, or in a couple of years HE will be on the hot seat.
Only you know what your true agenda is, but when you pull the switch-a-roo when someone doesn't follow your lead, its pretty clear it isn't to have an honest discussion about college basketball.
Frank Martin's calling card is his ability to reel in blue chippers, so he better do it early and often at SC. His spring class was uninspiring, but this class includes the Thornwell kid from Oak Hill (top 100) which is a start. But aGAIN, he better do it more often, or in a couple of years HE will be on the hot seat.
Only you know what your true agenda is, but when you pull the switch-a-roo when someone doesn't follow your lead, its pretty clear it isn't to have an honest discussion about college basketball.
I asked for one under a very simple pretense: The fact that there haven't been very many. I've made the same post before and even listed Swat and Moultrie as two guys that drastically improved during their time here. My agenda was not to say there has been none. But feel free to link me to either of the two giving Stansbury any credit for getting them to where they are at...if you can? The fact that you can only give 2 over 15 years proves that point. My "agenda" is simple fact, that player development has SUCKED here for a long time.
Winning that tournament proves what exactly? No one gives a damn about that tournament except the teams on the bubble/outside the dance. He underachieved 6 out of his last 7 years in the regular season. He then underachieved in the NCAAs 5 of 6 years, giving him a pass for what I thought was an excellent performance we saw in the Memphis loss in 08. If you can't see all this, I can't help you, but you should really question your own agenda. One run through an SEC tournament doesn't change these facts.
Took Stansbury 4 years to rebuild us and get us dancing when he took over. Are we going to pretend that he didn't inherit a MUCH, MUCH better situation than Rick Ray? With much more recent relevant success? He already had all the recruiting ties in place from being our lead recruiter for NINE years prior to getting the job. So, explain this one to me...if you can? Rick Ray should be held to a higher standard than that? Took Gregg Marshall 5 years to get Wichita St into the NCAA's... 5 years of consistent improvement for one of the best coaches in all of CBB IMO. We are not a "one and done" destination school. We are not a "glamour" program that can pull national bluechips. As such, the length of a rebuild here hasn't changed much, if at at all over the years.
Saying it doesn't take 3 years in basketball is situation-dependent. It easily can take that long or longer, or it can happen quickly...it's all dependent on getting one or two key players. Players that aren't really currently "out there" for us, at least not in MS...Not until the 2015 class anyway. I also think our rebuild is longer than some because it is unlikely Ray is willing to stoop to the same measures in recruiting/transfers that Stansbury did. I'll leave it at that.
Touche'. I haven't pulled a "switcheroo" on anything. You are the one talking out of both sides of your mouth on this. Taking up for Stansbury, while "it doesn't take three years so Ray better have success quick" while pretending that you are supporting our coach and team makes your agenda the one in question.
My agenda is to support this team and my school. Also to believe in and support Rick Ray until which time he proves to me he is NOT the right man for the job. In doing that, I'm not going to sit and watch him be blamed for problems that aren't his fault. Simple. Logical.
Last edited:
Blue chippers that play hard wasn't an option, genius.
He's talking about two teams. Last years ballers who didn't hustle vs this years weaker team who does. He'd rather watch the harder playing team.
He's talking about two teams. Last years ballers who didn't hustle vs this years weaker team who does. He'd rather watch the harder playing team.
I think your agenda has been throrougly fllushed out with this response.
First you want the name of one player that improved under Stansbury. Then you want to add someone who didn't improve because of their own work ethic. And now you want someone who gives Stansbury credit for it.
And you don't have an agenda?
Ridiculous.
Blue chippers who play hard IS an option. Somehow I'm not surprised that you don't know that.
Right. We are just going to go into other states and take these types of players from UNC, Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, etc** The "blue-chip" talent that Stans landed almost always had outstanding character flaws that made them a risk not worth taking to bigtime programs.
We haven't had/held that combination of qualities in a SINGLE player since Richard Williams was roaming the sidelines...
There are a couple of guys coming up through JPS right now that could potentially be this for us though... This is where Ray will prove/disprove his recruiting meddle.
You have a hard time making a post without taking a swipe at Stansbury. Why is that?
I would like to think - hope actually - that Ray doesn't see the same limitations on the recruiting front that you do.
Look, I get the whole premise that
You believe that by simply being a Dick, you gain credibility. But there is the notion that you have to understand what you read. The poster you responded to was observing that BETWEEN two teams of which neither had or has blue chippers who hustle, he'd rather watch the less talented onethat hustles.
Everyone, captain obvious, would rather watch the team you describe.
You believe that by simply being a Dick, you gain credibility. But there is the notion that you have to understand what you read. The poster you responded to was observing that BETWEEN two teams of which neither had or has blue chippers who hustle, he'd rather watch the less talented onethat hustles.
Everyone, captain obvious, would rather watch the team you describe.
Come on, Engie, stop arguing with Blew. A) He's a UK fan, not a State fan. B) Blew is always right. He knows more than all of SPS combined and is never wrong. Just ask Blew, he'll tell you.
Blew's agenda is clear. I'd also put Zimmerman in the group of players that improved over the course of their career here. But you're dead on that their weren't many. And other than Swat & Moultrie, ALL of them were in Rick's early tenure. Back when he recruited hard working character guys and role players versus ballers who didn't give a damn.
Blew's agenda is clear. I'd also put Zimmerman in the group of players that improved over the course of their career here. But you're dead on that their weren't many. And other than Swat & Moultrie, ALL of them were in Rick's early tenure. Back when he recruited hard working character guys and role players versus ballers who didn't give a damn.
Yep, keep on bein' the board's biggest *******, Blew. The only time you show up is to tell us all how wrong we are and how we should enjoy being the suck in athletics or never want more than to be mediocre. Now go back to being an ******* on the UK boards.
The same reason you always take up for him, I suppose.**
I would like to think - hope actually - that Ray isn't wasting his time recruiting 5* talent in other states trying to get them to come play ball at MSU(which is what you are implying that you want him to do, since there is NO "blue chip" talent available for the 2013 class in Mississippi. NONE.) You keep wanting this "blue chip talent" when everyone keeps trying to tell you that it is NOT out there for the taking in MS right now.
So, I want to see Ray spend most of his available time getting "role players" to plug the holes, and then put all his focus on Devin Booker(2014) and Malik Newman(2015). They are the next two blue chip talents coming through the ranks in MISSISSIPPI, and we should have a real chance at both of them. Problem is, with your approach, NEITHER would be on campus till Ray's 3rd year. Newman his 4th. So, you will have long since given up by then. **Since it doesn't take 3 years in basketball**
Realistic approach FTW. I realize this is going to be difficult for you to comprehend at this point.
Last edited:
Not hard to comprehend at all. You've managed to make Peachbowl look consistent in this thread and that's saying something.
And as usual, you've done a whole bunch of bitching without ever really saying a damn thing...
Holy hell, NOW I see why everyone considers you the worst poster.
You're not even living in reality.
You're not even living in reality.
How many different "agendas" do I have and what are they? I really would like to know...since you've "flushed them out" and all. The word "agenda" implies something subliminal. I told you explicitly what my goals and expectations are, and it is something that I have made clear ALL ALONG. Only someone with their own "agenda" would focus so intently for someone else's...
"my minions" - LOL, when it becomes clear that the board disagrees with you - It's a CONSPIRACY! Thanks for putting my opinion on a pedestal...but unfortunately this isn't a popularity contest to me and never has been. I speak my opinion, surround it with as many facts as I possibly can, and people can make their own decision about it. I enjoy in-depth discussion with those with opposing viewpoints, something you haven't even come close to offering.
It's not my fault that most of this board thinks of you as an idiot. You clearly have done that on your own over time.
Last edited:
Do you really think I give a rat's *** what this "board" thinks of me? Really?
This board is full of sports illiterates and the fact that so many of them disagree with me is comforting.
Here's what happened in this thread. You asked questions, I answered them. You didn't like the answers, so you changed the questions.
You need a longer handled shovel.
I think you have that backwards
You act like we'd be better off with Polk, Stansbury, and Croom as our coaches, yet we're the sports illiterates.
You act like we'd be better off with Polk, Stansbury, and Croom as our coaches, yet we're the sports illiterates.
LOL... "I'm not wrong, everyone else is just sports illiterate" - olblue(a sports genius that has been wrong about every coaching decision we've made in the past decade)
Irony at it's finest!
Last edited: