My last post on scheduling awhile...

[Optimus Prime 4]

[No message]

 

[hatfieldms]

I can't disprove those were our seeds? Well no ****. But the idea that scheduling harder when we have not been able to win all of our non-conference games against a weaker slate will somehow improve our seeding is unbelievably stupid, or about par for the course from you.

It wasn't our 12-4 SEC record that got us an 8 seed two years ago, it was going 9-5 non-conference. And now you'd take away from the 9 wins by sending us to North Carolina and Kansas so we "can get our name out there." As what, a have game will travel whipping boy?

Is there a gun in your house? Load it, put it in your mouth, and pull the trigger.

I think his point is if we are going to lose non conference games it might as well be to better opponents. It does look better for us to lose to. What loss would look better? UNC or Sand Diego?

 

[seshomoru]

I think his point is if we are going to lose non conference games it might as well be to better opponents. It does look better for us to lose to. What loss would look better? UNC or Sand Diego?

Just as long as it ends in an MSU loss, Coach is cool with it. No where in his mind can he comprehend a solution that involves MSU winning.

 

[msudawg12]

I also want to point out that just wait until ESPN starts fellating the SEC this year and see if a team that wouldnt have been favored last year is perceived mroe favorably this year. They do that ****. We all know it.

but yes, I'd give anything to have better ooc opponents. We need better competition to be perceived as a better team and also to become a better team. You gotta play the best to be the best or you'll play down to your opponent in typical bulldog fashion

 

[Sutterkane]

if we can't beat mid majors should we really expect to be in the tournament and perform well?

 

[hatfieldms]

I think his point is if we are going to lose non conference games it might as well be to better opponents. It does look better for us to lose to. What loss would look better? UNC or Sand Diego?

Just as long as it ends in an MSU loss, Coach is cool with it. No where in his mind can he comprehend a solution that involves MSU winning.

I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying he is right in saying that if we are going to lose non conference games they might as well be against better competition. Hell I wish we would go undefeated every year in non conference, but obviously we spend the most part of the beginning of the season figuring out what line ups to use

 

[DawgNDCity]

but I agree with Coach that the OOC schedule needs to be tougher (and I am a Stansbury fan). The General is right to say that we could beat a lot of patsies and make the tournament, but this past year we played some patsies and lost (flukishly, I believe). We had the same winning percentage if not better than Tennessee and we were not even in the conversation for the tournament, whereas everybody assumed that UT was in. Why? Because they lost to better people than we did. I'm not for scheduling automatic losses, but I really don't believe there is anybody that we absolutely cannot beat in basketball. A win against one of these teams virtually seals the deal for the tournament early on, and a loss to a top RPI team really does not hurt you nearly as much as a loss to the San Diego's of the world. In fact, a win versus San Diego doesn't help you much more than a loss to UNC.
</p>

 

[dawgstudent]

we beat San Diego and UNC-Charlotte, we would have been in the tourney without having to win the SEC Tournament.

The main problem with Stansbury besides his lack of NCAA tournament success is why do we lose to these teams in December. Stansbury needs to figure that out.

 

[Bdog9090]

Stansbury (I'm a fan) has a hard time winning the games he should in our OOC. Figure out what the problem is there, then start scheduling harder teams.

 

[jackstefano]

asd