No mention of the excellent inbounds play to seal the game?

[VirgilCain]

I was stunned. I assume it was at least somewhat designed, with the lob-pass NOT being the primary option.... maybe it was just great court awareness by the inbounder. Either way, glad to see us make plays at the end of the game because it seems to be a rarity in MSU sports.

I have my fingers crossed for Dee to have the killer-instinct that another past "D" had for us.... "Super D" Darryl Wilson.

 

[VirgilCain]

I was stunned. I assume it was at least somewhat designed, with the lob-pass NOT being the primary option.... maybe it was just great court awareness by the inbounder. Either way, glad to see us make plays at the end of the game because it seems to be a rarity in MSU sports.

I have my fingers crossed for Dee to have the killer-instinct that another past "D" had for us.... "Super D" Darryl Wilson.

 

[missouridawg]

there and just threw it. Whatever it was, worked though, which is nice. Big win today and hopefully Dee is getting his confidence back.

 

[dawgstudent]

Stans wanted it to go to Moultrie but Bost wanted to go deep with it.

 

[Coach34]

Stans wanted it to go to Moultrie but Bost wanted to go deep with it.

 

[VirgilCain]

Inbounding to our best free throw shooter is the obvious move with a obvious foul coming... I assume you mean that Bost reported that Stansbury's game plan was to try and get it into Moultre (our best FT%) but he wasn't open, so Bost saw the opportunity for the deep lob.

The way you stated it makes it sound like Stans and Dee had a disagreement, then Dee pulled a Mike Henig saying, "17-it!...I'm goin' DEEP!"

 

[dawgstudent]

@BradLocke - On last play, Bost said play was designed to throw in to Moultrie, but in huddle Bost told Bryant, "Go long."

@Bulldogsradio - Bost on last play, said Stansbury said to give it to Moultrie, but Bost
told Bryant to go deep. Bost didn't want ball in backcourt.

 

[Faustdog]

@BradLocke - On last play, Bost said play was designed to throw in to Moultrie, but in huddle Bost told Bryant, "Go long."

@Bulldogsradio - Bost on last play, said Stansbury said to give it to Moultrie, but Bost
told Bryant to go deep. Bost didn't want ball in backcourt.

This doesn't make sense. I don't believe Bost told anyone to "go long." And I don't believe that "Bost didn't want the ball in the backcourt." They tried to get the ball in to the primary guys, and it wasn't there. The next and only play that was available was the lob over the top. They did it, and I'm glad that they did.<div>
</div><div>Anyone who has ever thrown an inbounds pass from the baseline knows that if the last defender is at about the three point line on the side of the court you are inbounding from, and you've got a guy behind him, you throw it. It almost can't go wrong. It's an obvious play and a severe defensive breakdown.

</div>

 

[VirgilCain]

I think we are reading to much into a twitter message with a limit of 140 characters... I would have to assume that Bost meant something like "Bryant, if they overplay the obvious (and smartest) option to Moultre then be ready for the deep lob..."

There's no way that Dee was 100% dead-set on throwing the lob.... We knew Bama had to foul.....what if Moutre had been wide open? Then Dee's lob would have been the dumbest play of all time, given that our best FT-shooter was wide open in the backcourt... even if it ended up working out, it'd still be dumb.

 

[Faustdog]

I think we are reading to much into a twitter message with a limit of 140 characters... I would have to assume that Bost meant something like "Bryant, if they overplay the obvious (and smartest) option to Moultre then be ready for the deep lob..."

There's no way that Dee was 100% dead-set on throwing the lob.... We knew Bama had to foul.....what if Moutre had been wide open? Then Dee's lob would have been the dumbest play of all time, given that our best FT-shooter was wide open in the backcourt... even if it ended up working out, it'd still be dumb.

Exactly right. We went with the play that was there. If you watch the replay, we were looking underneath and went with the long pass only after seeing that it was the best option. That's why I don't buy any of this Bost calling his own play BS. It was the obvious play, and it was an option off of the play that was called.

 

[shsdawg]

if you actually WATCHED the play Bost tried to go short but nothing was open. Both he and Bryant made a heads up play, like well coached players should. You just need to give it a rest dude. You are almostcaricature of yourself now.

 

[bruiser.sixpack]

Actually had he thrown it too long and no one had touched it before it went out of bounds on our end, then Bama would have gotten the ball to throw in under their own goal with 3 seconds to make a play. It was a perfectly executed over the top throw....only after other options were taken away.... It may have been an option and Dee may have put it in as a back up plan.....but it wasn't the first option. It worked...We Won.

 

[Predestined]

Had to take NYOD's place!

 

[RougeDawg]

Would take a deep ridiculous 3 pointer with 23 seconds left on the shot clock and his team up 4 or 5 with about 1:20 to play? You obviously didn't see our well coached Dee do this Thursday night. A well coached team would have moved the ball around for a decent shot with around 5 seconds on the shot clock. Run it down no matter if you make shot or not. Our piss poor clock management at the end of games when we have a big lead is horrendous, and who is responsible for those types of things? I guarantee it isn't the towel boy under the goal.

Stan's talent level this season trumps his coaching skills, or should I say lack of. Do we ever run real set plays on offense? I've been watching for many years and the only thing we run is the Stans rotation, as he circles his hand on the sideline, hoping and praying the defense will break or fall down and someone comes open.

 

[RonnyAtmosphere]

..."stunned by an excellent inbounds play to seal the game?"


I don't get it.


I am stunned you are posting on this board.

 

[gravedigger]

"I told Brian in the huddle to go long," Bost said. "Coach told us to throw it to Arnett (Moultrie) but I figured if we threw it in the backcourt, they were still going to have 2 seconds left and we're going to be doing 1-and-1 and they had time to get something off. I just told him to go long and he did."</p>

I'm afraid Bost simply said 17 it.

 

[oem]

As you stated, what Bost did was basketball 101.<div>
</div><div>And some fans don't know enough about the game to get that. They want to turn it into a stanstroversy.</div>

 

[drunkernhelldawg]

That's the worst case scenario, and I've seen it happen with disasterous results for the team that threw the errant inball. Can't remember the game but I think it was a State game.

 

[SallyStansbury]

I think we are close to having evidence that Dee said 17 it, I'm going to do whatever I want (nevermind that it was the right call).

Why is it thatDee is allowed to stare off into the distance during timeouts ignoring the coach, then go and again ignore the coach (by running a good play) and then tweet about it saying as much and Jamont is allowed to give Coach Stansbury and Stewart/Hansborough the middle finger and do whatever he wants, but Turner, Osby, and now Deville receive *** chewings the first time they turn the ball over or do something other than ourprescribed"offense".

My guess is that these double standards, along with the ineptitude on offensive scheme leads to team disharmony and the multitude of transfers.

In addition to my bellyaching I would like to commend the poster in the earlier thread who outlined the positive things Coach Stans did to help us win that game. Good post.

Also, call me GenieWeenie or whatever you must, but I find threads that make off-color comments about Meo or her kids pretty pathetic. Lets leave Coach Stansbury's family out of this.

 

[oem]

you know that old saying that there is no such thing as a dumb question?<div>
</div><div>your post is proof that simply isn't true.</div>

 

[Hanmudog]

If Dee throws that ball out of bounds then you guys would be here bitching about why Stansbury did not tell Dee to get it to our best FT shooter in Moultrie. Stansbury cannot win with some of you. We just beat a team that most of you thought we were going to lose to but that just is not good enough is it?

 

[VirgilCain]

I think I was wrong earlier. I thought that if we had launched out the other end of the court then Bama would have to inbound it under our goal.... but on second thought, I'm pretty sure I was wrong. I think the ball could come back to where we initially threw it in from, under Bama's goal (given that the ball was not touched by anyone in play).

My original logic was that it would be better to force Bama to go the full court length to score the go ahead points, instead of forcing a bad pass to a guarded Moultre under Bama's own goal..... it's moot point now anyway

 

[shsdawg]

It does make it hard to fire Stans when we win. Sorry man, maybe we will lose the next one.

 

[drunkernhelldawg]

Yes. That's what I meant. The original spot. My memory of it happening is vague, but I'm thinking it was in a game against LSU. Can't remember whether we wound up losing because of it.

 

[RougeDawg]

Stans has taken teams with great talent to mediocrity in the NIT. Whereas a great coach would have gotten us Past round 2, at least once, with some of the teams Stans has coached. He's an average coach who has recruited pretty damn good talent. Hence why we are where we are. Usually NIT and occasionally NCAA tourney. As far back as I can remember we have been underachieving with the level of talet we have on scholarship.

Hence, the talent is SO great this year, even Stans inability to coach doesn't keep them from winning. Let me know when you see us run some set offensive plays other than the Stan's Rotation.

 

[dawgstudent]

that's a pretty impressive stat.

Don't know if it's 11 SEC wins or 11 overall wins.

 

[Tds &amp; Beer]

That was actually the sign of a well coached point guard.

Bahahahahahahahahaha. That might be the sign of a good point guard. Actually the way Bost never listens to Rick at all is a sign of a ****** ****** 17ed up coach. It's really sad.

 

[drunkernhelldawg]

Wow. You are going too far.

 

[Hanmudog]

Stans has taken teams with great talent to mediocrity in the NIT. Whereas a great coach would have gotten us Past round 2, at least once, with some of the teams Stans has coached. He's an average coach who has recruited pretty damn good talent. Hence why we are where we are. Usually NIT and occasionally NCAA tourney. As far back as I can remember we have been underachieving with the level of talet we have on scholarship.

Hence, the talent is SO great this year, even Stans inability to coach doesn't keep them from winning. Let me know when you see us run some set offensive plays other than the Stan's Rotation.

For accuracy's sake, Stansbury has been to 6 NCAA tourneys and only 3 NITs.