Ok, can we agree that the whole Stansbury debate is really 2 debates?

[gravedigger]

Debate # 1. Given Stansbury's ability to recruit and the talent he has brought in over the years, his assistant coaching experience and the fact that the SEC is not the absolute hardest conference to win in (but it's top 4 according to Sagarin ratings currently), has he sufficiently PROGRESSED as a coach to indicate there are better things to come?

Debate # 2. THAT THIS ALWAYS DEGENERATES TO.......Can we find a better coach right now to come to MSU?

My opinion on # 1. No. He has not gotten better as a court coach and he still makes the same boneheaded mistakes that cost us games and it boils my testicles when it happens to the point I come on here and blast him when I probably should shut the hell up.

My opinion on # 2. No. Not with enough certainty to get rid of a coach that as DS points out has with near 100% certainty gotten us TO the dance. Our options of who MSU is willing to invest in just doesnt justify that.

My point: the mindless debates about this keep morphing between these two without anyone defining it in the beginning.

 

[gravedigger]

Debate # 1. Given Stansbury's ability to recruit and the talent he has brought in over the years, his assistant coaching experience and the fact that the SEC is not the absolute hardest conference to win in (but it's top 4 according to Sagarin ratings currently), has he sufficiently PROGRESSED as a coach to indicate there are better things to come?

Debate # 2. THAT THIS ALWAYS DEGENERATES TO.......Can we find a better coach right now to come to MSU?

My opinion on # 1. No. He has not gotten better as a court coach and he still makes the same boneheaded mistakes that cost us games and it boils my testicles when it happens to the point I come on here and blast him when I probably should shut the hell up.

My opinion on # 2. No. Not with enough certainty to get rid of a coach that as DS points out has with near 100% certainty gotten us TO the dance. Our options of who MSU is willing to invest in just doesnt justify that.

My point: the mindless debates about this keep morphing between these two without anyone defining it in the beginning.

 

[gravedigger]

Debate # 1. Given Stansbury's ability to recruit and the talent he has brought in over the years, his assistant coaching experience and the fact that the SEC is not the absolute hardest conference to win in (but it's top 4 according to Sagarin ratings currently), has he sufficiently PROGRESSED as a coach to indicate there are better things to come?

Debate # 2. THAT THIS ALWAYS DEGENERATES TO.......Can we find a better coach right now to come to MSU?

My opinion on # 1. No. He has not gotten better as a court coach and he still makes the same boneheaded mistakes that cost us games and it boils my testicles when it happens to the point I come on here and blast him when I probably should shut the hell up.

My opinion on # 2. No. Not with enough certainty to get rid of a coach that as DS points out has with near 100% certainty gotten us TO the dance. Our options of who MSU is willing to invest in just doesnt justify that.

My point: the mindless debates about this keep morphing between these two without anyone defining it in the beginning.

 

[gravedigger]

Debate # 1. Given Stansbury's ability to recruit and the talent he has brought in over the years, his assistant coaching experience and the fact that the SEC is not the absolute hardest conference to win in (but it's top 4 according to Sagarin ratings currently), has he sufficiently PROGRESSED as a coach to indicate there are better things to come?

Debate # 2. THAT THIS ALWAYS DEGENERATES TO.......Can we find a better coach right now to come to MSU?

My opinion on # 1. No. He has not gotten better as a court coach and he still makes the same boneheaded mistakes that cost us games and it boils my testicles when it happens to the point I come on here and blast him when I probably should shut the hell up.

My opinion on # 2. No. Not with enough certainty to get rid of a coach that as DS points out has with near 100% certainty gotten us TO the dance. Our options of who MSU is willing to invest in just doesnt justify that.

My point: the mindless debates about this keep morphing between these two without anyone defining it in the beginning.

 

[dawgstudent]

I get frustrated as hell with his teams but at the same time, he wins and that's all I can ask for.

 

[bulldogbaja]

Because of the whole "agree" thing

 

[RonnyAtmosphere]

..resigned to Internet messageboards.

Out in the real world where people deal with things via common sense, Stansbury is seen as a winner, as well as a coach doing a masterful job of drawing quality recruits to a school that has little basketball history or tradition.

Meanwhile, on the Internet, where all the misfits & mentally challenged congregate to swap wisdom, it's an on-going debate: "Is Stansbury good enough for Miss. State?"

My advise is carry on all the Stansbury arguments you want to, just keep them confined to Internet messageboards. Because this stupid crap will not fly in the real world.

 

[Irondawg]

basically I don't think he's progressed as a coach and you can make the argument that his reccruiting is even going downhill as we've missed on the last several big guys we've tried to get. Next year is his big year to prove he's still a big gun in recruiting as a ton of home-grown talent.

I feel our teams overall have gotten worse the past couple of years, but at least the SEC is down as well so it makes us still above-average.

The key thing I'd like to see out of Stans is hire an offensive coordinator. Much like Tex Winter is for Phil Jackson - find a guy that loves to teach offense, is a mediocre recruiter and let him run that side of the ship. Stans is much more interested in defense and rebounding.

 

[Johnson85]

There are better things to come b/c of the law of averages. I don't think Stansbury chokes in the tournament. He just in general has some holes as a floor/x's and o's coach. It hurts us in the tourney, especially in close games, but his teams played well in losses to Duke and Memphis; It wasn't his tourney coaching that killed us, it was coaching limitations that allowed two good teams to end up as 8/9 seeds. At some point, he'll end up with a team that gets hot during the tourney that either has a 5-7 seed or a 11-13 seed, and he'll be able to make some noise.

//eternalsunshineku?

 

[mstateglfr]

Out in the real world where people deal with things via common sense, Stansbury is seen as a winner, as well as a coach doing a masterful job of drawing quality recruits to a school that has little basketball history or tradition.

At what point will our program have history and/or tradition?

In the last 20 years we have been to a Sweet 16, a Final Four, Won the SECT a couple times, Won the SEC outright, Won the SEC Division a ton, and been to the NCAA Tournament 9 times.

Is that not yet enough 'history'? Is 20 years of consistent success and a few points of big success not enough for 'tradition'?

Not arguing, really just curious what has to be done for the program to get these labels. Win even more? Do it for even longer? Get more big successes?

Gonzaga, for example, has only been really elite successful for the last 13ish years. They have had more national success than us, but in less time and havent gone as deep into March in that time as MSU has in that 20 year span. They are certainly more consistent in making the NCAAs though.

They are a team that i would consider to have tradition and history...yet havent been at it for quite as long and dont have that Final Four.

 

[DerHntr]

Meanwhile, on the Internet, where all the misfits & mentally challenged congregate to swap wisdom, it's an on-going debate: "Is Stansbury good enough for Miss. State?"

way to go there Einstein. wouldn't you be a happier person if you just deleted your account, blocked SPS from all of your computers, and went on with your miserable life? here is how you do it in case you don't know:

1. Click on My Computer
2. Click on Local Disk (C
3. Click on the Windows folder
4. Click on the System32 folder
5. Click on the Drivers folder
6. Click on the Etc. folder
7. Click on the Hosts file
8. Choose to view this file with Notepad
9. Type the following at the end of the document:

127.0.0.1 http://www.sixpackspeak.yuku.com
127.0.0.1 sixpackspeak.yuku.com
127.0.0.1 http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com

10. Close and save the document

This will work for IE and is supposed to work for Firefox. If it doesn't work for you then I will go out and find another way if you want.

 

[War Machine Dawg]

[No message]

 

[HighPointDawg]

I have no issue with complaining about the stupid coach mistakes or what we should have done, etc.. we all do that.

I have issue with the fact that if we get down by 2 damn points with 14 minutes to go in the first half on the road, this board starts 15 threads on why he should be fired... then we win and it makes the board unbearable for all the back and forth EAT **** posts...

 

[Liverdawg]

And I am especially in agreement on point #2. When Arkansas hired Pelphrey I was scared. I can't believe that situation has not improved. Most people would agree that Arkansas is a better job than State. With Anthony Grant taking the Alabama job, I'm not really sure who you could hire that would improve on our success. To me, if anything needs to be done, it would be to bring in an older assistant who purely is an X's and O's kinda guy. More than anything, this argument solidifies the fact that we are a basketball school. If Mullen gets us to consistent 6-7 win seasons I can't imagine these questions would be asked.

 

[fishwater99]

Debate # 1. Given Stansbury's ability to recruit and the talent he has brought in over the years, his assistant coaching experience and the fact that the SEC is not the absolute hardest conference to win in (but it's top 4 according to Sagarin ratings currently), has he sufficiently PROGRESSED as a coach to indicate there are better things to come?

He has progressed some as a coach, but he can not win consistently outside the SEC and has a hard time with the NCAA b/c he can not game plan for teams that he has not played on a regular basis and on a quick turnaround like the NCAA tourney. That's just the facts...

 

[patdog]

He's been with a couple of points of a Sweet 16 more than once. You're saying that it's impossible for him to do just a very little better than he's already done? That's ridiculous.

 

[Coach34]

Stansbury Sheep- believe that winning in the SEC West is enough and enjoy just making the tourney

Everybody else- believes that scheduling an extremely easy non-conference schedule opponents and winning in the weakest power basketball conference is ok but nothing great. Feels that one Sweet 16 in 12 years is not too much to ask. Wants to see the program takes steps to advance more nationally.

Thats pretty much it

 

[patdog]

Most of us realize that the chance of hiring a coach who is even as good as Stans, much less better, are pretty damn slim so we're much better off staying with what we've got (which is only the most successful program in any sport in the state) than taking a huge risk of going back to making the NCAA tournament only a couple of times a decade.

 

[AssEndDawg]

This will work for IE and is supposed to work for Firefox.

Sorry, but if you really typed this after all your advanced computer instructions I have to laugh. It's like making a good point and then ending it with the one thing that proves you don't understand anything about the subject you made a good point on.

 

[VegasDawg13]

He coached well in the tournament in 2008. We blew out Oregon and played 1-seed Memphis better than anyone else did in the tournament until Kansas beat them in the national championship game. Also, in 2005, we blew out Stanford and played 1-seed Duke down to the wire. This isn't as impressive to me because Duke was overrated and showed it in their next game.

Stansbury isn't absolved of all guilt because neither of those teams should have been playing one seeds in the second round, but your assertion that he coaches poorly every time he gets into a tournament situation is just plain false.

 

[AssEndDawg]

Stansbury Sheep- like winning

Everybody else- are stupid douche bags

That's pretty much it

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

.

 

[dawgstudent]

are Stansbury sheep as you like to say. You act like "everybody else" is the majority. I say "everybody else" is maybe 5%-10%.

 

[RonnyAtmosphere]

...I know how to delete an account, dumbass.

And, yes, only the misfits & mentally challenged are serious about replacing Stansbury.

The rest of the normal people outside this messageboard understands what Stansbury is up again, & appreciates how he has kept Miss. State basketball one of the top four programs in the conference.

Of course, like I said, if you & your ilk insist on discussing the merits of Stansbury's viability, then please keep that conversation confimed to this messageboard. Because if you start running that ignorant smack out in the real world, you are going to be treated like the weirdo you are.

 

[patdog]

are Stansbury sheep as you like to say. You act like "everybody else" is the majority. I say "everybody else" is maybe 5%-10%.

More like 1% to 5%.

 

[MadDawg.sixpack]

Pro-Stans people (not sheep) - Believe Stans has done a good job with the program. While never even insinuating that he is perfect, they rarely get a chance to even discuss their disappointment due to having to defend Stans from the haters.

Stans-Haters - Are emotional vaginas who do stupid things like call for Stans to be fired in the middle of a road game against the #14 ranked team - that we go on to win.

 

[bullysleftnut]

Pro-Stans people (not sheep) - Believe Stans has done a good job with the program. While never even insinuating that he is perfect, they rarely get a chance to even discuss their disappointment due to having to defend Stans from the haters.

Stans-Haters - Are emotional vaginas who do stupid things like call for Stans to be fired in the middle of a road game against the #14 ranked team - that we go on to win<span style="font-weight: bold;">, and then say we didn't win by enough</span>.

 

[DerHntr]

it does work for IE and didn't work once I uploaded firefox to my computer. this is even though i was told this would stop you from viewing regardless of the system you use. so, go figure. it's not like i claimed to be an interwebs guru or a computer engineer/programmer. i was told how to block websites on computers so that i could do it for a friend in an attempt to keep the kids from porn for good. also, typing isn't exactly a chore.

 

[DerHntr]

[No message]

 

[Stormrider81]

Stansbury is a great recruiter in the sense that he gets quality talent to Starkville, MS and MSU, which has no basketball history to speak of other than what he has had a hand in. Stansbury is not a great recruiter in the same sense that Calipari and Roy Williams are. Whereas they sign top tier talent, many of which are NBA level, year after year, Stansbury signs quality, but not NBA level, talent.

edited for spelling

 

[Stormrider81]

At least 90% of the fanbase are against firing Stansbury at this time. It's just that the other 5-10% are on the internet and are loud mouths.

Then there is the problem of dividing up an entire fanbase into two categories.

 

[Stormrider81]

and those categories are extreme positions. There are those of us, which probably constitutes over 50% of the fanbase, that realize that Stansbury has shortcomings as a coach, yet at the same time this group has enough sense to know that firing Stansbury at this juncture would most probably be catostrophic to the program.

 

[fishwater99]

See last year and soon to be this year. Stans gets bad losses early in the season and then our seeding sucks in the NCAA. Then we lose to a higher seed and do not make the Sweet 16... I am saying that he can't win consistently outside the SEC against major competition and his record proves that he just can't do it. I hope I am wrong this year, time will tell.</p>

 

[Coach34]

For example- one of the Sheepherders, HD6, insists that he does not want to improve the schedule and advance the program nationally. He has been quoted numerous times saying "we haven't beat top teams, yet you want to schedule more?" That is the sheep mantra- let's just keep playing Valley, play solidly in conference, and hopefully make the tourney There are many more people out there as State fans that want us to beef up the schedule and advance the program- our AD included. If Stansbury can handle that, great. If not, he needs to get out of the way and let's try and progress

 

[Hanmudog]

For example- one of the Sheepherders, HD6, insists that he does not want to improve the schedule and advance the program nationally. He has been quoted numerous times saying "we haven't beat top teams, yet you want to schedule more?" That is the sheep mantra- let's just keep playing Valley, play solidly in conference, and hopefully make the tourney There are many more people out there as State fans that want us to beef up the schedule and advance the program- our AD included. If Stansbury can handle that, great. If not, he needs to get out of the way and let's try and progress

Lets take Stansbury's name out of the equation for a minute: Imagine a coach that has been to 6 of 8 NCAA tournaments and averaged well over 20 wins a season while finishing at or near the top of his conference most years. A coach that also sells out season tickets with regularity. Would you get this coach "out of the way" if you were an athletic director? Most State fans would want Byrne crucified if he were to force Stansbury out.

 

[HD6]

doesn't make me a larger percentage of the fan base. And what I have said is I am not in favor of playing teams that will not give us a return game. That "beefing up" we don't need. And what I have also said is if we would just win the non-conference games we do schedule, we would be fine. Our seeding sucks not because we schedule poorly, but because we lose games to lower RPI teams. Again, the 2004 team played a terrible non-conference schedule but was a 2 seed. Why? Because they only lost 2 games in the regular season.

You never addressed how Florida and LSU were able to have so much more success than us despite playing equally poor non-conference schedules. It was in your ScoobaDawg post the other day.

 

[DowntownDawg]

.....50% that are total Stansbury Sheep, and 40-45% of people like me, you, and others who go back and forth on the issue.

I do know some State fans that want him fired, plain and simple. Coach is not the only one. But most people that I talk to that follow it are dissatisfied, but aren't anywhere near thinking that he needs to be canned. They are just frustrated and want to feel like we are improving.

 

[Coach34]

How about a coach that is 12-19 vs the other 5 power conferences, 17-44 entering this season bs the top 25...51-82 vs top 50 teams, and never been able to advance in the NCAA Tourney? Replacing average isn't that hard to do. Do you think many coaches would have had trouble going 13-2 vs that OOC schedule we had this season? Seriously?

 

[HD6]

*

 

[jsireland]

If you're talking about percentages of fans that agree with you.

If he occasionally admitted he was wrong when it's blatantly obvious, wouldn't show such apparent glee during losses/misery during wins, or just generally have a hard-on for all things anti-Stans, I think he'd find that quite a lot of this board, and the fanbase in general, also get pretty upset with Stans sometimes.

But after a few minutes reading his posts about how Kennedy is a successful hire but Stans should go, people are then drawn into pro-Stans arguments instead of agreeing with some of his basic points.

The fact that he's so vocal in an obnoxious way drives many of the moderates to the other side.