The CL and Rick weigh in on Turner vs Stans Text-gate...

[whatever.sixpack]

My point is that this whole "failure to communicate" thing is overblown. Stans didn't communicate with Turner ON PURPOSE, b/c he knew that if he called, Turner would've said that he wanted to return, or that he might, and that Stans would've had to tell him to his face that he wasn't welcome. He didn't want to do that, so he hid behind the rumors, "other" people saying Phil wasn't returning, and used the excuse of not registering for classes for his reasoning of moving on.

I agree that it was a little classless, and that there is mismanagement in our program.

But at the end of the day, ALL THAT MATTERS is winning and losing. It's hard to say Stans is "running the program into the ground" or that his days are numbered, because we might have a chance to have a better team in the next one to three years than we've had in the last 5 years. If Shaun Smith gets healthy, Sidney lives up to the billing, Bost gets back, and we can have adequate play out of a first year player at the 2, then next year is setting up to be better than this past year for sure.

 

[Johnson85]

You really want a coach to keep a player around if he doesn't think that player will help us be the best team we can be?

Turner's the only returning player thatplayed hardwhenever he was on the court and belonged on an SEC roster (sorry Benock). He also managed to avoid calling the coach out in public, which is also something Ravern, Bost, and Kodi had trouble accomplishing.You're telling me that wouldn't help us next year?
If Phil has a bad attitude off the court, it'sunderstandable seeing as he gets shat onafterbeing the only non-senior willing to do the little things like play defense and hustle all the time. You'retelling me Stansbury shouldn't be bending over backwards to accomodate him? What king of 17ing signalis Stansbury sending to other players?Even if Phil came back and ended up buried on the depth chart by more talented players,at least Stansbury could pretend that playing hard would get you somewhere with him.

And usually, if a player's that big of a cancer, you can see it on the court. It's rare that somebody plays hard all the timewhile being a cancer.My guess is that there's not too many coaches Turner would have trouble playing for.

 

[patdog]

you can disagree over whether Turner would have made us a better team next year or not. Stans obviously came to the conclusion that we'd be a better team without him. And the last person I want coaching any of our teams is one who will keep a player around that he doesn't think makes us a better team just because it's the "classy" thing to do.

 

[mstateglfr]

If Shaun Smith gets healthy, Sidney lives up to the billing, Bost gets back, and we can have adequate play out of a first year player at the 2, then next year is setting up to be better than this past year for sure.

That is quite a steep list of IFS.
IF a player who has had a bum hip for 2 years now is healthy.
IF a player that was so friggin either dumb or a liar regains his eligibility.
IF we have adequate play out of a true freshman SG when that position is notoriously known at MSU for not getting much out of freshmen since we like to recruit under the radar SGs.

Sure, well if thats all that has to happen, should be cake to be better than this year.

 

[jlat13]

Like someone else said. This would be like waking up one morning and checking your email to see your company sent you one saying you are fired.We aren't talking "class" here. We are talking common decency. If this theory is true, we have a coward for a coach. If you can't look a guy in the eye and tell him you are having to move on, you aren't in the right business. Hiding behind rumors?Is this serious?I think anyone that thinks our basketball team is going to better without Phil Turner is ignorant. They are probably the same people that referenced our basketball team as "successful" because we've been to post season (including the NIT so the term is used loosely here)play the last 4 years.

Your last paragraph is what bothers me most about MSU fans. Did you read your last two sentences? I have heard "wait till next year" with our basketball team more than Ole Miss fans with their football team. We are "young" or "undersized". Who is responsible for that? Stansbury. We are young every year because we can't keep a consistent roster together from year to year.

Also, you listed 4 IF's that would make our team respectable next year. We just dismisseda player that can play and defend multiple positions, rebound above average for his size, and shoot the ball to extend the defense. These are things we KNOW. I don't know all the things behind the scenes in this case, but it can't be because he was a cancer. As others have pointed out, we have other players that I would assume are worse for the chemistry than someone that has real passion for the game. And why do we have so many issues with chemistry? Robert Jackson, Charles Rhodes, Walter Sharpe, Gary Ervin, Jamont Gordon, Delk's, Hans, Osby, Augustus, etc. Don't bring up that every team has transfers. That is a stat everyone loves to throw around. People leave schools for different reasons. I know not all of those players listed transferred, but there was at least mention of each of them doing so or leaving school early at one time or another. The main difference is all of those players had a significant role on our team. There is one common thing in all of these cases: Leadership (Stans).

Can't wait for another 20-12 season with an exciting win-to-get-in SEC Tourney.</p>

 

[SallyStansbury]

Freshmens, Year-in, etc...these are the verbal manifestations of his ignorance. We rarely made in-game adjustments, dreadlock ark guy goes for 30-something, FLA big beats our *** to death in the first game, Alabama presses Dee to death and we fold........dumb. We fixed most of these issues, and I will give a little credit to Rick or whomever solved these problems with strategy and game-planning, but never, ever,in-game.

"Ravern is a 3", "Wendell andRiek are 5's""Kodi is a 4" etc....this is simple for him to comprehend.

Rick will assign a player to a role and that will be it for darn near the whole season. Phil isn't a 2/3, etc...because he doesn't dribble right. Ravern is a 3, but he doesn't play defense? Barry was our go-to guy, but he can't finish to save his life? ********. It is just stupid and the players and now more of the fans are starting to see it.

My suggestion is to put the 5 best players on the court and go for it.Phil, because of his defense and intensity,would easily have been in my top 6 or 7 on next year's team for sure....especially with Osby now gone.

There have been excellent points made further down this thread concerning Ravern's TERRIBLE defense. In instances with teams having a strong 3 like Polyniece sp? for OM or Leslie for UGA, Rick was retarded to think Ravern could handle these guys. Turner on the other hand could have and when given the chance did. When Tuner played a good bit in the first Kentucky game he did a good job.

With Ricks obsessionwith playing undersized power forwards, I would anticipate him being more than arroused at the thought of Tuner @ 6'3" 180 getting extensive minutes at the 4 early in the year {no Osby @ 4 and no Sidney @ 5} But alas, we are bound to see lots of minutes for Benock, Reik and Lewis. The beat goes on.....

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

[No message]

 

[SallyStansbury]

I like your mention of intangibles.

One additional comment to follow your reasoning: On a team with more than its share of pussies, Barry "I just got rejected again and fell over on my wrist" Stewart, Jarvis "210 lb I never lifted a weight in my life" Varnado, and Ravern "165 lb Pit Bull" Johnson. We really really needed the defensive tenacity of Turner because Dee was thinking about his next Tweet and playing this next season in Israel, and Kodi was thinking, "breath in, breath out, breath in, breath out...." At least Turner came to play hard and compete.

Turner often came in while the hockey rotation of Stewart, Benock, Osby, Lewis, et al. were in there and the motion offense functioned flawlessly in those instances, NOT. I would be frustrated if I were him too.

 

[KurtRambis4]

getting rid of someone on a team for a player that is better? I couldn't care less what their classification is (sr, jr, so, fr). Isn't that a good thing?

 

[fishwater99]

Stans clearly could have handled this in a classier manner. He chose not to, so it just goes to show that he is lacking there.
He didn't check with Turner, assumed that he was not coming back, and then gave his scholly to another player. If Bost is not reinstated, then we will have an extra scholly next year. Turner would have seen significant playing time next year if he would have been on the team.</p>

 

[patdog]

This had nothing to do with Stans wondering if Turner was coming back and then cutting him without checking with him. It had everything to do with Stans getting fed up with Turner's ******** and cutting him. And really, I don't give too much of a **** about how nice, or "classy," a coach is about it when he cuts someone.

 

[fishwater99]

Come on Pat...
It's not the fact that it happened, it's how he did it, classless. Is it really that hard to wrap your brain around this?
Stans should have at least had the decency to call Turner, personally I think a face to face would have been the way to go.

 

[rebel law]

it is certainly stansbury's right to kick him off the team but damn at least be a man about it and call him in your office and kick him off. This is akin to firing someone without telling them and just quit sending them their paychecks like office space.

 

[whatever.sixpack]

mstateglfr wrote:

That is quite a steep list of IFS. (They are probable ifs though)
IF a player who has had a bum hip for 2 years now is healthy. (2 years should be sufficient enough time to recover from ANY injury for a 20 yr old)
IF a player that was so friggin either dumb or a liar regains his eligibility. (looking good that he'll be eligible though, don't you agree?)
IF we have adequate play out of a true freshman SG when that position is notoriously known at MSU for not getting much out of freshmen since we like to recruit under the radar SGs.(I think all we need is for either Bryant or Steele to play as well as Hans, Stewart, or Reggie Delk did as a frosh, that may be likely, don't you think?)

Sure, well if thats all that has to happen, should be cake to be better than this year.

So, that leaves us w/ Sidney. If he is indeed the best to ever play here, then we could easily be better than last year. A PROBABLE starting 5 of Bost, a decent 2 like Steele or Smith (who is more talented than Stewart), Ravern, Kodi, and Sidney has some possibilities, especially if the returning 3 starters show slight improvement.