view that as the best MSU should expect, yes. We've got the second smallest Arena out of 14 and we don't even fill that up. We recruit in the smallest state vs another SEC school and a CUSA team that has been outperforming us of late and alot of the top talent still goes out of state.
Well Coach.........
- Thread starter shsdawg
- Start date
at the situation, I agree with you. Let me know when "people" are in the running and I know it's getting close to that point.
should expect tourney appearances 50% of the time. A new coach with what we have coming back should get 4 years to make a tournament and then after that - a 50% clip should be expected.
there's nothing wrong with hiring an assistant from a major program imo. countless other programs have ventured that route that are on par or maybe even slightly better than msu.mstatefan88 said:
anyone with a 3rd grade education level recognizes 20 Ws don't mean what it used to. these days, more teams play 34-35 regular season games, whereas 10+ years ago, teams played 30-31 regular season games. the at large teams in the tourney in the 90s used to have records like 18-12 and 20-10. these days, very few teams are even on the radar unless they have 22+ Ws.tenureplan said:
just a fyi, MS produces like double the amount of NBA talent as SC. i posted a link a week or 2 ago basically listing every NBA/ABA player from each state and also what state they played HS in. MS had one of the highest per capita rates in the country, and had more pure numbers that every SEC state except florida, georgia, and now texas. MS produces more future pro players than bama, ark, la,ky, tenn, sc, and missouri.beachbumdawg said:
If that is your expectation is it realistic based upon the results? I decided to check for myself:
Over the last 20 years the number of NCAA appearances by each SEC school not named Florida and UK
Vandy - 8
Georgia - 6
South Carolina - 3
Tennessee - 10
MSU - 8
Ole Miss - 5
LSU - 7
Alabama - 9
Arkansas - 12 (3 in the last 10 years)
Auburn - 3
To me Arkansas is an outlier since Nolan Richardson's hogs were so dominant in the early 90's, but even keeping them in the last 20 years, SEC teams have averaged 7.1 trips to the NCAA tourney over the last 20 years, almost going once every 3 years. I do think if you take Stans tenure and just use the last 14 years as a model you would find similar results that MSU has been an above average program in the SEC. I could see any coach looking at the situation and the past results and think to himself that if he has to exceed the previous coach, that means going to the tourney almost half the time, which only four programs have done over the last 20 years, and over last 10 even less have accomplished it, one of them being MSU who just basically fired their coach.
Now I certainly understand the reasons MSU fired Stans the program clearly got away from him, but I also understand a good coach passing on a job where the fan base has expectations that are not in line with the results of teams in the conference.
Over the last 20 years the number of NCAA appearances by each SEC school not named Florida and UK
Vandy - 8
Georgia - 6
South Carolina - 3
Tennessee - 10
MSU - 8
Ole Miss - 5
LSU - 7
Alabama - 9
Arkansas - 12 (3 in the last 10 years)
Auburn - 3
To me Arkansas is an outlier since Nolan Richardson's hogs were so dominant in the early 90's, but even keeping them in the last 20 years, SEC teams have averaged 7.1 trips to the NCAA tourney over the last 20 years, almost going once every 3 years. I do think if you take Stans tenure and just use the last 14 years as a model you would find similar results that MSU has been an above average program in the SEC. I could see any coach looking at the situation and the past results and think to himself that if he has to exceed the previous coach, that means going to the tourney almost half the time, which only four programs have done over the last 20 years, and over last 10 even less have accomplished it, one of them being MSU who just basically fired their coach.
Now I certainly understand the reasons MSU fired Stans the program clearly got away from him, but I also understand a good coach passing on a job where the fan base has expectations that are not in line with the results of teams in the conference.
Mississippi: Ranked 31st in population with 2,978,512 estimated residents in 2011. Arkansas: Ranked 32nd in population with 2,937,979 in 2011. We're recruiting against another SEC school and a CUSA school. Arky is recruiting against a Sun Belt school. If you're going to call out someone else, get it right so you don't make yourself look like a dumbass.
Seriously, y'all got me on that. The numbers don't lie.
But I will live to fight another day. THAT'S MY PLEASURE!
http://www.hark.com/clips...lgcxqx-thats-my-pleasure
But I will live to fight another day. THAT'S MY PLEASURE!
http://www.hark.com/clips...lgcxqx-thats-my-pleasure
i think you also need to look at talent though. this year especially, we had one of the most talented temas every to play at msu and they collapsed. that's on the HC. if you have NCAA tourney talent, and you keep missing the tourny 5 times in the last 7 years, then even if looking through a generic big scope of the last 20 years (8 tourney, 1 final 4, however many 20+ W seasons) it appears we are meeting our expectations, that is ignoring that we had the talent to be better, especially since 2005.
Stansbury had to go because he lost control of the program, but that also finding a well credentialed coach to exceed Stans' on the court accomplishments is going to be difficult and that a step backwards may have to be accepted.
I have read on here over and over, how fans just want someone to install discipline. Have players that listen and respect their coach. Im sure MSU could find that coach. The problem is that coaches that demand these things at schools that aren't traditional powers, they can really struggle to find elite talent because elite talent needs to be coddled or they go to a school that has an established track record of getting players to the NBA. Also those schools don't have to coddle potential lottery picks, because they have their pick of the litter. MSU and most SEC schools don't have that luxury so we kiss the player's as well as their handler's ***. Stans did this pretty well for years. Unfortunately it got to the point where the kids realized they have more power than Stans and Stans was stuck.
If the next coach is going to be expected to exceed Stans' on the court results and exceed Stans' off the court results, I think most coaches are going to pass on the job. Now assistants that are making 200K will gladly take the job because they don't know when the next job offer is going to come along, but overall most head coaches are going to say, "Look I can probably clean up the mess, but it is going to cost us in the W/L category, but I can clean up the mess". That can play well for a season or two, but when all of a sudden people are tired of players not only not getting in trouble but also not getting into the tourney, all of a sudden the Charles Rhodes, Jamoney and Dee Bost's of the world don't seem that bad.
Can MSU find a coach that can balance both of these desires? Im not sure, if so it will be a very impressive coaching performance, which based on the SEC track record of coaches, isn't likely.
I have read on here over and over, how fans just want someone to install discipline. Have players that listen and respect their coach. Im sure MSU could find that coach. The problem is that coaches that demand these things at schools that aren't traditional powers, they can really struggle to find elite talent because elite talent needs to be coddled or they go to a school that has an established track record of getting players to the NBA. Also those schools don't have to coddle potential lottery picks, because they have their pick of the litter. MSU and most SEC schools don't have that luxury so we kiss the player's as well as their handler's ***. Stans did this pretty well for years. Unfortunately it got to the point where the kids realized they have more power than Stans and Stans was stuck.
If the next coach is going to be expected to exceed Stans' on the court results and exceed Stans' off the court results, I think most coaches are going to pass on the job. Now assistants that are making 200K will gladly take the job because they don't know when the next job offer is going to come along, but overall most head coaches are going to say, "Look I can probably clean up the mess, but it is going to cost us in the W/L category, but I can clean up the mess". That can play well for a season or two, but when all of a sudden people are tired of players not only not getting in trouble but also not getting into the tourney, all of a sudden the Charles Rhodes, Jamoney and Dee Bost's of the world don't seem that bad.
Can MSU find a coach that can balance both of these desires? Im not sure, if so it will be a very impressive coaching performance, which based on the SEC track record of coaches, isn't likely.
Yes, I missed the difference in numbers, I apologize having done the research in the past I counted and confused Alabama numbers and Mississippi numbers. It's still wrong to say Mississippi is the smallest state.<div></div><div><div>BulldogBasher said:
</div><div>My error was in the difference between the two states, not their placement.</div><div>
</div><div>What gets really interesting though is looking not just at the raw population, but the number of highly recruited players (we'll use basketball) that come out of those states. Since it's easier to use scout's listing we will use it.</div><div>
</div><div>2012 - Arkansas (1 5*) Mississippi (1 5*) Push.</div><div>(For those who saw it before edit, scout.com has a guy from PA listed high school as MS instead of HS)</div><div>2011 - AR (2 4*) MS ( 1 5*, 2 4*) Edge Mississippi.</div><div>2010 - Nothing for either state. Push</div><div>2009 - Zip for both , Push</div><div>2008 - Nada for Arkansas, Mississippi (1 5*, 2 4*) Edge Mississippi</div><div>2007 - Arkansas (1 5*, 2 4*) , Mississippi (2 4*) Edge Arkansas</div><div>2006 - Nada for Both</div><div>2005 - Nada Arkansas , Mississippi (1 5* , 2 4*) Edge Mississippi</div><div>2004 -</div><div>2003 - Arkansas (1 4*) , Mississippi (2 4*) Edge Mississippi</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>So 2004 is missing, but only one time did Arkansas have a deeper talent pool in 5* and 4* recruits in the respective states was in 2007. And don't bother to talk about competing in-state being a problem, because none of the 4* or 5* players went to Ole Miss, or USM.</div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>This "poor us" is tiring.</div> </div>
is that he has stated he'd prefer to see said players exceed in their life time, but he just doesn't think the likelihood is there.<div>
</div><div>But to the extent he goes against Russell.. I just don't get that.</div><div>
</div><div>But this douche... he really seems happy thinking we're going to suck.</div>
</div><div>But to the extent he goes against Russell.. I just don't get that.</div><div>
</div><div>But this douche... he really seems happy thinking we're going to suck.</div>
<div>OMlawdog said:
</div>Well, honestly without the right breaks (The Baylor disaster), even Stansbury would be hard pressed to meet or exceed Stans' physical numbers. Shoot in terms of actual accomplishment (versus pure numerical accomplishment) Stansbury never met or exceeded Richard Williams. (Please note the last sentence is not some attempt to say we should not have fired RW, merely that if you only count tourney results RW accomplished more)<div>
</div><div>I do agree with your basic premise. MSU was always going to have to take a flyer on a Coach to replace RS. And by flyer I mean an Assistant with no HC experience. The good news is we actually have a decent shot at a "Mullen-like" AC, and not what we have had in the past. Remember after all our two best coaches in the Modern SEC Basketball era were a HS Coach and an Assistant Coach that few outside of MSU were willing to give him a chance base on potential NCAA issues from a previous school. If we focus on what those 2 coaches did for us and realize that our choices this time around are better than that, this might not feel like the disaster everyone thinks it is.</div><div>
</div>
we DID have this discussion withCoach a couple of months ago. I said at thetime that i thought we would have a harder time with the hire than most of youguys thought we would. i was told by coach that we would have coaches, good coaches, lining up for the job. Y'all were laughing at me. Are you laughing now?CadaverDawg said:
is that a player or two can change that. Whereas in football, a player or two wouldn't have made much of a difference.
i still think he's a teenager or has littleman syndrome. everything he posts is overly aggressive or just 17in absurd.
