We're 0-20 against the RPI top 25 since '04 ...
- Thread starter msugolf
- Start date
As the resident numbers guy, that is brutal. We are a middle of the pack team that makes the NCAAs when we perform well against lower level competition. When we have a year like this year, with four sub-100 losses, we don't make the NCAAs.
Check this out:
In 2004-05, we went 16-2 against sub-100 teams and 5-7 against top 100 teams. Result: NCAA Tournament
In 2005-06, we were 12-3 against sub-100 teams and 3-11 against top 100 teams. We sit at home.
In 2006-07, we were 10-2 against sub-100 teams and 7-10 against top 100 teams. NIT
In 2007-08, we were 16-0 against sub-100 (we won the games we should have) and 5-9 against the top 100. NCAA Tournament
In 2008-09, we were 12-4 against sub-100 and 7-8 against top 100. We make the NCAA Tournament because we win the SEC Tournament.
This year, we were 14-4 against sub-100, and we have a winning record (7-6) against the top 100. I fully believe if we were 16-2 against the sub-100, we would be a lock.
Look at 04-05, we were 16-2 against sub-100 and had a LOSING record against top 100 and we were a lock of a 9 seed. This year we have a WINNING record against the top 100 and have a 14-4 record against sub-100 and we are in the same boat we were last year, having to win the SEC Tournament.
IF WE ARE GOING TO PLAY 16-18 SUB-100 TEAMS A YEAR, WE HAVE TO WIN ALL OF THEM!
Check this out:
In 2004-05, we went 16-2 against sub-100 teams and 5-7 against top 100 teams. Result: NCAA Tournament
In 2005-06, we were 12-3 against sub-100 teams and 3-11 against top 100 teams. We sit at home.
In 2006-07, we were 10-2 against sub-100 teams and 7-10 against top 100 teams. NIT
In 2007-08, we were 16-0 against sub-100 (we won the games we should have) and 5-9 against the top 100. NCAA Tournament
In 2008-09, we were 12-4 against sub-100 and 7-8 against top 100. We make the NCAA Tournament because we win the SEC Tournament.
This year, we were 14-4 against sub-100, and we have a winning record (7-6) against the top 100. I fully believe if we were 16-2 against the sub-100, we would be a lock.
Look at 04-05, we were 16-2 against sub-100 and had a LOSING record against top 100 and we were a lock of a 9 seed. This year we have a WINNING record against the top 100 and have a 14-4 record against sub-100 and we are in the same boat we were last year, having to win the SEC Tournament.
IF WE ARE GOING TO PLAY 16-18 SUB-100 TEAMS A YEAR, WE HAVE TO WIN ALL OF THEM!
Great info..... Change is coming soon, if not this year then after next year, unless Sidney leads us to the Sweet 16.</p>
DAMN YOU veazey... been working on the rpi project all year!!! Oh well..mine will be from '99 season and compare other coaches if I can ever got the data formatted right
Why does it take VZ posting it for people to get it?
I support Stans, but we have only been slightly better than mediocre in his tenure. We have dropped down to simply mediocre lately.
I support Stans, but we have only been slightly better than mediocre in his tenure. We have dropped down to simply mediocre lately.
his numbers came from my research..and using Pomeroys numbers for stans Careeer (prior to this season) he was 17-44 vs top 25, 34-38 vs top 50, 59-32 vs top 100, and 63-13 vs 100-200.
0-20 in rpi terms is a lot worse and does honestly need to be pointed out.
0-20 in rpi terms is a lot worse and does honestly need to be pointed out.
We possibly could. We could also do a lot worse. It's a gamble. One I'm sure the former Legion of Croomers are willing to take. Obviously.
and does it get avoided if Sidney only leads us to the second round? I'm assuming you are saying assistants could get run off, because I don't see Stansbury getting fired if he gets to the second round.
...that the attitude that "anybody's better than this idiot we have as a coach" can lead to a Crooms being hired.
Beating a top 25 team in baskeball is akin to beating a top 8 or 9 team in football or even baseball, and being a top 50 team in basketball is akin to being a top 17 team in football.
This year's basketball record would get us in a decent bowl in football, and would land us as a 2 or 3 seed in a regional in baseball. Finishing 4th or 5th in ANY BCS conference in football gets you in a decent bowl, as would winning the worst division in football in the top 6 conferences (Big XII North?)
So yes we're disappointed and think we underachieved, BUT... we must've come a long way if we're disappointed enough to think about firing a coach that just finished 5th in our conference and won a division title. This would be like firing a coach that made the Independence Bowl and an even better bowl the year before, and a New Year's Day bowl the year before that. This is MSU, you fire coaches for losing records, not mediocrity that results in being the 5th best out of 12 w/ the 11th biggest budget in the league.
This year's basketball record would get us in a decent bowl in football, and would land us as a 2 or 3 seed in a regional in baseball. Finishing 4th or 5th in ANY BCS conference in football gets you in a decent bowl, as would winning the worst division in football in the top 6 conferences (Big XII North?)
So yes we're disappointed and think we underachieved, BUT... we must've come a long way if we're disappointed enough to think about firing a coach that just finished 5th in our conference and won a division title. This would be like firing a coach that made the Independence Bowl and an even better bowl the year before, and a New Year's Day bowl the year before that. This is MSU, you fire coaches for losing records, not mediocrity that results in being the 5th best out of 12 w/ the 11th biggest budget in the league.
It's funny that when KV posts something negative about State (including this post) some fans are ready to explode on the guy.
Then when a post happens to be related to a coach that isn't currently well-liked, his post is not so much a negative one about State's athletics but rather a negative one against the head coach.
Then when a post happens to be related to a coach that isn't currently well-liked, his post is not so much a negative one about State's athletics but rather a negative one against the head coach.
For someone to throw out the "we're just old M-State, with our $10 budget" excuse and telling us fans we should be happy of where our program is.
And I'd love to hear you explain how you came up with this brainiac of an analogy when comparing how basketball postseason would relate to other sports. </p>
And I'd love to hear you explain how you came up with this brainiac of an analogy when comparing how basketball postseason would relate to other sports. </p>
I think it's certainly fair to compare Stans to Nutt and Jeff Bower, and Cutcliffe to an extent. I think Cut is a great coach, but he did leave the cupboard bare, which is something Stans wouldn't necessarily be accused of.
On the other hand, if we brought someone else in and they started losing I'm sure you guys would say "our talent isn't as good as we thought" and "Stans left the program in terrible shape," just like we hear for every other program
On the other hand, if we brought someone else in and they started losing I'm sure you guys would say "our talent isn't as good as we thought" and "Stans left the program in terrible shape," just like we hear for every other program
From my perspective, he is a pretty good reporter. Sometimes the facts don't favor State, but that is not his fault. I would rather have KV than David Brandt that writes Ole Miss column. David does seem to have a negative slant to most columns he writes.
KV brings some things out in the open that we think should remain hidden, but if stories broke and he was not on top of them, not only would we be bitching he would probably lose his job. KV's biggest mistake is graduating from Ole Miss.....
KV brings some things out in the open that we think should remain hidden, but if stories broke and he was not on top of them, not only would we be bitching he would probably lose his job. KV's biggest mistake is graduating from Ole Miss.....
men's BB coach in MSU history...how's he doing?<div>
</div><div>I'd be ok with a change but we could be Aub, Ark or Bama right now. Stans has been consistently average at least.</div><div>
</div><div>Edited to add: Yes, I believe this team should have at least 3 more wins. We had a real shot at 13 SEC wins and probably should have had 11.</div>
</div><div>I'd be ok with a change but we could be Aub, Ark or Bama right now. Stans has been consistently average at least.</div><div>
</div><div>Edited to add: Yes, I believe this team should have at least 3 more wins. We had a real shot at 13 SEC wins and probably should have had 11.</div>