What is the love affair with Stans and MSU?

[Thick]

Why do so many people think that he should have a long leash? It has been stated and proven on the Pack that the man cannot coach, plays soft non-conference schedule, has very few quality non-conference wins, can't keep players from leaving, and is terrible in the post season. We have more embarrassing losses to non-conference teams then quality vics. He is an ok recruiter, but not a very good player developer. He has a couple of assistants that lower tiered programs will not hire, hell the black universites won't even hire Kirby.

We could be so much better in basketball then we are if there was some accountibility placed on Stans. Coach34 is right about other very capable coaches out there that could do much better than Stans. I'm not saying fire him now, but he needs to know that people are watching his every move. It would be nice to go to the Hump, and watch our team run set plays instead of watching and admiring our opponent's offensive playbook.

 

[Thick]

Why do so many people think that he should have a long leash? It has been stated and proven on the Pack that the man cannot coach, plays soft non-conference schedule, has very few quality non-conference wins, can't keep players from leaving, and is terrible in the post season. We have more embarrassing losses to non-conference teams then quality vics. He is an ok recruiter, but not a very good player developer. He has a couple of assistants that lower tiered programs will not hire, hell the black universites won't even hire Kirby.

We could be so much better in basketball then we are if there was some accountibility placed on Stans. Coach34 is right about other very capable coaches out there that could do much better than Stans. I'm not saying fire him now, but he needs to know that people are watching his every move. It would be nice to go to the Hump, and watch our team run set plays instead of watching and admiring our opponent's offensive playbook.

 

[1msudawg]

averaging 20+ wins a year. That gets you a lot of leeway. Esp. at MSU. No other coach has won like Stans has.

 

[chewgumm]

He gets the players. I am not saying that we should keep him, because I don't think he learns. He has been coaching forever, and we are just as good as whoever he can bring in's individual ability. Nothing to do with his coaching.

 

[Frances Drebin]

...is that aGAINst the schedule he has played over his career, he should be 258-65.

 

[TR.sixpack]

Hell, had Richard Williams been smarter with his free time, he'd have just as long a leash as Stansbury.

The problem with Stansbury is he's good enough of a recruiter to have accomplishments to point to and fans to defend him, and such a poor floor coach that he can't win without good, experienced upper classmens.

I'm pretty ambivalent about the whole situation right now.

 

[Coach34]

averaging 20+ wins a year. That gets you a lot of leeway. Esp. at MSU. No other coach has won like Stans has.

winning 18-20 games just isnt that damn hard like it used to be.

We are in the SEC which makes recruiting easier.
We have one of the easiest pre-conference schedules every year in the SEC- that gives us at least 10 wins a season
We average 8.7 conference wins a season

Thats 18.7 wins a season just by being average in conference and dominating the nobodys like McNeese, Jacksonville St, and a SWAC team. 75% of coaches around the nation could do that

Ricky isnt really doing anything extraordinary. Give me Williams career over his anyday

 

[1msudawg]

he should have a better record and more postseason wins and all that. But the simple fact is that he has been doing the one thing that no other coach (or should I say previous coaches) on this campus has been doing. And that is winning; That is the reason there is all this love for him. Should he have done better. I think so. But at a time when no other coach on campus could get it done. He did.

 

[TR.sixpack]

nm

 

[1msudawg]

The question was asked why the love affair. I answered with why I think a good portion (probably the majority) are happy with him. I mean, how many people really want to fire the only coach on campus that for the longest time was the only one actually trying to do his job.

Could he be doing better? Hell yes!!
Should he be doing better? Another Hell yes!!

<span class="post-title">but basketball is not the same as it was 20 years ago either...

</span>

Basketball is not the same as it was 5 years ago. Much less 20 years ago.

 

[BriantheDawg]

I didn't realize we should be finishing every season 27-5, or something like that. 20-10 is just not good enough for the flagship basketball school in the entire nation. We are Mississippi State, by God!!!!!!! Anything less than 27-5 and a trip to the National Chamionship Game is UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Stans should have been fired after the 2005 season when he didn't duplicate going on the road undefeated in the SEC for the 2nd year in a row!!!!!! How dare he?????????

It's all becoming so clear to me now. FIRE STANS NOW, GREG!!!!!!</p>

 

[Todd4State]

as much as it is about being fair. I think most people here feel like he gets a pass this season, but if he doesn't do better next season, it's time to change.

 

[Frances Drebin]

...ridiculing me, why don't you just go back and look at the schedules? I'm not saying anything less than a NC is a failure. I'm saying that he should win the games he's supposed to win. His record is riddled with losses to the likes of Northwestern State, George Mason, etc., as long as bad conference losses to Ole Miss, Auburn, and Georgia when those programs were down. Also, his scheduling has been notoriously bad. We play a bunch of nobodies every year. Then you guys want to throw Stans a parade for averaging 20 wins a season against these nobodies? The level of stupidity is unbelievable.

 

[Ol Blue.sixpack]

A certain victory over LSU comes to mind.

 

[MSUCostanza]

How come only 2 or 3 other SEC teams have had the same level of consistency, if it's so easy to win 20 games a year? Have you looked at other SEC schools' non-conference slates? They are notoriously bad too. We aren't the only team playing the Alabama A&M's of the world.

Nobody is happy with the way this season has started, including me. But some of the **** I read on here is ridiculous. It's like the opposite of the freaks on Swan Lake trying to justify keeping Croom for 20 more years despite winning 3 games a year. I have read some folks going to amazing lengths to **** on Stansbury's accomplishments.

 

[Seinfeld]

You can badmouth his competition, coaching ability, or girly clapping all you want, the fact of the matter is that no one in the history of MSU athletics has been able to do what he's done on a consistent basis.

MSU fans are happy with his 20 wins against nobodies because no one else has been able to do that. Richard Williams had a magical two years, we were great in the 60s with a basketball legend playing on our team, but that's about it in the hundred years of MSU basketball other than Stansbury. Should he be able to name his terms? Hell no, but he does get a little bit longer leash than some other coaches.

I don't understand the fans who think that anyone could do the job that Stansbury has done over the last 10 years. If it's so easy, why has no one else done it? Why can the other SEC West schools who allegedly have much better resources and practice facilities not beat out little ol MSU?

I'm not saying that MSU has no chance at doing better, but I think that the fear that most fans have is that hiring a new coach gives us the risk of going back to a basketball doormat. This isn't a completely fair comparison by any means, but I remember a lot of fans cursing JWS on his way out, thinking that because we had some recent success in football, we should not accept anything other than championships. Well, right or wrong, we got rid of him and now we're once again firmly planted in the SEC football cellar.

I'd love to see our postseason performance improve a lot, but for a lot of fans that have followed MSU sports for some time, winning division and conference championships, competing with Kansas and UT for talent, and consistently winning is good enough.

 

[wpnetdawg]

Folks keep talking about the OOC schedule. Let's say that, on average, a team plays two more so-called significant opponents a year than State (which would actually be a lot over a decade long time frame) and wins 40% of those games, you would only be talking about a net difference of 1.2 wins per year.

On a somewhat unrelated note in reference to the difficulty of the West, in the years in which State won West titles, the conference RPI was #1, #2, #2, and #4 nationally. Clearly, the East is superior to the West. However, the conference cannot sustain a conference rating that high with an entire half weighing it down. It doesn't even make halfway reasonable mathematical sense.

 

[BriantheDawg]

in thinking we should just automatically be the best team in the SEC year in, year out. You have good years and you have bad years. With Stans, it's been way more good years than bad. I do not need to go back and look at the schedule to know that Stans has more wins than any other coach in school history, has averaged 20+ wins a season for 10 years, and went undefeated on the road in the SEC one year. I'm sorry, but we are simply not the mecca of college basketball like some of you want to think we are. And, no, that's not a woe is me attitude, it's the cold hard truth. 20+ wins a season with a good shot at making the Tourney every year is what we have with Stans. Trust me, it could be A LOT WORSE. And as others have pointed out, how come all these other SEC schools haven't been doing as well as we have with their ****** OOC schedules? My answer is their coaches aren't as good as Stans is. Plain and simple.

 

[hatfieldms]

in thinking we should just automatically be the best team in the SEC year in, year out. You have good years and you have bad years. With Stans, it's been way more good years than bad. I do not need to go back and look at the schedule to know that Stans has more wins than any other coach in school history, has averaged 20+ wins a season for 10 years, and went undefeated on the road in the SEC one year. I'm sorry, but we are simply not the mecca of college basketball like some of you want to think we are. And, no, that's not a woe is me attitude, it's the cold hard truth. 20+ wins a season with a good shot at making the Tourney every year is what we have with Stans. Trust me, it could be A LOT WORSE. And as others have pointed out, how come all these other SEC schools haven't been doing as well as we have with their ****** OOC schedules? My answer is their coaches aren't as good as Stans is. Plain and simple.

There is no place for common sense in this thread. Nice try though

 

[dogfan96]

outside of the UK that is.. nobody else cares enough or maybe they hire worse coaches.. who knows? The SEC has never been a great league for basketball.. Florida and UT are changing that a little, but really the level of play over the years was so average/bad that I would never watch SEC basketball if I wasn't an MSU fan. To me, winning the West in basketball is about like winning C-USA in football. Yeah it's great I guess, but who really gives a ****? We did win the conference and that was great, but we parlayed that high seeding into nothing.

 

[was21]

and we ain't gettin' rid of the sumbitch...we like him...Meow too and all them kids. He recruits well, plays that damn good defense...and hell, nobody's perfect. He's outlasted a lot of damn SEC coarches and for REASON. Besides, we like to hear him talk about the "freshmens."

 

[Frances Drebin]

...the fascination with everyone else. We shouldn't care what LSU or Alabama has done over the same time. That's an issue for their fans. We should be worried about our team and performance. And for all of our "consistency" under Stans, there has been a lot of games that has been like the one we had last night. You talk about Swan Lake, but the arguments that are being made in defense of Stans is pretty much the epitome of being happy with mediocrity. Like it our not, our basketball program has been mediocre outside of about a three or four year stretch.

 

[Agentdog]

However, he does not have the ability to coach up marginal talent. If we have great players, we win most, lose some we shouldn't, but make the tourney. Marginal talent such as this year.....no post season. I would call him a below average floor coach and above average recruiter. With that said, I have seen MSU basketball with a good floor coach but poor recruiter. We don't want that combination again.

These past few years have been very frustrating to watch though.

 

[wpnetdawg]

by far their most popular sport. Like I have posted before, the last four years in which State has captured division championships, the conference RPI was #1, #2, #2, and #4. To suggest that the play of the SEC was so bad as to not be watched is to suggest that the play of college basketball as a whole is so bad as to not be watched. The numbers are very clear in this respect.

 

[dogfan96]

as I do in Brett Favre in the 4th quarter or OT of a playoff game. Motherfuck an RPI. I have two eyes and anybody who says the SEC is the best or even 2nd best basketball conference in the country anytime in the last 10 years is on crack.

 

[wpnetdawg]

#3, #2, #2, and #6.

Are we believe that all of mathematics are conspiring to indicate that the SEC is consistently one of the top three basketball leagues in America?

 

[dogfan96]

they're played inside television sets. Statistics can be made to mean anything you want them to mean. Other than the UK, no SEC teams really play national schedules (Tennessee has started to lately) so SEC teams basically play regional rivalries, nobodies, and each other. That proves nothing. If you can honestly watch SEC basketball and tell me the quality of play is consistently better than the ACC, Big East, and even the Big 12, then you're either a homer or you don't know **** about basketball. The SEC always has lots of great athletes but fewer great basketball players.

 

[wpnetdawg]

That is the reason that computers are the truest measure of determining performance short of playing a double round robin of all 320+ college basketball teams.

 

[wpnetdawg]

#2, #2, #2, and #5

Edit: I transposed some letters. Sorry.

 

[Simplydog]

78 schools from 17 conferences have reached the Sweet 16 since State last made it.

Out of the 6 BCS Conferences, 49 of the 73 schools have reached the Sweet 16 since 2000. 24 have not. Guess which group MSU is in.

8 of the other 11 SEC schools have made it...including Ole Miss. 5 of those 8 coaches aren't around anymore.

Ricks 4 tourney wins are versus two 18-13 Pac-10 schools, McNeese State, and Monmouth.

I keep reading the term "NIT Final Four." 1977 called, it want's it's worth-a-damn back.

Ron Polk was good. We all knew MSU could do better.

Rick Stansbury is good. We all know MSU can do better.

Next topic.

 

[wpnetdawg]

I can't be exactly sure which five coaches you are alluding to because a couple of the schools have made multiple changes. Some of the ones that can be quickly identifed would be Rod Barnes who was fired after being 28 games below .500 in conference play, John Brady who was fired after being 19 games below .500 in conference play (including 6-17 in his last two years and 1-6 in his final season), Tubby Smith (that is Kentucky and is yet to be seen whether this firing will bear fruit), Nolan Richardson (who left in controversy), and Cliff Ellis (who left 14 games under .500 and with losing conference marks in four of his last five seasons and an even .500 in the other).

 

[Simplydog]

Yeah, actually, I misspoke. It's 4 of the 8. Smith, Barnes, Brady, and Cliff Ellis @ Auburn. Surprisingly enough, Arkansas hasn't been to the Sweet 16 since their last title game in 1995. Even more interestingly, South Carolia hasn't won a tournament game since joining the SEC. In fact, they haven't won one at all since 1973. BTW, Nolan Richardson is now the coach for the Mexican National Team...random.

Regardless, Rick need to play his way out of the first building at least once to have really accomplished something, IMO.

 

[Coach34]

"Regardless, Rick need to play his way out of the first building at least once to have really accomplished something, IMO"

I would take Brady's "19 games under .500" and his Final Four and Sweet 16 over Ricky's 14 games over .500 and a few West titles anyday