When will Osby get the start?

[fishwater99]

The Recruiter needs to realize that you have to tweak your line-up against bigger teams.
Why is he so damn hard headed? Stans is in love with the four guard line-up, that won't work against LSU.
We got out rebounded by 20, and shot 5-20 from 3 point land. Hard to win any game with those stats.

Osby needs to start from now on, he plays like a big guard anyway...</p>

 

[fishwater99]

The Recruiter needs to realize that you have to tweak your line-up against bigger teams.
Why is he so damn hard headed? Stans is in love with the four guard line-up, that won't work against LSU.
We got out rebounded by 20, and shot 5-20 from 3 point land. Hard to win any game with those stats.

Osby needs to start from now on, he plays like a big guard anyway...</p>

 

[fishwater99]

The Recruiter needs to realize that you have to tweak your line-up against bigger teams.
Why is he so damn hard headed? Stans is in love with the four guard line-up, that won't work against LSU.
We got out rebounded by 20, and shot 5-20 from 3 point land. Hard to win any game with those stats.

Osby needs to start from now on, he plays like a big guard anyway...</p>

 

[Hanmudog]

If he had changed the lineup and we lost then some would probably be saying that you don't mess with a winning formula. I agree that when LSU comes to the Hump then maybe we should start a different lineup unless we are just rolling with the small lineup at that time. You can't always adapt to your opponent. That is why this small line up has worked to our benefit. We have forced teams to go away from their strengths and adapt to us.

 

[birdZdawg]

when I saw Phil Turner defending a guy much taller than him in the low post. He did alright in that game, but I think Osby needs to be in there more.

Who should sit? Phil? Ravern? Randy?</p>

 

[fishwater99]

Hanmudog[/b]]If he had changed the lineup and we lost then some would probably be saying that you don't mess with a winning formula. I agree that when LSU comes to the Hump then maybe we should start a different lineup unless we are just rolling with the small lineup at that time. You can't always adapt to your opponent. That is why this small line up has worked to our benefit. We have forced teams to go away from their strengths and adapt to us.

No, I have been saying Osby should start since last spring, he is the future of MSU BBall along with Bost..
And yes you can adapt to your opponent if you know you need too, maybe that is the problem...

 

[Coach34]

good teams are going to pound on us the way LSU did...you just cant let them keep doing it</p>

Adapting to your opponent is not something thats hard to do, especially when you have a guy like Osby</p>

 

[Hanmudog]

I think Osby should start now. However, I never like to mess with a formula that you are winning with. As long as we were on our streak we should have stuck with the small lineup. Sometimes good outside shooting can overcome a size deficit. I don't think Osby would have changed much last night but he does need to see the floor a bit more from here on.

 

[7BuLLdoG229]

Osby may not get to start because Stansbury likes to lock in who his starters by the time the SEC match ups start. He should start Osby because we have been getting out rebounded almost every game. Plus Phil Turner is our best defender. Stansbury should put in Phil off the bench to guard the opposing teams best player. Also the run and gun offense that Stansbury is a fan of this year would work a little better if he started Osby for the slower game the put in Phil the Thrill to start running up the floor while the other teams starters are tired. Osby will be a star one day and Stansbury knows that.

 

[Coach33.sixpack]

when I saw Phil Turner defending a guy much taller than him in the low post. He did alright in that game, but I think Osby needs to be in there more.

Who should sit? Phil? Ravern? Randy?</p>

Alright? He scored 17 points and blocked 3 shots. Id say a little better than just alright.

We should sit Randy for airballing a free throw.

 

[lawdawg02]

is that he needs to be in when varnado sits, to help out bailey in the paint. i thought stans had been doing a pretty good job of keeping those two together. with varnado in, phil can (usually) play the 4 well enough to allow our 4 guard lineup. bailey and 4 guards is not a good idea.

the rotation is probably based on (1) keeping osby on the floor whenever bailey is in, and (2) running 4 guards when varnado is on the floor.

that said, i think increasing osby's minutes is a good idea. by doing so, you could shorten the minutes of whichever shooter (stewart, ravern, or turner) is struggling that particular night. i don't mind him coming off the bench, so long as he is the first guy off the bench. if our 4 guards get out to a fast start, then the other team has to adjust to us, not the other way around.

 

[birdZdawg]

I wasn't trying to downplay his play in that game. During the first half, he looked overmatched when he was defending his man in the low post. </p>

 

[rugbdawg]

Johnson looks bigger (barely), taller, and can certainly jump higher.

 

[lawdawg02]

but i don't think ravern is strong enough (or maybe crazy enough) to bang with the big boys. ravern is more of a finesse player than phil is.

 

[graddawg]

<span style="font-weight: bold;">Osby may not get to start because Stansbury likes to lock in who his starters by the time the SEC match ups start.</span> He should start Osby because we have been getting out rebounded almost every game. Plus Phil Turner is our best defender. Stansbury should put in Phil off the bench to guard the opposing teams best player. Also the run and gun offense that Stansbury is a fan of this year would work a little better if he started Osby for the slower game the put in Phil the Thrill to start running up the floor while the other teams starters are tired. Osby will be a star one day and Stansbury knows that.

While your statement does have some merit, Stans also doesn't like to change starters while we are winning. This situation reminds me of him waiting until after we lost to Kentucky to replace Marcus with Shane in the starting line up in 2004 despite it being obvious to everyone that Shane should have been starting much earlier. We were winning games with Marcus starting and Stans refused to change until we lost. Obviously the teams and their respective records are very different but the situations are similiar. I wouldn't be surprised to see Osby start on Saturday.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

I went to the game and we simply stunk no matter whom we played. Osby played and he did no better than the smaller guys and he got taken to the barn a couple of times by Tasmin Mitchell. I do agree that the rebounding is bad but the shooting and ball handling was the worst I've seen this year and Bost and Beckham looked like Freshmen. I will predict we will beat LSU at home and a lot of it has to do with the right mind set. LSU tried to play Jarvis head up some and he took Johnson and Quentin Thornton to the cleaners. Our problem was we let the game get out of control and LSU with the crowd had the game on their terms. Our lack of size is going to hurt us but Bailey has to realize his role and not put up bricks and quit making silly fouls. Actually, I was glad to see Brian get some minutes and he looked physically a little better but if we don't hit threes against anybody, we are in deep trouble because when LSU started double downing on Jarvis, the shots were there but we couldn't make them. All in all, it was a sloppy effort.

 

[Todd4State]

If it ain't broke, why fix it? If he had started Osby out of the blue and we had gotten beaten by 20+ we would all wonder why he messed with what was working.

I think I would have to try this lineup if I was Stans on Sat.

PG- Dee
SG- Barry
SF- Ravern
PF- Osby
C- Swat

6th man- Phil

 

[msudawg12]

In a game when we're out rebounded by 20 which is almost 20 we shouldve just cycled all three of them in and out with 2 in at a time to keep one fresh. It obviously wouldnt have hurt varnado to have bailey or osby in with him at the same time

 

[Coach34]

doesnt mean it wasnt broke

 

[Todd4State]

we were doing it right with Croom and losing?

 

[Coach34]

we started the 4 guard line-up against SD and Cincy when we lost as well....thats why I said winning a couple games didnt mean it wasnt broke

 

[DawgatAuburn]

It was clearly broke then, but Pegues and AJ almost single-handedly turned us from five win team into an eight win team.

 

[fishwater99]

He is not going to make a change and our season suffer unless we shoot 45% from behind the Arch..

 

[Hanmudog]

We won 5 games in a row, not a "couple". We hammered decent WKU and Houston teams, won AT Arkansas, then beat Vandy and Alabama at home. All 3 SEC teams we played had bigger lineups and outrebounded us yet they all lost. There was nothing broken. We won BECAUSE of the small lineup not in spite of it. Enough with the horseshit Coach. If Rick changed the starters last night and had the same result you would be complaining that he messed with a winning formula. Sure Osby is bigger and can score but he also can't guard a big guy any better than Phil. His defense needs alot of work.

 

[Coach34]

" If Rick changed the starters last night and had the same result you would be complaining that he messed with a winning formula"

I've only been saying that Osby should be starting for ohhh, the last month and a half now....thanks for being Meo Cowstanza and telling "what I would say"...the fact is that you and I disagree. I think Osby not starting is a mistake and you dont. We'll see how things go from here I guess

 

[Hanmudog]

I would go so far as to say that if Osby had started the last 5 games then we would have lost 2 of them. Phil Turner played great in a starting role against Vandy and Bama. He has sucked coming off the bench over the last two years. I will grant you that Osby might could have helped last night due to the matchups but there is no freaking way you can dispute the results Rick got with the small lineup over the last 5 games.

 

[Todd4State]

" If Rick changed the starters last night and had the same result you would be complaining that he messed with a winning formula"

I've only been saying that Osby should be starting for ohhh, the last month and a half now....thanks for being Meo Cowstanza and telling "what
I would say"...the fact is that you and I disagree. I think Osby not starting is a mistake and you dont. We'll see how things go from here I guess

I read this board every once in a while. Every once in a while being 16 hours a day. I honestly can not recall you saying that once on here. Maybe I'm wrong, we can get Ronny to do an archive check, but I would be surprised if I missed that.

 

[Coach34]

and I literally dont have the inclination to search back thru pages of threads to show you like some people on here try to do to me...I've said it quite a few times and havent backed off that stance

 

[dawgstudent]

2+ weeks, then yes.

I present to you the Osby + Coach34 search...

http://sixpackspeak.yuku....mit=search&advanced=1

And I will say there was no way you could change the starting lineup with the 5 game win streak. I am not aGAINST Osby starting but to change that lineup with the way we were playing would have been crazy.

FYI, if you click advanced search, it has a search that is...well...more advanced.

 

[Brutius]

nm

 

[bulldogs726]

Stans has actually said that he does not prefer the 4 guard lineup because he hates getting out rebounded the way we have. He said that we are in running it because it fits the players we have. All of you were on Croom for running the West Coast Offense when we did not have the personnel for it and now just because we swapped things around and are running a system that fits the personnel come of you are complaining. If we could shoot 3's, run fast, out rebound opponents, make free throws, and swat shots we would be a final 4 team no matter what system. Fact of the matter is we are not that good and we sometimes have to pick our poison by putting a smaller team out there and hoping we can hold our own on the boards or a big team out there and hoping we can knock down some shots.

The scheme didn't work yesterday but it has beaten 3 teams that had more impressive non conference season than us

 

[Coach34]

"because i think the West is going to suck...it may actually allow us to slip in a Tourney"- Coach34- 08/21/08

"we will get better as the year goes on. Lack of a scoring prescence inside though will be a constant problem untill Osby grows up "-Coach34- 12/11/08

"how does Osby not start? Blows my mind"-Coach34 01/05/09

"Do you think were are going to lead every game by 20 because we play this line-up and not starting Osby?"- Coach34 01/05/09

"I brought it up last night night and you have thought I called Ricky's Mom a ho...replies were:

1. Why start Osby? We are up by 20 points
2. Osby is going to be a awesome 6th man
3. Ricky knows best
4. I hate State because I want Osby to start

Thats why Osby shouldnt start"- Coach34 01/06/09

I've been saying it over and over...and I'm not going to change

 

[robertd38606]

and I literally dont have the inclination to search back thru pages of threads to show you like some people on here try to do to me...I've said it quite a few times and havent backed off that stance

uhhh, there's a search box at the top of the board, dubmass. All you have to do is type coach34 and piles and piles and crap spills out of posts.

 

[youngster]

who cares what the starting lineup is. if stansbury was a good coach he would see that that formula was not working and change the lineup throughout the game. he can start big or small, but until he learns to adapt to the situation, we are going to be an alright team instead of a good team.

 

[fishwater99]

It seems that you take other posters thoughts and then claim them as your own.
Do I see a pattern forming here..

Don't get me wrong, I am glad you agree that Osby should be starting, just one of Stans mistakes he has made this year.

I have been saying Osby should be starting since before the season even started..

</a><a href="http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=12560">http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=12560

</a><a href="http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=13456">http://sixpackspeak.yuku.com?topic=13456

 

[Coach34]

that you are a Reniassance Man and I want to emulate you and soak up the knowledge you bring forth each day.

 

[markymark.sixpack]

people complaining about Stans all the time is exactly the same as the idiots down south complaining about (and eventually getting rid of) Bower. Makes no sense. Just watch the games and enjoy yourselves. none of you are the coach or AD. Learn how to live with that fact.

 

[Coach34]

people complaining about Stans all the time is exactly the same as the idiots down south complaining about (and eventually getting rid of) Bower. Makes no sense. Just watch the games and enjoy yourselves. none of you are the coach or AD. Learn how to live with that fact.

1. Bower was 7-6 and lost his last game in a bowl. The Nasty Bunch hired a top coordinator with an exciting offense. He was able to go 7-6 in his first year with a bowl win- and has recruiting taking an upswing and some life in a stagnant program. Their tens of fans are motivated.

2. Heard the same **** after Crooms had a winning season. Just because he got lucky, it didnt make him the right coach. And the crowd that kept complaining about Crooms turned out to be right.

3. Ricky has done a solid job, but some of his teams have underperformed in big games. I personally dont think he is the coach to get us to a top level. He has some big games ahead. Should we not make the NCAA Tourney this season- that will be one trip in the last four years. That is Mark Gottfried-like. I have higher expectations for our program than one trip to the NCAA's every four years

We stand at 12-6 (RPI doesnt recognize our D-2 win), We have to let this season play out and see where we are at the end. But getting on people for being concerned is pretty dumb

 

[fishwater99]

If you don't like what people say then you might be in the wrong place pal...

 

[Foronce]

If you were to run

dee
randy
ravern
osby
swat

out on the floor, how do you sub... we need johnson so we can sub two for two then...
I think this is the whole reason we run the 4 guard is Johnson...
I really think Stans hates the 4 cause it is not conventional, but if Johnson was healthy he would play Johnson over Osby