It's sports, it's MSU, it's highly dicussed, someone will call someone else an idiot......everything that 6 pack threads should be.
Where did the basketball thread go?
- Thread starter DawgatAuburn
- Start date
It's sports, it's MSU, it's highly dicussed, someone will call someone else an idiot......everything that 6 pack threads should be.
that doesn't take us to the Sweet 16.
And to me, I don't care what the commisioner said, our goal is to get to the tourney.
And to me, I don't care what the commisioner said, our goal is to get to the tourney.
If the "Recruiter" can't do it this year, then he never will and he will once again prove how bad of an in-game coach he is.
How long has Stans been the head coach at MSU? How many times have we made it to the Sweet 16?
How long has Stans been the head coach at MSU? How many times have we made it to the Sweet 16?
But, like in any business, when your employee is doing a pretty good job but not attaining his higher level goals, a plan is usually put in place to help him get there...what we are doing now is not helping us get to a Sweet 16- we are 0-11. Its time to try a new approach
Weren't you saying before last season started that it was going to be a long year for us? If so wouldn't you say he has to be a pretty good coach to take a team that you thought would not be that good, to an SEC title and a trip to the NCAA tournament?fishwater99 said:
We had "zero chance" of winning the SEC tournament according to our future Douchebag of the Year. Whether Coach will admit it or not Stansbury exceeded every expectation he had for our team prior to this year......with or without Kodi.
Dammit I just fed the troll.
Dammit I just fed the troll.
No one's opinion has changed since the first time it was brought up and no one's opinion is going to change the next time it's brought up which will probably be some time next week so here's a cookie you win. Please shut the 17 up.
This has been beat to death and beyond. DA and Coach want us to pimp ourselves out and play 10 road games against Duke, UNC, Kansas, Mich State, UCLA, et al, go 1-9, and then be able to call for Stansbury's head when we don't make the tournament. Actually, I'm pretty sure this is just Coach's way of just finding the next thing about Stansbury to ***** about since he exceeded his expectations this past year and pretty significantly, I might add. As far as D@A, I have no idea why he's following that mouth-breathing mongoloid around the interwebs on this one. He is usually smarter than that.
Coach34- "Stansbury hardly ever beats anybody worth a ****"-
Sixpack- "As much as Stansbury has won, you can't say that"
Scooba presents evidence that Stansbury is 51-82 against top 50 teams in his career
Coach34- "we need to improve our schedule"
Sixpack- "no we don't- NCAA's 6 out of the last 8 years"
Greg Byrne- "20 wins doesnt matter- it's who you play and where"
Mike Slive- "our teams need to beef up OOC scheduling"
yeah, i'm the douchebag
Sixpack- "As much as Stansbury has won, you can't say that"
Scooba presents evidence that Stansbury is 51-82 against top 50 teams in his career
Coach34- "we need to improve our schedule"
Sixpack- "no we don't- NCAA's 6 out of the last 8 years"
Greg Byrne- "20 wins doesnt matter- it's who you play and where"
Mike Slive- "our teams need to beef up OOC scheduling"
yeah, i'm the douchebag
... To get to the tourney. What Byrne is saying is that 20 wins does not necessarily get you there anymore. Now it's about RPI. Not achieiving this goal consistently enough is a firable offense, one that Rick is not in danger of committing. The second goal is to advance in the tournament. Failure to achieve this goal is not firable, unless goal #1 is not being achieved. However, the only way to advance with any degree of regularity is to make the tournament consistently and to get a high seed. Upgrading the schedule accomplishes both goals. How can anyone be against it? Upgrading the schedule (within reason) does not hurt our tourney chances. It helps them, because RPI is so important. It also helps seeding a great deal. Losing to Kansas is better than beating North Alabama. And in the event you beat a very good team, you have punched your ticket with an avereage conference season. Upgrading the schedule helps us both make the tournament and advance in it. That is the system now.
"DA and Coach want us to pimp ourselves out and play 10 road games against Duke, UNC, Kansas, Mich State, UCLA, et al, go 1-9, and then be able to call for Stansbury's head when we don't make the tournament"
Playing 2 big games on the road a season is not "pimping ourselves out". We play 15 OOC games- we could play 10 at home, 5 on the road...2 being against top teams...I just cant see the problem in going to Notre Dame, Michigan St, UCLA, Texas, Georgetown and playing some games for national exposure
Playing 2 big games on the road a season is not "pimping ourselves out". We play 15 OOC games- we could play 10 at home, 5 on the road...2 being against top teams...I just cant see the problem in going to Notre Dame, Michigan St, UCLA, Texas, Georgetown and playing some games for national exposure
Stans want his 20 wins and his worshipers will agree with whatever OOC schedule he makes. There is no doubt that we should beef up our OOC schedule and play 2 or 3 good teams on the road. Problem is that most teams do not want to play is this year and Stans has not scheduled these games in the past, so he is out of luck gettting a real OOC game for next year.
I take offense at that. I am nowhere close to anything that resembles smart.
Here's the deal George and Desoto, and you don't have to agree with it, but at least coming from someone other than Coach maybe you will at least consider the this a feasible proposal.
No one, despite continuous over exaggeration, is suggesting we play those teams. Only Downtown thinks Carolina would play us in a two for one. What we are doing now, which is scheduling a bunch of wimps except every once in a while when we think we are going to be good, is working only to a certain degree. We pile up wins, compete in the upper quartile of the SEC most every year, and flame out in March. The reasons for that are anyone's guess. The "guess" that Coach and I have is that by upgrading our OOC schedule (more on that in a minute), we expose ourselves to a higher level of competition which will hopefully lead to more consistent effort and more of an understanding of what it takes to win. It also allows us to play against a non-familiar coach and team, like the NCAA tournament does. Do we stand a greater risk of losing to a good OOC opponent than we do to Nicholls State? Of course. I just believe, and I guess Coach too, and I think patdog if I am not mistaken, that replacing ONE of those weak sister home games with a home and home or neutral court game against a top 50ish RPI team would pay bigger dividends in the long run. There is also the obvious RPI implication, which win or lose, will help when it comes to seeding in March, which could help in the matchup we have in the tournament, which could help us advance more, which puts us on TV more, which puts more money in our pocket to offset the loss of funds on one home game. Of course it's not the answer in an of itself, but trying can't hurt.
As for who do we play, here are the teams who are not going to give us a home and home or a 2 for 1.
Duke
UNC
UCLA
Arizona
Michigan State
UConn
Georgetown
Syracuse
Villanova
Louisville
Memphis (although this might be about to change)
Kansas
There may be a few more that I am missing, but for certain those. If we weren't in the SEC, you could certainly add UK and probably UF and Arkansas to that list. Those are the elite programs who just aren't going to do that. As we all know, we are not exactly a marquee name for other teams and for TV. It takes the right arrangement to get teams to say yes. As I think through the next level of teams in those conferences, I see teams that would at least consider it before they said no. I'd start with this level and then work down from there.
ACC - Wake, Maryland
Big 10 - Purdue, Michigan (probably wants a bigger name), Iowa, Indiana (down now, but won't always be)
Big 12 - Texas, OU, Oklahoma State, A&M
Pac 10 - Any of them other than SC and Zona, but the travel makes no sense for either side
Big East - Pitt (did a home and home with Auburn in the last three years), Notre Dame (did one with Bama); a lot of the Big East would be difficult because they have so many schools in the northeast to pick from
Adding any one of those is not a sure fire loss, is a sure fire RPI boost over Nicholls State, will probably be on TV and gives us good competition. The only drawback is having to figure out what HD6 will do that one Saturday afternoon in December without a non-televised blowout to watch.
Here's the deal George and Desoto, and you don't have to agree with it, but at least coming from someone other than Coach maybe you will at least consider the this a feasible proposal.
No one, despite continuous over exaggeration, is suggesting we play those teams. Only Downtown thinks Carolina would play us in a two for one. What we are doing now, which is scheduling a bunch of wimps except every once in a while when we think we are going to be good, is working only to a certain degree. We pile up wins, compete in the upper quartile of the SEC most every year, and flame out in March. The reasons for that are anyone's guess. The "guess" that Coach and I have is that by upgrading our OOC schedule (more on that in a minute), we expose ourselves to a higher level of competition which will hopefully lead to more consistent effort and more of an understanding of what it takes to win. It also allows us to play against a non-familiar coach and team, like the NCAA tournament does. Do we stand a greater risk of losing to a good OOC opponent than we do to Nicholls State? Of course. I just believe, and I guess Coach too, and I think patdog if I am not mistaken, that replacing ONE of those weak sister home games with a home and home or neutral court game against a top 50ish RPI team would pay bigger dividends in the long run. There is also the obvious RPI implication, which win or lose, will help when it comes to seeding in March, which could help in the matchup we have in the tournament, which could help us advance more, which puts us on TV more, which puts more money in our pocket to offset the loss of funds on one home game. Of course it's not the answer in an of itself, but trying can't hurt.
As for who do we play, here are the teams who are not going to give us a home and home or a 2 for 1.
Duke
UNC
UCLA
Arizona
Michigan State
UConn
Georgetown
Syracuse
Villanova
Louisville
Memphis (although this might be about to change)
Kansas
There may be a few more that I am missing, but for certain those. If we weren't in the SEC, you could certainly add UK and probably UF and Arkansas to that list. Those are the elite programs who just aren't going to do that. As we all know, we are not exactly a marquee name for other teams and for TV. It takes the right arrangement to get teams to say yes. As I think through the next level of teams in those conferences, I see teams that would at least consider it before they said no. I'd start with this level and then work down from there.
ACC - Wake, Maryland
Big 10 - Purdue, Michigan (probably wants a bigger name), Iowa, Indiana (down now, but won't always be)
Big 12 - Texas, OU, Oklahoma State, A&M
Pac 10 - Any of them other than SC and Zona, but the travel makes no sense for either side
Big East - Pitt (did a home and home with Auburn in the last three years), Notre Dame (did one with Bama); a lot of the Big East would be difficult because they have so many schools in the northeast to pick from
Adding any one of those is not a sure fire loss, is a sure fire RPI boost over Nicholls State, will probably be on TV and gives us good competition. The only drawback is having to figure out what HD6 will do that one Saturday afternoon in December without a non-televised blowout to watch.
...That they would give us a two for one. I just raised the issue. I was corrected by Costanza and others, and I will assume they are right without much argument. Other than that, good post that I totally agree with. And nobody addressed my idea of playing a top team at their place and then in Memphis. There is a good bit for Roy Williams to gain by playing in a national recruiting hotbed, on TV, in a ncaa type setting.
In a vacuum that's a good layout for a schedule. The problem comes when you're selling off 2 OOC games a year to these top teams but never getting the return trip. That's when it becomes whoring yourself out, and I think that is the problem most people have. The problem isn't the need to upgrade the schedule, I think most would agree somewhat that that needs to be done. For the most part, I agree with what D@A laid out in his long post above. I got no problems playing big names and strengthening the schedule within reason and without whoring ourself out. We shouldn't be doing anything other than a home and home or 2 for 1 with any school. I might could see an occassional home/neutral court with a school, but my opinion on that would depend on the situation and the understanding that that's not gonna happen very often. Like most other things you post on, you're over the top with this whole strengthen the schedule crusade, and whether you're doing it purposefully or not is certainly up for debate, but that's where I think most have an issue with your crusade.
Why can't we play one team a year on the road without a return trip by them to S-Vegas? You are acting ike we are UNC or Duke. We need to do what is needed to strengthen our schedule, and if we need to go to Kansas or Texas and play then so be it.[b said: